Banks Won’t Lend, Families Can’t Sell: Inside the Cowichan Ruling’s Real Impact on BC Homeowners

Published: October 31, 2025

A Landmark Decision That’s Shaking Up BC Real Estate

If you’re a homeowner in British Columbia—or thinking about buying property here—you’ve probably heard whispers about a court case that’s causing serious waves in the real estate market. The Cowichan Tribes ruling isn’t just another legal decision; it’s potentially reshaping how we think about property ownership in BC.

Let me break down what’s actually happening, separate fact from fear, and help you understand what this means for your home.

What Actually Happened?

On August 7, 2025, BC Supreme Court Justice Barbara Young made a historic ruling after what might be Canada’s longest trial ever—513 days of hearings spread over 11 years. The court granted the Quw’utsun Nation (Cowichan Nation) Aboriginal title to approximately 750 acres of their historic village site in Richmond, BC, along with fishing rights in the Fraser River’s south arm.

Here’s the kicker: this land includes about 150 privately-owned properties, government lands, and commercial operations.

The judge declared that Crown and City of Richmond fee simple titles on these lands are “defective and invalid.” However, the ruling was suspended for 18 months (until February 2027) to give everyone time to figure out a solution through negotiation.

The Claim Everyone’s Talking About: Are Homes Really “Unsellable”?

You’ve probably seen headlines screaming about “175 unsellable homes” or claims that homeowners need Cowichan Nation permission to sell. Let’s fact-check this.

What the Cowichan Nation Actually Said:

The Nation has been crystal clear: they “did not bring this case against any individual private landowners and did not seek to invalidate any of their land titles.” Chief Pam Jack emphasized that “the ruling does not erase private property.”

What Their Lawyer Said:

David Robbins, representing the Cowichan Nation, did acknowledge that private sales would require “the consent of the Cowichan Nation and it would be with some accommodation from the Crown.” This statement is where the “consent required” narrative comes from.

The Reality on the Ground:

Here’s what’s actually happening:

Banks are refusing mortgages. Financial institutions won’t lend money for properties with uncertain titles. A Richmond councillor reported that a manufacturing company was denied $100 million in financing, and families can’t sell deceased relatives’ properties because buyers can’t get mortgages.
Some properties are still listed. A nearly four-hectare blueberry farm is on the market for $5.3 million, though the realtor admits the ruling is “not good for the market.”
It’s a practical problem, not a legal ban. The homes aren’t legally prohibited from selling—the issue is that nobody can get financing to buy them.

The Letter That Sparked Panic

In October 2025, Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie sent letters to approximately 150 property owners with this bombshell: “The court has declared Aboriginal title to your property which may compromise the status and validity of your ownership.”

The reaction was immediate. The Cowichan Nation called the letter “inflammatory.” The First Nations Leadership Council labeled it “alarmist.” Property owners felt blindsided—many had no idea this case had been going on for over a decade.

Who’s Appealing and Why

This isn’t over. Multiple parties are taking the fight to higher courts:

The Province of BC is appealing, with Attorney General Niki Sharma warning the ruling “could have significant unintended consequences for fee simple private property rights in B.C.” Premier David Eby put it bluntly: “Owning private property with clear title is key to borrowing for a mortgage, economic certainty, and the real estate market.”

The City of Richmond filed an appeal in September 2025.

Other First Nations are also appealing. The Musqueam Indian Band and Tsawwassen First Nation argue that these lands are part of their traditional territories, and the decision affects their rights too.

Legal experts expect this appeals process could drag on for 7-10 years, potentially reaching the Supreme Court of Canada.

Why This Case is Different

Previous landmark Aboriginal title cases, like the famous Tsilhqot’in decision in 2014, specifically excluded private lands. The Cowichan case is unprecedented because it explicitly declares Aboriginal title over lands that include privately-held properties.

Justice Young’s key findings included:

Provincial land grants issued between 1871-1914 lacked proper constitutional authority
BC’s Torrens land title system doesn’t protect against Aboriginal title claims
Aboriginal title and fee simple ownership can coexist, though tensions need to be resolved through negotiation

Here’s the constitutional complexity: Section 35 of Canada’s Constitution protects Aboriginal rights, but there’s no general property rights protection. This creates an imbalance that courts are now grappling with.

What Homeowners Should Do Right Now

If You Own Property in the Affected Area:

Don’t panic. The Cowichan Nation has repeatedly stated they’re not seeking to remove anyone from their homes.
Stay informed about the appeals. The 18-month suspension gives time for negotiation, and appeals will shape the final outcome.
Expect mortgage difficulties. If you need to refinance or take out a home equity line of credit, be prepared for pushback from lenders.
Get specialized legal advice. Consult lawyers who understand both Aboriginal law and real estate.
Review your title insurance. Traditional policies often exclude claims that could have been discovered through due diligence—and Aboriginal title claims are now a known risk.

If You’re Thinking About Buying in BC:

Before you make an offer on any property, ask these critical questions:

Is this property within any claimed Aboriginal title area?
Are there ongoing Aboriginal title cases affecting this region?
What does title insurance actually cover regarding Aboriginal title?
Can my lender provide mortgage financing despite any uncertainty?

Remember: approximately 95% of BC consists of unceded territories where no treaties were signed. The Cowichan case could set precedent for other claims across the province.

