Comments on: I learned something interesting. http://run.likethewind.ca/2010/fraudster/ a bad idea, followed by poor execution Tue, 06 Dec 2011 07:28:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: fathima http://run.likethewind.ca/2010/fraudster/comment-page-1/#comment-10214 fathima Wed, 10 Feb 2010 11:24:06 +0000 http://run.likethewind.ca/?p=1658#comment-10214 oh right, clarification -- this applies in instances where the fraudser (to use the prof's technical term) disappears. it may also apply when they're able to apprehend fraudster; that seems unlikely but i don't know for sure. the whole law's unlikely. relevant provision of BC's <em>Land Title Act</em>: <blockquote> <strong>297</strong> (1) In this section, "transferee" means a transferee who, in good faith and for valuable consideration, acquires an estate or interest in land less than a fee simple estate. (2) Despite anything to the contrary in this Act, no transferee is subject to a proceeding under this Part in respect of an estate or interest in land of which the transferee is the registered owner, for (a) recovery of land, (b) deprivation of land, or (c) damages in respect of land on the ground that the transferor (d) may have been registered as owner through fraud, error or a wrongful act, or (e) may have derived title from or through a person registered as owner through fraud, error or a wrongful act.</blockquote> the LTA addresses how messed up that is by giving money out of its Assurance Fund (but only after much whining) to the people who owned the land in the first place. oh right, clarification — this applies in instances where the fraudser (to use the prof’s technical term) disappears. it may also apply when they’re able to apprehend fraudster; that seems unlikely but i don’t know for sure.
the whole law’s unlikely. relevant provision of BC’s Land Title Act:

297
(1) In this section, “transferee” means a transferee who, in good faith and for valuable consideration, acquires an estate or interest in land less than a fee simple estate.
(2) Despite anything to the contrary in this Act, no transferee is subject to a proceeding under this Part in respect of an estate or interest in land of which the transferee is the registered owner, for
(a) recovery of land,
(b) deprivation of land, or
(c) damages in respect of land
on the ground that the transferor
(d) may have been registered as owner through fraud, error or a wrongful act, or
(e) may have derived title from or through a person registered as owner through fraud, error or a wrongful act.

the LTA addresses how messed up that is by giving money out of its Assurance Fund (but only after much whining) to the people who owned the land in the first place.

]]> By: adnan. http://run.likethewind.ca/2010/fraudster/comment-page-1/#comment-10200 adnan. Tue, 02 Feb 2010 14:01:54 +0000 http://run.likethewind.ca/?p=1658#comment-10200 <i>So what I’m saying is, don’t lose your house in BC.</i> but you wouldn't even know if you did. what happens to the fraudulent party? and where does the market value money to cover the original owner come from? i have a business idea plan depending on those answers. So what I’m saying is, don’t lose your house in BC.

but you wouldn’t even know if you did.

what happens to the fraudulent party? and where does the market value money to cover the original owner come from?

i have a business idea plan depending on those answers.

]]> By: baji http://run.likethewind.ca/2010/fraudster/comment-page-1/#comment-10199 baji Tue, 02 Feb 2010 13:42:42 +0000 http://run.likethewind.ca/?p=1658#comment-10199 now, maybe it's just me, but that doesn't seem fair. is it as black and white as that? maybe is it limited to property that may have been constructively abandoned? who buys a house without looking inside? now, maybe it’s just me, but that doesn’t seem fair. is it as black and white as that? maybe is it limited to property that may have been constructively abandoned? who buys a house without looking inside?

]]>