A 2002 provincial law — the Funeral, Burial and Cremation Services Act (FBCSA) — triggered what came next.

The couple was ordered by Ontario’s Registrar of Burials to launch a burial site investigation (BSI) to determine “the origin of the site.”

Absolutely insane homeowners have to foot the bill, and I guarantee before it could be legally required, it was a fraction of that cost.

The survey should be something a government agency does at no cost to the landowner.

The current system incentives hiding or destroying anything that is found.

The only reason it would be a fraction of the cost is because there would be no regulations and no requirement to adhere to certain standards. Of course it would be cheaper, but it would also probably miss a lot of evidence and destroy much more if there was no requirement to meet a standard. Probably no indigenous inclusion as well.

I do agree that the law needs to be redone to define undue hardship and set clear limits on what a homeowner is responsible for. Owning property is a privilege, not a right, and thus the homeowners should be responsible for a portion of it, but not a bankruptable amount. I have a hard time assessing what pity is deserved in this case, because they clearly had the money to buy a second, lake-front home. Not saying $300k is chump change, but this isn’t a poor family by any means.

I am a bit shocked that the homeowners were unaware of the amount of remains found in the area.

The point was if everyone has to pay for something, it drastically raises demand and companies know consumers have no choice but to pay someone

That will always raise prices.

And it’s wild you’re shocked that people are ignorant of what’s underground on their property. How the fuck would they know?

It’s not about knowing, it’s about risk.

I live in an earthquake zone. I know before ai buy a home, I should consult an earthquake map to see my risk of liquidation or amplification and make a judgement based on that.

When buying a property, it is in the buyers interest to look at KNOWN hazards, assess the risk and make informed decisions. Archeological remains is a known risk of that area, just like flooding might be because of the lake front.

I should consult an earthquake map to see my risk of liquidation or amplification and make a judgement based on that.

And there are no known graveyards around here…

Are you saying everyone should pay for a 300k inspectionbefore buying land?

Like, are you seriously saying everyone in “southern Ontario’s Niagara region” should just operate under the assumption there’s human remains under their house?

I’m seriously asking, because surely you must mean something else and I’m just misunderstanding.

I even looked it up, it’s 590k people, and 715 square miles.

No, I’m saying that it is up to the buyer to be aware of the risks they are taking with a purchase and that they accept them when they make that purchase. Just like any house, you get an assessment beforehand to make sure you aren’t buying a lemon. They wouldn’t pay $300k for an assessment; that is to dig their entire property. They might pay $1-2k for an archeologist to dig a soil pit and make a determination based on the findings. That is what reasonable risk avoidance looks like.

I’m also not advocating for the homeowner to liable for the entire price tag. I’m just in the camp that this was a foreseeable potential outcome.