the LEASE

The Infamous Suffern Lake Cabin Owner Lease 

includes comments from a realtor who was approached to list two properties                                 

RE: Suffern Lake Regional Park Lease Considerations

Lisa Wildman <

Mon 2022-06-13 7:18 PM

To: premier@gov.sk.ca <premier@gov.sk.ca>; Minister JU <jus.minister@gov.sk.ca>; Minister PCS <tpcs.minister@gov.sk.ca>; Minister GR <minister.gr@gov.sk.ca>; Minister ENV <env.minister@gov.sk.ca>

Cc: MacDougall, Twyla PCS <twyla.macdougall@gov.sk.ca>; katrinai@saskregionalparks.ca <katrinai@saskregionalparks.ca>

 

Good day Honourable Premier and Ministers,

 

We are court-ordered to sell a full-time residence and a recreational property, with over three decades of ownership by October 20, 2022, into a controversial and limiting lease. Realtors refuse to represent our properties. Contentious lease conditions hamper sale opportunities and severely impact our potential sale values. 

 

Obstructive government tactics remain an ongoing frustration. We put no faith in statements from Deputy Minister (DM) MacDougall of Parks, Culture and Sport (PCS) which claim the cottage owner sub-lease currently in place at Suffern Lake Regional Park is now the “standard lease” slated for use throughout the regional park system and is, according to Saskatchewan Regional Park Association (SRPA) Executive Director, Katrina Irving, already in use in other parks.  

 

We set out to determine the veracity of their claim that the SLRPA lease, as it exists in our park, is consistent with the lease being circulated within government and implemented in other regional parks. 

• We FOIPed Environment for a copy of the Suffern Lake cottage owner sub-lease. 

  • The sub-lease is to be in compliance with its Crown lease, however, Environment responded stating it does not hold those records. 

  • Fair question then: is the process of ensuring Crown/sub-lease compliance an honour system of reporting?  

  • FYI: the honour system of Regional Park Administrators providing their oversight RMs with timely and accurate assessment information for SAMA failed dismally.   

• We contacted Saskatchewan Regional Parks Association requesting information readily to hand in their files. It was not forthcoming. 

  • SRPA is not subject to LA FOIP or FOIP which requires that we FOIP Ministry of Parks for information held by SRPA. 

• We FOIPed Ministry of Parks.  

  • PCS failed to provide responsive documents due June 4, 2022.   

  • The request was forwarded to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner where it faced further delay due to the volume of submissions queued for review 

  • Exactly the obstructive outcome PCS intended.  

• An additional PCS FOIP (due June 18) requests a copy of the draft lease former Park Planner, Dominique Clincke, reviewed and the suggestions he subsequently made. 

  • Suffern Lake Regional Park Authority (SLRPA) minutes show they accepted and implemented Clincke’s suggestions. 

Suffern Lake cottage owners are subject to a contract drawn up by our landlord, an agency of government. It is reasonable to expect government, all levels of government, to deal honourably with us. 

 

SLRPA Counsel has said: “people need to be cognizant of what they sign”. Mr. Kusch is, as are you, aware that there was no opportunity to negotiate terms and that in order to maintain their significant property investments cottage owners had to make a take-it-or-leave-it choice. The manner in which the SLRPA lease was implemented reflects the inequality between the lessees and the Park Authority, a government agency. 

 

We have researched a variety of cases and studies that reviewed contracts, specifically “standard use” leases, on the basis of their fairness.  

• Examination criteria considered relevant to determine fairness included: 

  • The written document contains numerous contentious clauses – substantive unfairness: 

    • Right of SLRPA to enter private residences – a Charter concern (*turns out it is actually a Bill of Rights issue). 

    • Lack of a renewal clause. 

    • Properties are now designated for Recreational use not Residential. 

    • Restrictions to using owned improvements to six months a year. 

    • Restrictions on visitor length of stay. 

    • Tenants to be held responsible for own legal costs and SLRPA’s on a full indemnity solicitor-client basis. 

  • The course of negotiations – procedural unfairness: 

    • There were no negotiations. 

  • The character and experience of the parties – substantive unfairness: 

    • There is a distinct inequality in bargaining power between SLRPA and cottage owners. 

  • The circumstances surrounding execution – procedural unfairness: 

    • The SLRPA sub-lease was imposed on park property owners in May 2021, five months past due. 

    • Concerns went forward to PCS. Numerous concerns. Numerous questions. Answers were not forthcoming. 

    • Cottage owners received a response from Clincke saying he was sure the legalese used in the new lease was confusing but that the lease was not unlike leases at other regional parks. 

An English judge, Lord Evershed M.R., once remarked, “this contract is so one-sided that I am astonished to find it written on both sides of the paper”.  Unfairness, as per Lord Evershed M.R., goes beyond a mere inequality of result and speaks to the character and motivations of the party drafting and advancing the contract. 

 

Unfair lease terms cause significant harm including economic loss for both parties and increased litigation. Government’s hands-off stance on the current Suffern Lake lease does nothing to advance fairness.  

 

The Saskatchewan government seems to see concerned cottage owners as complaining signatories to a private contract. However, let us be clear: our landlord is an agent of government; and the Crown, their landlord. 

 

A reasonable expectation would be that PCS, as the ultimate regional park oversight body, review the lease terms, take into consideration principles of procedural and substantive fairness, and mediate an acceptable contract that delivers protections for both the Park Authority and the property owners. 

 

Alternatively, the lease could be rescinded in its entirety and with both parties involved, a new document could be negotiated. 

 

The Saskatchewan government has the legislated oversight to act to resolve the Suffern Lake Regional Park lease concerns. What actions will you take to effect a fair reform?

 

Regards, 

 

Lisa Wildman 

John Danilak

 

No acknowledgement

No response