Upon learning that their property rights may be jeopardized by the recent Cowichan title decision, a number of concerned Richmond residents confronted officials at an event hosted by the city. Among them was a man who claimed his lender had refused to renew his mortgage due to the fact that his home sits within the area claimed by First Nations..WATCH: Tensions erupt at packed Cowichan Decision info session in Richmond.His story sparked outrage from politicians, pundits, and everyday people alike, with many — even those who support reconciliation — arguing that the situation is unfair to him and others who may soon find themselves in the same boat.In the days since, mortgage brokers have warned that unless fee simple title is quickly upheld, landowners' problems will only get worse.GLM Mortgage Group President Geoff Lee told the Western Standard that one of the main issues is that when the mortgages were first approved, they were registered as freehold, meaning the owner is the sole holder of the land until they sell it or die. If the Cowichan Decision is upheld, however, that freehold status will turn into native leased land."If somebody's coming to me and saying, hey, I want to purchase something on native leased land, okay, that's not going to necessarily be a problem," he said, "but your lender selection isn't going to be as as abundant at it was for freehold.".Lee explained that while some lenders handle mortgages on native leased land, many simply do not. The aforementioned Richmond resident did not disclose the identity of his lender, but it could very well be that they fall into the latter category, in which case he would have to look elsewhere.Then comes the issue of re-qualifying.Homeowners are not required to go through the qualification process when renewing a mortgage, meaning they can continue using the same financial information they provided when they were first approved. If their lender refuses to renew, however, they will be forced to do it all over again.."There are a lot of people that may have been in these homes for a huge amount of years that are now retired — or whatever their current situation is — that aren't going to qualify with another vendor because they don't have the income, or they don't have the credit, or whatever that reason may be," Lee said. "So what's going to happen to those people? Now you're forced to sell because now you can't qualify for the home you've been living in for 20, 30 years?"Eric Coching of Coching Mortgage Group shared Lee's concerns, agreeing that only when it comes time to renew might banks start "taking any real action" against landowners."As long as as the borrower is making the mortgage payments on time and the equity of the property is still there, then I don't think the banks are going to be foreclosing," he told the Western Standard. "It might be at the time when the mortgage up for renewal, and it still happens to be in that desert area where there could be some concerns, then the banks at that point might take action."Coching also noted that most property owners have title insurance, which protects them in the event that "something on the title is compromised.""This very well could fall into that category," he added, "so it's ... very preliminary to speculate on what the bank should be doing moving forward.".WATCH: Richmond mayor says city not to blame as landowners decry lack of warning over Cowichan title case.When asked about the risk of fee simple private land to native leased land transitions spreading to other areas of the Lower Mainland and British Columbia, Coching urged people not to jump to conclusions."I don't think it's necessary to push the panic button quite yet," he said.All parties involved in the Cowichan case have appealed the ruling, potentially paving the way for another decade in the court system. During that time, the land in question will remain in limbo, leaving owners in the middle of litigation they wanted no part of — and only recently found out about.
