Discussion Groups

From what you are saying it sounds like speed bumps are being installed in front of your unit. The SPA requires that the decision is recorded in s.35 minutes, some financial record may also be required. If the decision is not recorded in the minutes council is contravening the SPA, but the CRT won't usually order them to obey the law. In any event, council has the power to make decisions concerning common property without explanation and has a lot of discretion in interpreting what they deem to be a "significant" change. It sounds like you expected to be treated with common courtesy, but complaining about being rudely ignored is probably a waste of time. The SPA only requires council to respond to a very narrow range of situations, and that has cultivated an astonishing level of disrespectful arrogance that is spreading throughout BC's strata agency industry. *** The CRT says it's redundant to order stratas to comply with the SPA because that obligation is alr...

I'm all for inviting resumes or some kind of introduction of candidates that includes a summary of what they can contribute. However, I respectfully suggest that you change your strategy. Any plan to recruit a cookie cutter slate and exclude existing council members sounds to me more like a coup than a democratic election process. ⁠ Why not form a nominating committee, and invite ALL owners who care to serve to submit a short cv or introductory bio? That way the voters will have the factual data they need to make informed decisions on who they want to represent them. 

CRT Consultation Time Thanks for sharing this. I will certainly participate, and I really hope that everyone else will also! **** For whatever it's worth, let's not waste ANY opportunity to build the CRT according to public needs. We need the members of this group to participate in this consultation. I took the survey and then made further comment that I would like to be able to save my suggestions. **** I don't know. I participate to suggest corrective action, for whatever it's worth. **** LOVE the image, thanks for sharing it! Will you participate? I'll show you mine, if you show me yours! LOL! **** I know, it takes courage. You have to be careful. Constructive feedback that requires corrective action by the CRT is treated as criticism, and criticism provokes retaliation by adjudicators. What happened to you? Will you please participate in this consultation, just for the record? We really need victims of the CRT to speak out. **** I asked the...

Good question. We might need a magic wand. My suggestion is to give up on portables and install ductless air conditioning that effectively cools the whole place on recycle so you don't have to open the windows and choke on smoke during wildfire season. If you must use portables, window ACs work better than the ones with hoses, and according to Consumers Reports, none of them work as well as advertised. To keep the heat down in our unit we close the windows tight, put corrugated cardboard next to the glass, and close the blinds and drapes while the sun is on the window. Outside we try to shade the glass with a patio umbrella. In summer I get up when it cools off at about 4 a.m. and open all the doors and windows until about 7 a.m., or whenever it gets warmer outside than inside. We also use fans. Lots of fans. Pointed right at us. We don't have a cross draft or shade trees, so on many days nothing we do brings relief. I go around naked wiping myself down with a wet cloth...

Eye roll is right. Just remember that you have to pick your battles. I think that kind of nit picking is usually employed as a distraction to divert attention away from some serious misconduct by the strata management team. I would ignore petty criticism and keep my eye open for that instead.

Notice that in the federal election nobody is suggesting an electronic vote that undermines the democratic right to a secret ballot. It is the strata agency industry that is trying to pass bylaws that allow electronic meetings to replace general meetings. That move to control the mute button, restrict debate, intimidate voters and transfer power into their hands is a state of emergency for stratas in my opinion. I believe that bylaws that allow proxy farming or electronic general meetings as standard practice are contrary to the best interests of owners and strata corporations. FYI, I bcc'd this message to over 90 of my email contacts.   If everyone did the same thing we might better curtain the industry’s campaign for bylaw amendments that would allow EGMs to deprive owners of in-person AGMs.

Thanks for sharing the article "STRATA ALERT: HOW TO GET INTO PEOPLE’S STRATA LOTS WITHOUT THEIR PERMISSION" written by Paul Mendes, brother of the current president of BC's Law Society. Unfortunately, it looks to me like a deceptive attempt to churn up litigation by legal professionals who profit from it. The OP's bylaw is probably enforceable. The SPA provides a standard bylaw 7(1) that requires an owner to allow a person authorized by the strata corporation to enter and inspect their strata lot at a reasonable time, on 48 hours' written notice. With all due respect to the Mendes brothers and so many others, lawyers acting in conflicts of interest that are contrary to the best interests of stratas and owners of strata property manufacture countless disputes. I think Adrienne Murray was one of the lawyers drafting the standard bylaw, and the SPA specifically allows for stratas to amend it. Owners do themselves a favour if they rely on the law instead of stories...

Check your bylaws. I think you need a bylaw if you want to force disclosure of the list of proxies. However, s.36 of the SPA entitles you to an unredacted copy of any correspondence, including attachments. This is confirmed multiple times in case law posted on CanLii.   It doesn't matter whether the proxy was delivered via email, hand, or otherwise, a written instruction received by the strata is correspondence, and you are entitled to a copy within 2 weeks of your request upon payment of 25 cents a page. Council is responsible for retaining and providing copies unless your strata passed a bylaw allowing council to delegate their powers and duties to a property manager under s.4 of the SPA. **** None of that makes sense, and none of that is the law. CHOA is "the largest association representing the strata industry in British Columbia" and Daryl was/is a property manager defectively practicing law without a license. The list of proxies is not the property of CHOA or ...

