Property Management Company ("PMC")

NAME Perhaps you need to remind the PM that documents permitted under a governing enactment can be delivered to the strata by email pursuant to 63 (1) of the S.P.A. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/.../comp.../statreg/98043_04...

…..

Yes, I agree; it seems like property managers can do anything they want. I think the unlawful conduct of SPABC members persistently proves that they are a white collar crime syndicate.

Nevertheless, if the strata’s agent and registered and records office is Korecki property management company, then I think you should send the BCFSA a copy of Korecki’s notice that it's blocking your email address and interfering with your right to correspond with the strata. Just for the record, ask the BCFSA if it can take corrective action.

Note that pursuant to your understanding of s.63(1)(c)(i) of the S.P.A. your notices of administrative misconduct and requests for remedies are permitted under governing enactments and can be given by using the strata corporation's email address.

With further respect to the nature of building bodies of evidence, you might want to point out that as the strata agent Samantha Coleman is mischaracterizing your messages as harassment and abuse to thwart the indisputable evidentiary confirmation of receipt that delivery by email provides.

For whatever it's worth in a conspiracy of double standards and unconstitutional governance of condominium home owners, strata records are a common asset. You could therefore ask council to take corrective action to enforce your bylaw prohibitions against using such records to create a nuisance for you or to illegally contravene s.63 of the S.P.A. and deprive you of email confirmation of delivery of your correspondence to the strata.

Finally, you could make a s.36 request for each council member's telephone number, or some other method by which the council member may be contacted pursuant to s.4.1(1) of the S.P.R.

But before you engage in any of those crazy making efforts, you have to ask yourself if you're stark raving mad for wasting so much time and effort on scofflaws who are exploiting a justice system that makes a mockery of the S.P.A. as well as of constitutional protections under Canada's Charter of Rights.

.......

I know. I've also exhausted all reasonable options, with similar experiences.
At our last AGM the PM hired "security" and the president characterized my pleas for protection under the law as "harassment" - continuing a decades long defamatory campaign in retaliation for my seeking remedies for very damaging misconduct, much of which is criminal in nature.
The way I see it, most council members are like mindless sheep whose own interests make them willfully blind to corrupt governance, no matter how blatant or destructive. 
Worse, of all is the role that CHOA, VISOA, CCI, mainstream media, and the provincial and federal government play in supporting industry interests at the expense of trusting, law abiding condominium home owners.

......

NAME If the property manger threatens you with a complaint alleging that this Facebook discussion group is a bylaw infraction, I think you should dispute the validity of the complaint. I’d also make a s.36 request for each council member's telephone number, or some other method by which the council member may be contacted pursuant to s.4.1(1) of the S.P.R., note that governing enactments permit owners to report concerns and seek remedies, and be sure to accept If you're offered a s.135 hearing. https://www.bclaws.gov.bc.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/43_2000#part4

......

NAME You're quite right. Property managers might charge the strata for extra services, by contractual terms or otherwise, but not for practicing law without a license. I don't think property managers are entitled to charge owners, ever. That power is reserved for the courts or the strata.

....

From what you're saying, it sounds like council voted to send the letter, and I have no problem with that so long as the decision was recorded in the minutes as required by s.35 of the SPA.

If council agreed to being invoiced by the PMC, I have no problem with that either, so long as the contract is available to owners pursuant to s.36, and its approval by council was recorded in s.35 minutes.

However, there's no provision in the SPA for automatic approval of a chargeback to owners - chargebacks by council are explicitly restricted to very specific circumstances - and in law each decision must be voted on by council and recorded in s.35 minutes.

….

Yes, this is a valuable Court of Appeal citation. Thanks for sharing it.

….

I think automatic chargebacks are more than questionable, they're unlawful. In regard to power, might does NOT make right. Council may have the power to enter into any agreement they like, but that doesn't make anything about it lawful. 

....

Standard bylaws prohibit owners, including council members, from using strata lots or common property for illegal purposes. Council approving a contract that contains a term allowing property managers to put an automatic chargeback on an owner’s account for work they do is an unlawful act. I think owners should replace council members who fail to take corrective action for financial irregularities, even if it takes a s.43 petition to do so.

….

I agree, stratas really do need a standard contract for property management that serves owners instead of the company. I'd like to see somebody draft a proposed PMC contract and upload it for review and comment under the "Files" tab for this group. I did that with great success for a model bylaw package for townhouses. I think every major accomplishment starts with a first step by somebody who cares.