CondoVoice - Winter 2007

P U B L I C AT I O N O F T H E C A N A D I A N C O N D O M I N I U M I N S T I T U T E - T O R O N T O & A R E A C H A P T E R P U B L I C AT I O N D E L’ I N S T I T U T C A N A D I E N D E S C O N D O M I N I U M S - C H A P I T R E D E T O R O N T O E T R É G I O N

www.ccitoronto.org

VOL. 12, NO. 2 • WINTER 2007

PLUS:

The Appointment of

Administrators

■

Appointment of an Administrator - The Legal Perspective

■

The Downward Spiral of a Condominium Building

■

The Condo Dream

■

Enforcement: The Path to Success

■

Requisition Meeting

■

Highlights of the 2007 CCI/ACMO Conference

… and more

PM #40047005

Contents Canadian Condominium Institute / Institut canadien des condominiums Toronto & Area Chapter 2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310 Toronto, Ontario M2J 1W8 Tel.: (416) 491-6216 Fax: (416) 491-1670 E-mail: cci.toronto@taylorenterprises.com Website: www.ccitoronto.org

Features

6

The Downward Spiral of a Condominium Building

11

The Appointment of Administrators

15

Appointment of an Administrator – The Legal Perspective

19

Enforcement: The Path to Success

26

The Condo Dream

34

Requisition Meeting

2007/2008 Board of Directors PRESIDENT John Warren, C.A. (Co-chair, Conference Committee, CAI Liaison) Adams, Masin & Tilley LLP

VICE-PRESIDENTS Armand Conant, B.Eng., LL.B., D.E.S.S. (Chair, Legislative Committee) Maclaren Corlett LLP Mario Deo, LL.B. (Co-chair, Public Relations Committee Member, Conference Committee) Fine & Deo LLP SECRETARY/TREASURER Bob Girard, B.Comm, RCM (Chair: Special Projects Committee) AA Property Management & Associates

PAST PRESIDENT Janice Pynn, RCM, ACCI, FCCI (CCI National Liaison, CAI Liaison) Simerra Property Management Inc.

BOARD MEMBERS Gina Cody, P.Eng., M.Eng., Ph.D., ACCI, FCCI (Chair, Education Committee, CAI Liaison) Construction Control Inc. Henry Cohen (Member, Membership Committee) YCC #0074

by Andrew W. Wallace In some cases the checks and balances in the "Act" are not being adhered to.

by Brian Horlick, B.Comm., B.C.L., LL.B., ACCI There are circumstances when the appointment of an administrator is the only hope.

by Robert Mullin, B.A. (Hons.) LL.B. Adopting a uniform enforcement trategy could ensure a corporation's path to success.

by Steven Christodoulou, R.C.M. The birth of a condo dream is a reality - Is It Your's?

by John Warren, CA Providing owners with information early could defust a Requisition Meeting.

39

The Six Types of Condo Directors

56

Revisiting the “Open Book”

Brian Horlick, B.Comm., B.C.L., LL.B., ACCI (Co-chair, Public Relations Committee) Horlick Levitt Barristers & Solicitors Lisa Kay (Member, Membership Committee, Conference Committee, Website Committee) Maxium Condo Finance Group

by Robert L. Weinberg, MBA, RCM, ACCI The best medicine for a spiral is to prevent it......work together.....be a team.

by Michael E. Le Page, R.C.M. Directors are usually a very diverse group - read on.

by Michael H. Clifton, M.A., LL.B. Every right of any kind can only be exercised within bounds.

CCI News 5 30

President’s Message

Vic Persaud, BA (Chair, Website Committee Member, Membership Committee) Suncorp Valuations Ltd.

44

Something New for the Presidents’ Club

47

Report on the 2007 CCI-T Annual General Meeting

Bill Thompson, BA, RCM, ACCI (Chair, Membership Committee) Malvern Condominium Property Management

50

Members’ Corner

51

New Members

Jasmine Martirossian, B.A., M.A., PhD.

54

CCI Course Calendar

ADMINISTRATOR - Lynn Morrovat ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT - Josee Lefebvre

55

Diversions & Distractions

Julian McNabb TSCC #1850

EX OFFICIO DIRECTOR

Highlights of the 2007 CCI/ACMO Condominium Conference

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

3

President’s Message 008, and I’ve had an entire year as President of CCI-Toronto and Area Chapter (CCI-T); it just doesn’t seem like it. It was not until I sat down to write this that I realized that so many people did so many things this past year. I will not be able to recognize them all here, but I assure you their accomplishments were legion.