Council can grant permission for short term exclusive use under s.76, unless it requires a 3/4 vote under s.71 for a significant change in use or appearance from as shown on the strata plan. In either case, council can also impose corresponding user fees under s.6.9 of the SPR. I think a user fee rule that is not ratified, or adopted as a bylaw, ceases to have effect at the next AGM, but it can be renewed at the same time that s.76 permission is renewed. Like all decisions, these decisions must be recorded in s.35 minutes. Permission for exclusive use, whether it is a significant change or not, doesn't change the designation shown on the strata plan from common property to limited common property. Nor can it be applied to change s.66 ownershp or proportionate unit entitlements. It is a short term privilege, not an entitlement or ownership. Granting exclusive use of common property without imposing user fees would be a contravention of s.31 if it is unfair or contrary to...

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...

 STRATA RECORDS! I just put this together, and it took a while to transcribe it into plain language that a post secondary graduate can digest. So I'm sharing it in case it helps others. I suspect the time it took me may be a big part of the CRT's reluctance to order production of strata records that are not specific enough to suit them. They keep saying they want claimants to keep sorting it all out, instead of the strata, property management company, or CRT doing it just once.   Section 35 Strata corporation records provides that the strata corporation must a) permanently retain the strata plan, any disclosure statement required by the Real Estate Development Marketing Act, plans from the developer for building permits, or any document that indicates the location of a pipe, wire, cable, chute, duct, any information respecting the construction, installation, operation, maintenance, repair and servicing of any common property or common assets, any resolutions that deal ...

I hate to say it, but the list of attendees is not one of the strata records that must be disclosed to owners under s.36 of the SPA. Having said that, the list of attendees is the property of the strata, not the property of CHOA. Council just has to ask for it - but they must vote to do so.  To make a decision of any kind, council has to vote.  Your property manager is BSing everybody, no wonder there was a removal motion. 

 It is my understanding that if A sells to B at a profit prior to possession, then CRA treats it as inventory, not real estate, and taxes it as ordinary income, rather than capital gains. That can be a major disadvantage for the owner who actually takes possession if only the original owner is exempt from future rental restriction bylaws under the SPA. Particularly if the assignments circled back to the developer to resell, so the owner thinks that they are the original purchaser, when they actually aren't. If the completion date on the contract of purchase and sale is a year or two before an occupancy permit is issued, then I wonder if the owner might be responsible for strata fees, insurance, or loss from fire, vandalism, injury, etc. in the interim... Caveat emptor!

The timeline listing the times you were heard humming is correspondence received by the strata, which cannot be withheld or redacted to hide the author's identity. I don't know if it will help, but I'd respond with something like this: "This letter is in follow up to my request for copies of any correspondence received by the strata in regard to me being heard humming. My understanding of what the property manager told me is that nobody has to reply to my request. Please correct me if my recollection of that is less than accurate, as I expected the courtesy of a reply. Since the 2-week time period for providing said copies has expired, with none received, I request copies of all correspondence received by the strata from any owners in the 2 years prior to this date. In consideration of my disability, I also request an in person hearing pursuant to s.34.1 to obtain a decision on reasonable accommodation of competing interests. If anything else is required please let m...

It sounds like your neighbours might be exercising their discretion as council members. Or they might be just bullying you. The question is, are they acting in conflict for their own interests, unreasonably interfering with use and enjoyment of your property, or are they acting in the best interests of the strata? The table and water bucket are not within council's jurisdiction unless they are an actual hazard or nuisance or unreasonably interfere with the use or enjoyment of others. If the only "others" are themselves, then under s.32 of the SPA they must recuse themselves from voting on the matter. **** I'm not convinced that the patio is part of your strata lot and the yard is limited common property, since you haven't said that it is designated that way on the strata plan. If you don't have a copy of the strata plan, I sure hope that you ask to review it, or request a copy of it pursuant to s.36 of the SPA prior to proceeding further. If the ...

Using a personal logo on strata correspondence is very bad practice, but sometimes owners will "allow" a strata president to do anything at all, for as long as they get away with it. It's up to the owners to put a stop to it. The problem with that is there is no penalty, so the time and effort required is often so grossly disportionate to the benefit that a whole sting of misconduct persists relentlessly until the culprit is voted out. As others have mentioned using a personal logo may expose the owner of it to personal liability as well.

I know. It’s disgusting. When Mae Reid, former Coquitlam City Councillor and realtor, sold her strata lot, which is right above mine, she hired a fellow realtor who bragged about integrity as she deceptively advertised a common property deck for sale with the strata lot. No wonder there is so much confusion over repairs, common expenses, and ownership. Fraudulent misrepresentation is common practice among corrupt agents! 

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 deductibl...

The duty to repair and maintain an outside electrical socket is usually the strata's, but you would have to exercise some due diligence to be sure. First, check your strata plan to confirm the strata lot and limited common property designations and boundaries. If you don't have the strata plan, make a s.36 request for a copy. Second, read the definitions of common property and common expenses in s.1 of the SPA. By taking those 2 steps you should be able to find your answer in the SPA, if you read it... "common property" includes wires for electricity if they are located within a floor, wall or ceiling that forms a boundary between a strata lot and the common property, or if they are located wholly or partially within a strata lot if they are capable of being and intended to be used in connection with the enjoyment of the common property. READ THIS DEFINITION CAREFULLY! This is what makes it the strata's responsibility. "common expenses" means e...