Foreclosure over Deductible

-

I'm so sorry to hear you are going through this. I know it is truly horrific. In my decades of experience when council has no defence for their own misconduct they use defamation of the victim to distract attention away from themselves. It's the same principle as "the best defence is a strong offence." Cognitive thinking exercises may provide the best evidence, and the best protection if you have enough strength and endurance to do them.

***

I wish I could agree that truth always prevails, but unfortunately, I cannot. The effect of defamation is to twist thinking into blaming the victim who is trying to defend themselves for costing the strata $10,000, instead of blaming the party breaking the law and provoking litigation. Good luck!

****

Decision makers are not in the habit of visiting the scene of the crime. You have to deliver the evidence proving it.

****

Op claims "(no need for details)" for why she is responsible to pay an insurance deductible of $5000, which is by default a common expense of the strata. That sounds like the cause of the loss was her responsibility for some unstated reason, which may or may not be arguable.

Her complaint is that there is no evidence of $5,000 being spent on those repairs. Extortion and tampering with financials are MAJOR crimes, and reasonable apprehensions of such misconduct are raised in stratas where other misrepresentations are proven, or where nondisclosure of strata records in contravention of the SPA is standard practice.

****

What to do? Raise awareness, for a start. Other than that, it sounds to me like OP is doing everything possible under the circumstances.

No owner should ever automatically pay the strata's insurance deductible, certainly not without proof of the 5 Ws. Who is responsible? Why are they responsibile? What was spent? Where are the repairs? When were they completed?

Popular posts from this blog

Conflict of interest

-
I think recusal depends on whether you have an interest in the matter that conflicts with your duty on council to enforce the bylaws. If for example if you're reporting something like a fire hazard that puts others at risk, then I don't see any reason to recuse yourself. On the other hand, if you're complaining about your neighbour interfering with your own use and enjoyment of the property then the best practice might be to recuse yourself. Further to that, if you're a member of council and a bylaw infraction is ever reported against yourself, then under s.32 of the SPA it is mandatory that you recuse yourself from voting on enforcement. **** If you were the one with the odd colour I would say you would have to recuse yourself. Otherwise, no - just report the infraction and make a motion to enforce the bylaw pursuant to s.135 of the SPA. Quote the bylaw, and give the owner notice that fines may be issued until the approved colour is reinstated. If the rest of...
Read more

Carpenter Ants

-
We had carpenter ants pouring into our family room like a river. The nest was in an adjacent railroad tie retaining wall on the north side of our patio. I don't know how the pest control company did it, but they found the nest, and we never saw the ants again. The trick is to find the nest. The building was repaired in our leaky condo project, but the retaining wall has remained damaged for about 20 years despite an engineers report recommending repairs over 5 years ago. ****  
Read more

Duplex Deadlock

-
You could check you property tax assessment notice. Or your registered land title for the legal description of the property. If it says Strata Plan#, fractional interest in common property, then it is s.4 of the Strata Property Act (the "SPA") that is forcing you to join the other owner on a strata council. It's the law, and there is nothing you can do to change it. In a deadlocked duplex there are a few possibilites. First choice is invite the other owner for tea and negotiate some kind of mutual understanding. Second choice is bring matters before the CRT. Third choice is apply for a court ordered administrator. Fourth choice is sell. The SPA and Standard Bylaws will determine the outcome of the second and third choices, with the third choice usually being prohibitively costly. You can go online to BC Laws and scan the Table of Contents of the SPA and the Schedule of Stanard Bylaws. You might want to add them to your Favorites for quick answers to most questions i...
Read more