2

CCI-Toronto & Area and The Association of Condominium Managers of Ontario (ACMO) partnered to lobby the Ontario Government for changes to the Regulations related to electricity submetering. There are, again, just too many people who made important contributions to this effort to name but the result of all their efforts is that electricity submetering for condominiums is now voluntary.

Though becoming voluntary has eliminated the time pressures previously faced by condominiums, it appears there may be compelling financial reasons to submeter and every condominium should investigate submetering to determine the best course of action for their community.

CondoVoice had an astounding year; increasing in size with more and more articles of interest. This issue discusses condominiums under administration and causes that can spiral a condominium out of control. There are also other, perhaps more upbeat, articles on successes in condos and a look at the six types of directors.

CCI-Toronto & Area in partnership with ACMO and Rogers Cable, annually presents the premier condominium conference providing the best in condominium education and information with delegates and speakers from across Canada and, this year, with guests from the USA and Australia. The 2007 conference was about “going green” and was the biggest and best yet. It was so successful that next year we are moving to a larger location. Please see the report on the conference in this issue for details.

Our educational courses and seminars were reviewed, updated and reinvigorated this year and more and more people attend the sessions. We have a busy schedule set up for 2008 including holding the popular Condo 101 course across the GTA and perhaps offering the Basic and Advanced Director’s courses on weekends for those who cannot commit to weekday nights.

Membership continues to increase and a significant milestone was reached this year. CCI-Toronto & Area now represents owners of more than 100,000 condominium units or approximately 25% of all units in the GTA. In 2008 there are plans afoot to extend our contact with those unit owners as well as our continued membership efforts with condominium corporations.

Being President this past year, I had the opportunity to meet many of the directors, professionals and suppliers who support our organization. I have always been impressed with condominium people; almost to a person they set off each day to do the best possible job for their communities. Like most, I just sort of assumed that everyone involved in condominiums were like those I had met and I am so pleased to report that they are. Their willingness to volunteer and share their expertise is incredible and it has been very much my privilege to work with them this past year.

2008 will, I am sure, be just as exciting and I look forward with enthusiasm and confidence, sure that we will continue to advance the cause of condominiums in Ontario.

All the best to you and to yours.

John Warren Winter 2007

thecondovoice

5

The Downward Spiral of a Condominium Building

BY ROBERT L. WEINBERG, MBA, RCM, ACCI PERCEL INC. PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

e have all “heard” about that condominium building in trouble. You know, the one “down the street” with the terrible Board of Directors or lousy property management company. At least that is what the average condominium owner understands. There always seems to be someone to blame for the woes facing a condominium corporation in trouble.

W

The fact is that it is never just one thing that causes a condominium corporation’s problems, but a combined effect of symptoms including financial mismanagement, internal political infighting, physical deficiencies, demographics and ineffective property management.

The focus of this article is to examine the root causes of the Downward Spiral, the methods that can be utilized to pull out of that spiral and the associated costs. As a professional condominium manager, I am fortunate that I have only been involved in one trou-

bled Condominium Corporation but that it never reached the depths to which this article refers. For the purpose of this article the focus will be only on standard condominium corporations.

All condominium corporations regardless of the number of suites, the size of the common elements or the nature of the building (high rise, low rise, townhome or commercial) have the same potential to spiral out of control given the right mix of problems and the inability of the stakeholders to work together toward developing and implementing reasonable policies and plans for the operation of the corporation.

A condominium corporation is a business. It is registered with the Ontario Ministry of Government Services. Like any registered corporation, it is required to keep financial records, file tax returns, have elected or appointed directors, hold meetings and keep a minute book. However, unlike any other corporation, the individual direc-

tors running the business do not necessarily have to have any direct expertise in the business they are running. This is potentially the first problem that can contribute to the start of the spiral.

Condominium Directors are charged with the legal responsibility of managing the condominium corporation.

More frequently than not, they have absolutely no knowledge of the Condominium Act, their own Corporation Declaration, accounting, facility management or human resources management. How then is it possible that these people are managing the money of the Corporation, selecting trades, investing Reserve Funds and directing a property management company?