The Bigger Picture: What This Means for BC

Public Sentiment:

An Angus Reid poll from October 29, 2025, found that 60% of British Columbians believe this decision will harm relationships between Indigenous groups and others in the province. Property owners (66%) were significantly more concerned than non-owners (48%).

Economic Impact:

Beyond individual homeowners, infrastructure projects and commercial development have stalled. Richmond councillors report that planned roads and transit improvements can’t proceed without ownership clarity.

Precedent Concerns:

Richmond City Councillor Alexa Loo warned: “Richmond is not the only place where Indigenous people are claiming title to land. There’s a great portion of B.C. that will be affected by this if further court actions happen.”

She’s right. In October 2025, a First Nation in Quebec filed a similar claim seeking title to eight areas including Gatineau Park, explicitly stating they don’t intend to dislodge private landowners.

Is There a Path Forward?

Yes, and it’s called negotiation.

The Haida Title Agreement from 2024 provides a blueprint. BC and Canada recognized Haida Nation Aboriginal title over Haida Gwaii, including private lands, with explicit provisions protecting existing private property rights, public services, and parks. The BC Supreme Court confirmed this agreement in September 2025.

First Nations leaders have pointed to the Haida model as proof that Aboriginal title and fee simple ownership can coexist. The key is good-faith negotiation rather than prolonged court battles.

BC Attorney General Niki Sharma has said the province prefers resolving land claims through negotiation rather than litigation to avoid “considerable uncertainty.” The Cowichan case demonstrates exactly why: court-imposed solutions create chaos and controversy.

The Uncomfortable Truth

This case highlights a fundamental tension in Canadian law that we’ve been avoiding for generations. Aboriginal peoples have constitutionally protected rights to lands they’ve occupied for millennia. But hundreds of thousands of British Columbians own homes on those same lands, purchased in good faith with clear titles from the government.

Who’s responsible when those two realities collide?

The courts say it’s primarily the Crown’s responsibility. Justice Young’s ruling emphasized that private landowners aren’t the proper targets—they bought their properties legally. The constitutional obligations lie with federal and provincial governments.

What does that mean practically? Potentially massive Crown-funded compensation—either to First Nations for historical dispossession or to property owners if lands must be returned. Either way, it’s taxpayers footing the bill for historical wrongs.

What About Title Insurance?

Many homeowners are asking: “Doesn’t my title insurance protect me?”

The short answer: probably not as much as you think.

Traditional title insurance policies typically exclude claims that could have been discovered through due diligence. Now that Aboriginal title claims are a known legal risk throughout BC, insurers may argue you should have known to investigate.

If you’re in the affected Richmond area or anywhere with known Aboriginal title claims, talk to your title insurance provider about what’s actually covered. Get it in writing.

A System Under Strain

Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of this case is the notification failure. Private landowners weren’t informed about the litigation for over a decade, despite the province and city knowing about it since 2014.

At a standing-room-only public meeting in Richmond on October 28, 2025, hundreds of property owners expressed anger about the lack of warning. One attendee captured the sentiment: “Why weren’t we told sooner?”

The answer reveals a systemic problem: Case Management Justice J.A. Power explicitly rejected notification requests from governments, concerned that informing private landowners would “overwhelm the court” with standing applications.

In other words, the court decided it was more convenient to keep property owners in the dark than to deal with them wanting a say in a case that could invalidate their titles.

Final Thoughts: Uncertainty Ahead

The Cowichan case represents years—possibly decades—of uncertainty ahead. Multiple levels of appeals are expected. Negotiations will be complex and contentious. And the outcome will reshape property law in British Columbia.

For homeowners, the message is clear: stay informed, get expert advice, and don’t make major decisions based on panic or incomplete information.

For prospective buyers: do your homework. Research Aboriginal title claims before making offers. Demand clear answers from sellers, lawyers, and lenders. And consider whether you’re comfortable with the level of uncertainty in any given area.

For all of us: this case is ultimately about reconciliation—finding a way to acknowledge historical injustices while respecting the property rights of people who bought homes in good faith. It won’t be easy, and it won’t be quick. But ignoring the issue isn’t an option anymore.

The Cowichan ruling has forced a conversation that British Columbia—and Canada—can no longer avoid. How we resolve this will define property rights and Indigenous relations for generations to come.

Important Disclaimer

Please conduct your own research and fact-checking before making any decisions based on this article. This information is compiled from publicly available online sources as of October 31, 2025. Legal situations evolve rapidly, and this case is subject to ongoing appeals and negotiations.

For advice specific to your situation, consult with qualified legal professionals specializing in Aboriginal law and real estate law. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal, financial, or real estate advice.

Sources

This article is based on information from the following sources:

Global News – Multiple articles on Richmond homeowners, Cowichan Nation statements, and financing impacts
CBC News – Coverage of the ruling, appeals, and community reactions
MLT Aikins, JFK Law, Cassels, BDP Law, Miller Titerle, and other legal firms’ analysis
City of Richmond official communications
First Nations Leadership Council statements
BC Real Estate Association communications
Angus Reid Institute polling data (October 29, 2025)
CityNews Vancouver coverage
Cowichan Tribes official press releases
BC Supreme Court decision (2025 BCSC 1490)
Province of British Columbia official statements
Various news outlets including Times Colonist, Richmond News, CTV News, and others
Legal analysis from Osler, Woodward and Company, and other law firms
Fraser Institute commentary
BC Treaty Commission materials
Academic sources including UBC Law Review

Last Updated: October 31, 2025