‘We want to get back what was stolen from us:’ P.E.I. woman says house, land taken from family nine years ago

EAST ROYALTY, P.E.I. — A lady from Cardigan, P.E.I., has been preventing for nearly a decade to get well her household’s land and residential that she says have been stolen.

In 2011, Manuela Proenca’s household purchased a plot of land with a home on it, identified to most locals because the purple home, in East Royalty on the nook of St. Peters Street and MacRae Drive.

In February of 2013, Proenca’s granddaughter, 19-year-old Nadia Marques, utilized for a mortgage to construct a brand new house on the piece of land on the outskirts of Charlottetown.

As Marques was solely 19, Proenca and Marques’ grandfather, Domingos Marques, have been requested to ensure the mortgage.

In September of 2013, the household moved into the brand new house regardless of it not being completed, as they wanted to be within the house by the point faculty began, mentioned Proenca.

Nevertheless, Proenca alleges points with the standard of the construct instantly started exhibiting up.

“The entire laborious tile flooring started cracking and lifting up,” she mentioned. “It began cracking as a result of the cement for the muse wasn’t poured correctly. There have been no plans or inspections completed on the muse.”

As a result of points with the muse, frost was in a position to get into the partitions and flooring of the home, finally inflicting moisture and structural injury over the three years they have been there, mentioned Proenca.

“It was not protected to be there,” she mentioned. “There was mould in all places, all around the partitions, and we have been respiration all of it in.”

The home had been constructed by Do All House Enhancements, owned by Wally Bambrick, who had been really useful to Proenca’s granddaughter by her lawyer, Ewan Clark, who labored with Cox & Palmer, mentioned Proenca.

In December 2014, Bambrick introduced the household to courtroom over not receiving the remaining $15,150.11 for the development of the home. Bambrick had gained the preliminary courtroom case, during which the household was ordered to put up safety for $18,000, however Proenca’s household appealed the order.

In a 2018 written decision, Justice John Mitchell mentioned the movement choose erred in justice when inserting the order and granted the attraction.

Within the determination, Mitchell agreed with the unique choose, who mentioned the counterclaim in opposition to Bambrick for points surrounding high quality of workmanship was legitimate.

He additionally famous two studies that weren’t referenced by the unique movement choose. One was a lab report confirming elevated counts of mould in the home, and the second was a report from James C. Johnson Associates Inc., which said that the repairs wanted to make the home liveable once more would come with utterly eradicating and repouring the flooring slab.

Different points have been found in the home as effectively, reminiscent of incorrect and unsafe wiring of retailers and fixtures within the kitchen and a damaged and incorrectly put in in-floor heating system, mentioned Proenca.

A SaltWire Community reporter toured the house with Proenca at the moment and confirmed the state of the home.

By August 2016, Proenca mentioned the household was compelled to go away the home attributable to well being and security considerations. Nevertheless, the problems with the house have been solely the start of the troubles the household would face.

In keeping with a 2019 Prince Edward Island Court docket of Enchantment decision, when the household left the house, the Nationwide Financial institution of Canada mentioned they stopped paying the mortgage.

Quickly after, in March 2017, the financial institution foreclosed on the mortgage and took possession of the home.

To cease the foreclosures, Proenca and her household took the financial institution to courtroom, alleging the financial institution had been accountable for inspecting the work on the house with the intention to advance funds from the mortgage to Bambrick. She alleged the financial institution’s neglect to correctly examine the work led to the injury that brought about them to go away the house when it grew to become unsafe.

“There have been no inspections completed on that home,” Proenca mentioned. “Even whenever you take a look at the paperwork, the images they used for every go to have been the identical, there have been no inspections completed.”

Of their courtroom case, Proenca additionally alleged the financial institution, her household and the contractor accountable for constructing the home had all been represented by Clark on the time the deal was made to construct the house, making a battle of curiosity.

The household initially misplaced that courtroom case however appealed the choice and took the case to the P.E.I. Court docket of Enchantment.

The result of the attraction was no completely different, although. Within the 2019 attraction determination, Justice John Ok. Mitchell discovered there was no proof that Clark had represented all three throughout the mortgage deal. He additionally discovered the financial institution was not accountable for inspecting the construct high quality of the house.

“The Financial institution’s letter of directions to the solicitor said solely that advances could be made in accordance with building work progress studies licensed by the inspection performed by the Financial institution’s appraiser,” mentioned Mitchell within the determination. “The duty of the Financial institution’s appraiser was to offer the Financial institution with a building progress report, not a report on the standard of the development. All of the Financial institution’s appraiser needed to do was certify at what stage of progress was the development.”

Following the attraction determination, the financial institution took possession of the house, and the household was left to pay the price of the attraction – $500.

Nevertheless, Proenca mentioned she doesn’t agree with the choice. She mentioned the property, which the household had owned earlier to the mortgage, nonetheless belongs to them.

When talking with SaltWire Community in April, Proenca mentioned the financial institution took the land as collateral to cowl the price of the unpaid mortgage, as the home held no worth as a result of injury.

Nevertheless, Proenca alleges the mortgage for the brand new house was by no means accomplished, as their lawyer hadn’t equipped the financial institution with any documentation. She additionally alleges a brand new doc that was lacking signatures was given to the financial institution, and a brand new mortgage with a distinct mortgage quantity was created months later.

Because of this, Proenca mentioned the financial institution owes her household the land in addition to a brand new house, as their former house, the purple home, was torn down with out their permission in preparation for the brand new building.

“We need to get again what was stolen from us. The land, the home that they destroyed, the final 9 years of our lives we’ve been coping with this. What we wish again and what my household needs is what was ours to start with.” — Manuela Proenca 

Presently, her former new home is getting used as a rental unit by the present house owners, mentioned Proenca, and was available on the market on the market in March 2022.

SaltWire Community met with Proenca exterior the home in April. Whereas not allowed inside the house, on the skin, varied patch marks alongside the concrete slab of the house could possibly be seen the place makes an attempt to restore the cracks had been made, indicating it had not been changed.

Proenca mentioned she contacted the sellers of the house beforehand and defined its previous situation to them. She mentioned she additionally reached out to the Canadian Actual Property Affiliation about the home, noting that most of the listings for the home had incorrect data and didn’t state the problems with the construction or basis.

One itemizing for the home on Zillow mentioned the house had been in-built 2010 and was well-maintained. No point out of the muse or structural points was included.

Proenca mentioned CREA could be investigating her claims in opposition to the sale of the home, however she has but to listen to again from the affiliation. As of Aug. 2, the home is off the market.

Whatever the courtroom choices, Proenca will proceed preventing to get their property again, which may contain making an attempt to convey felony expenses in opposition to these concerned, she mentioned. Nevertheless, that has but to occur.

“We need to get again what was stolen from us,” she mentioned. “The land, the home that they destroyed, the final 9 years of our lives we’ve been coping with this. What we wish again and what my household needs is what was ours to start with.”

Cody McEachern is a reporter with the SaltWire Community in Prince Edward Island. He could be reached by electronic mail at [email protected] and adopted on Twitter @CodyInHiFi.