Can anyone imagine any other business, which can be worth many millions of dollars and have a multi-million dollar budget run by individuals without the requisite background or knowledge? In our society we have such high expectations when hiring Winter 2007

thecondovoice

7

people to work for us. They require a certain education, work experience and skills in order to be even considered for a job that has nothing to do with the overall direction and welfare of the business.

This is a direct excerpt from the Condominium Act:

Qualifications 29. (1) No person shall be a director if, (a) the person is under eighteen years of age; (b) the person is an undischarged bankrupt; or (c) the person is a mentally incompetent person. 1998, c. 19, s. 29 (1).

izens, the single parent with two jobs, the unemployed and those on disability allowances. While these are all important factors to consider on a humane level, the Board of Directors and Property Management have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that the Corporation is adequately funded at all times to ensure that a financial deficit is not realized. Should a deficit occur, they must plan for the recovery of the deficit.

Essentially the first problem with condominiums is that you do not need any minimum qualifications or education to be a director and manage the assets of other people. Is it any wonder that there are many condominium corporations in a spiral? Today, people need more qualifications to work in minimum wage positions.

In some cases, however, directors have an extensive background in finance, law, medicine, engineering and the like.

They know everything or so they believe. All too often these directors believe they are the only ones with the “plan” and their vanity or conceit can lead to as many problems for the corporation as those caused by the directors without any knowledge. Either way, the directors themselves can directly contribute to bad decisions which start the spiral.

Financial distress is one of the main by-products of directorial mis-direction but not what keeps it going. It is a given that the vast majority of condominium owners do not want to see their maintenance fees increase. We have all heard about the fixed income senior cit8

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

Most condominium corporations have some utility bills as part of the common area expenses. Even townhome corporations usually include water and sewer as an expense. In some corporations, the utility costs can make up as much as 50% or more of the operating budget, and given the increases in utility rates over the last 5 years especially, it is necessary for the Directors and managers to explain the necessity to raise common element fees to keep step with these rising costs no matter how unpopular the decision.

Unfortunately, it has been an all-to-common occurrence that the Directors fail to heed the advice of their property manager or auditor and the deficits keep growing.

That leads to the next loop in the spiral … the property manager.

The Property Manager

Condominiums cannot be run by the Board of Directors or management as a popularity contest. Although it may sound callous, we are there to be right, not popular. Unfortunately, there are too many directors who bend to the “popular” vote and too many management companies who fail to recommend the proper course of action because they do not want to be fired.

The property management industry is attempting to regulate itself with educational requirements like the RCM program and corporate involvement through the ACMO 2000 Certification.

Managers are professionals who are required to be fluent in Condominium Law, Labour Law, Building Codes, HVAC, Building Mainten-ance, Finance and Account-ing. But, given all of this knowledge and experience, who is it that is the first to get “cut” from the team?… the property manager.

Property management companies are usually the greatest resource for a condominium corporation, although not all companies possess the same skills, knowledge and qualified staff.

The fact is that there are also some very good management companies and some who are not as good or may not have congruent goals with their clients.

However, when times are tough financially, too many times the Directors look for “cuts” in the management fees first. If the management company agrees to the cut, they frequently replace the site property manager with one who is less experienced and frankly, earns a lower salary. If they don’t agree, they will terminate and then the Corporation potentially loses a good property manager over a few dollars.

Unfortunately, the changes made by this new Board may not sit well with those owners who believed their political platform and then what happens, another requisition, another special general meeting and another new Board. There is no leadership, no plan, no direction for management to follow and the spiral continues.

The Community

Although maybe not as prevalent in geographic areas outside the GTA, many corporations encompass a mixture of peoples from across the globe.

They come from vastly different cultures than the formerly typical Canadian culture and with them they

In other cases, a Board of Directors will decide to “test the market” and tender the management contract, even if they are generally pleased with the company’s services. In this scenario, they can make a change just to reduce their costs.

Sometimes the property management company and the directors are in conflict and just can’t work together. So a change in management companies is made. This can happen multiple times in the same Corporation over a short time. This writer has knowledge of Corporations who have had no less than four (4) management companies in four (4) years. So, is it really the management company at fault or is it the Board of Directors, yet again.

Either way, the much needed consistency in property management is eliminated and the spiral continues.

The Politics

So the Board is no good or so the owners believe, rightly or wrongly. “Let’s get a requisition together and throw them out” is the chant that is heard in elevators and on the street.

