Real Estate

Mattamy Changing Floorplan Before Closing Within a Month

  • Last Updated:
  • Feb 18th, 2019 12:44 am
[OP]
Newbie
Feb 14, 2019
2 posts
1 upvote

Mattamy Changing Floorplan Before Closing Within a Month

Hi everyone.

Got an email earlier today from mattamy stating they are removing 1 of the 2 closets from the main floor because the hvac runs theough the closet. We asked them about the closet during our frame walk and they confirmed the closet would be there and now its not going to be.

They quoted a small portion of the purchasers agreement stating its a minior change and no compenstation will be made. I've gone through the whole agreement for that specific section and nothing mentions about a complete removal of the closet. It mainly refers to cosmetic changes like door changes and such.

We effectively lost storage space and some functionality in the house.

Need some help on how I should go on about this.

Thanks.
12 replies
Deal Fanatic
Feb 29, 2008
8591 posts
3664 upvotes
Welcome to buying from plans. This stuff happens.
Deal Addict
Nov 26, 2004
2308 posts
400 upvotes
Yes, it is more or less too bad so sad and you can not do anything about it. They have move my stairs and I lost about 30 sq ft of useable space and there were no compensations.

Though, if you ask nicely, you may be able to get some freebie from them such as having them install a dishwasher or a garage door opener free of charge.
Deal Addict
Jan 15, 2017
2543 posts
1866 upvotes
Talk to your lawyer and get a legal opinion on the matter. This may be an issue for Tarion - note it on your PDI that it is missing. This will send a signal to Mattamy that you expect it to be there.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jul 14, 2008
8168 posts
1802 upvotes
Ontario
Gotta love builder contracts with unilateral conditions.

Talk to your lawyer. At the very least, this was lazy planning because HVAC runs should be considered when designing a layout. They would definitely have had an idea at the framing stage, and they provided assurance (which with Mattamy might be good as useless) it would still be there.

I wouldn’t just let this be. Imagine any other major purchase we make if an entire feature is just missing, “oh, it’s only minor so too bad so sad”, even though it was agreed to as part of a purchase.

Even if they are under the opinion it’s minor, the squeaky wheel will get some compensation. The fact that they didn’t even offer something trivial for an entire closet disappearing from the layout and defend that because hey, it’s only minor, reveals the kind of business practice they operate under.
[OP]
Newbie
Feb 14, 2019
2 posts
1 upvote
Well I was going to give Tarion a call on Tuesday. The fact that they have been using and building variations of this model for multiple phases in the area, and suddenly are like oops the hvac runs through there... Somone screwed up and they are trying to cover up their mistake.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 29, 2008
8591 posts
3664 upvotes
Those builder contracts allow them to make these changes. Do what you need to do but I’d be shocked if you get anything more than a “sorry”
Deal Fanatic
Feb 29, 2008
8591 posts
3664 upvotes
onlineharvest wrote:
Feb 16th, 2019 9:15 am
Gotta love builder contracts with unilateral conditions.

Talk to your lawyer. At the very least, this was lazy planning because HVAC runs should be considered when designing a layout. They would definitely have had an idea at the framing stage, and they provided assurance (which with Mattamy might be good as useless) it would still be there.

I wouldn’t just let this be. Imagine any other major purchase we make if an entire feature is just missing, “oh, it’s only minor so too bad so sad”, even though it was agreed to as part of a purchase.

Even if they are under the opinion it’s minor, the squeaky wheel will get some compensation. The fact that they didn’t even offer something trivial for an entire closet disappearing from the layout and defend that because hey, it’s only minor, reveals the kind of business practice they operate under.
Read the contract. It actually allows them to do whatever they want. Sure contact lawyer and Tarion but builder contracts are to protect them, not the buyer.
Member
Jun 19, 2007
496 posts
252 upvotes
Halifax
Presumably your lawyer also stuck in a few conditions that were unilaterally in your favour when you two were negotiating terms with the builders lawyers? Or if not he at least advised you these things were possible and negotiated a pretty good discount vs comparables since you apparently have neither rights nor recourse?

I don't know why people are still surprised by things like this. It sort of came to light when United physically dragged that poor guy off the plane a year ago after overselling the flight, but these huge organizations who deal with individuals tend to write the agreements out in non-negotiable terms, where they have any and all rights, and you literally have none while shouldering all of the obligations. You're are obligated by law to provide a) b) c) & d), and they are legally obligated to provide nothing save something 'comparable' which ignores all non-financial metrics (eg a flight tomorrow =/= a flight today, a second closet in your unit =/= a second closet in the building one town over). These are loaded with terms that if two organizations of similar size, means, and resources were negotiating, would never agree to.

Why people willingly agree to these horrible one sided deals is mind boggling to me, but not wholly unexpected with so many people out these who in 2017 were so desperate to get into RE that they literally would agree to anything, and pay to the absolute limit of their ability with any and all available funds, credit, and 3rd party personal loans. This is why I've stayed out of the market the last few years as the only way to 'win' a house was to suspend any degree of rational thought or concern for your potential financial well being as you were competing against people who were only all to keen to. Even though we all know 'past performance doesn't guarantee future' people were making decisions as if assured 30% YoY increases were a given.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 29, 2008
8591 posts
3664 upvotes
seadog83 wrote:
Feb 16th, 2019 1:10 pm
Presumably your lawyer also stuck in a few conditions that were unilaterally in your favour when you two were negotiating terms with the builders lawyers? Or if not he at least advised you these things were possible and negotiated a pretty good discount vs comparables since you apparently have neither rights nor recourse?

I don't know why people are still surprised by things like this. It sort of came to light when United physically dragged that poor guy off the plane a year ago after overselling the flight, but these huge organizations who deal with individuals tend to write the agreements out in non-negotiable terms, where they have any and all rights, and you literally have none while shouldering all of the obligations. You're are obligated by law to provide a) b) c) & d), and they are legally obligated to provide nothing save something 'comparable' which ignores all non-financial metrics (eg a flight tomorrow =/= a flight today, a second closet in your unit =/= a second closet in the building one town over). These are loaded with terms that if two organizations of similar size, means, and resources were negotiating, would never agree to.

Why people willingly agree to these horrible one sided deals is mind boggling to me, but not wholly unexpected with so many people out these who in 2017 were so desperate to get into RE that they literally would agree to anything, and pay to the absolute limit of their ability with any and all available funds, credit, and 3rd party personal loans. This is why I've stayed out of the market the last few years as the only way to 'win' a house was to suspend any degree of rational thought or concern for your potential financial well being as you were competing against people who were only all to keen to. Even though we all know 'past performance doesn't guarantee future' people were making decisions as if assured 30% YoY increases were a given.
Brand new still has its benefits. No stupid bidding wars, allows you to save for a few years, allows you to customize your finishes. It also means no worries for a number of years as everything is under warranty and should hold up (ie. roof, windows, furnace etc). Rents are sky high as well. So yea I can see why someone would want new.

Most contracts are not written in the buyers favour. Whether it be car, house, whatever.

I will say, buying new you are at the builders mercy. But when options are limited people can be forced to dance with the devil.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Jul 14, 2008
8168 posts
1802 upvotes
Ontario
JayLove06 wrote:
Feb 16th, 2019 10:59 am
Read the contract. It actually allows them to do whatever they want. Sure contact lawyer and Tarion but builder contracts are to protect them, not the buyer.
No doubt, and that is something that needs to be addressed eventually because those contracts are horrid for purchasers.

But even then, it's not WHATEVER they want. If they make material changes to your property it doesn't fall into "minor" changes.
If they changed your 4 bedroom into 3 without any input from you or financial compensation, would you just say ho hum? If you wanted a walk in closet and they removed it, ho hum? You wanted white cabinets and they installed dark stain ones, ho hum? No. You wouldn't.

AND even if they could, I mentioned squeaky wheel because those are the ones who get the grease. They need to resolve the issue, make the customer whole. They could have thrown a customer a bone but they didn't. But that is not inconsistent with the mentality of most subdivision builders. The OP mentioned similar model homes so I'd be curious if those units shared the same issue as the OP (and if they were done when shown to the OP, why more assurance it wouldn't affect the closet as agreed to in the layout).

We seem to get more upset about Rogers overbilling us for $10 than for material changes to a property purchased for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
Deal Fanatic
Feb 29, 2008
8591 posts
3664 upvotes
onlineharvest wrote:
Feb 16th, 2019 1:32 pm
No doubt, and that is something that needs to be addressed eventually because those contracts are horrid for purchasers.

But even then, it's not WHATEVER they want. If they make material changes to your property it doesn't fall into "minor" changes.
If they changed your 4 bedroom into 3 without any input from you or financial compensation, would you just say ho hum? If you wanted a walk in closet and they removed it, ho hum? You wanted white cabinets and they installed dark stain ones, ho hum? No. You wouldn't.

AND even if they could, I mentioned squeaky wheel because those are the ones who get the grease. They need to resolve the issue, make the customer whole. They could have thrown a customer a bone but they didn't. But that is not inconsistent with the mentality of most subdivision builders. The OP mentioned similar model homes so I'd be curious if those units shared the same issue as the OP (and if they were done when shown to the OP, why more assurance it wouldn't affect the closet as agreed to in the layout).

We seem to get more upset about Rogers overbilling us for $10 than for material changes to a property purchased for hundreds of thousands of dollars.
You’re right, but the Canadian mentality is bend over and take it. We are used to getting royally screwed. It won’t change.
Jr. Member
Nov 5, 2009
154 posts
91 upvotes
was this their first time building this floor plan? Not sure how this happens so far into the build.

As others said theres an arguement to be made that they can do as they please but I'd be curious why their selling a floor plan and using you as a Guinea pig.

Top