After a couple of months and some expense, a new Board is in power.

After all, these people or their campaign managers believed that if they had the power, everything would be better. The maintenance fees would be lower, the building would be cleaner and better maintained and problems would, if not immediately, go away or be lessened.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

9

bring the beliefs, behaviors and expectations from their native lands.

This too can lead to many internal problems from racial discrimination, criminal activity, multiple tenancy of individual suites/units, demands for changes to the established Corporation rules or Bylaws (to suit the needs of the individual groups) and a general lack of harmony on the property.

Once this happens, the real estate market picks up on the “signals” and suddenly the market pricing is negatively affected and either people can’t sell their units or they “take a hit” just to get out. Then the Corporation starts to attract a buyer who would not contribute to the betterment of the property. The lessthan-desirables start to move in and the spiral continues.

The Building is Broken

So there is no money, no plan, no consistency of management, and a changeover on the Board due to requisition meetings. You’ve seen the Corporation lawyer more this year than your own kids.

Things are breaking down everywhere.

There are leaks into suites and into common areas. The roof is worn and also leaking. There is inconsistent hot water and the heating systems keep shutting down.

Enough is enough. What can we do now asks a concerned owner? With no answer from the Board or the manager that is just putting in time, knowing that he/she is the 14th manager to be on the site in 2 years, the owner contacts a lawyer and demands that appropriate action be taken to reverse the spiral before the Corporation crashes.

granted by the Court.

The Administrator, who is usually a property manager (management company) reports to the Court directly and in many cases has complete control over all decisions necessary in order to restore the Condominium Corporation both physically and financially.

This last resort option is very costly for all owners. It will require a substantial period of time to pull out of the spiral and may involve special assessments, temporary closure of facilities, increased maintenance fees, liens, power of sale of units, etc. The spiral will end but costs will be enormous.

Other Methods

There are simple, easy to implement methods to avoid the downward spiral.

1)

2) 3) 4)

5)

6)

Court Appointed Administrator

In rare circumstances, although becoming more prevalent today, an owner can make application, under Section 131 of the Condominium Act, to the Superior Court to have an Administrator appointed to manage the affairs of the Corporation subject to the powers 10

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

7) 8)

Insist that all directors be willing to take the CCI directors courses.

Insist that all directors sign a disclosure agreement.

Ensure that the Corporation complies with Sections 93, 94 and 95 of the Act.

Hire an ACMO 2000 certified management company and ensure that they are treated as a working partner in the Corporation’s decision making and implementation processes. They are the Corporation’s right hand and the most valuable resource.

Increase common element fees annually to account for increases in utility costs, contractor’s rates, employee salaries and increases in maintenance costs, etc., due to the aging of the property.

Make-up any deficits in the next fiscal year by either increasing the common area fees or by special assessment.

Create, maintain, implement and update a detailed maintenance plan for the common areas of the property.

Ask the Corporation Auditor for assistance should the Corporation

9)

appear to be falling behind in meeting its operational plan or reserve fund plan.

Enforce the Corporation’s Declaration, Bylaws and rules for all owners and do not permit special interest groups to hijack the Corporation.

10) Communicate regularly with all owners in order to help them feel that they are part of the overall team.

11) Stay on course.

If any Condominium Corporation wants to avoid the downward spiral, they merely need to follow these steps.

For any Condominium Corporation finding itself in the spiral, the owners should demand that an owners meeting be called to bring the “team” together and come to a balanced plan to “pull out of the spin”. The plan should be realistic and specify: • the required timing, • who the responsible parties shall be • how the costs are to be distributed to the owners • the order of priorities including physical repairs and financial restructuring • reporting intervals to the owners and/or mortgage companies.

No matter the size or circumstance of an individual Corporation, the best medicine for the spiral is to prevent it.

Work together. Be a team.

Robert Weinberg has been a property manager for over 25 years and is currently the President of Percel Inc., a professional condominium management company. His company manages high-rise, townhome and industrial condominium properties.

Mr. Weinberg can be reached toll-free at 1-888-PERCEL1 or emailed at rweinberg@percel.com. ■

The Appointment of

Administrators

BY ANDREW W. WALLACE

he first Administrator appointed to a Condominium Corporation was approximately three years ago. The Corporation was located in the Jane and Finch area and in the writer’s opinion the Courts, in appointing a property management company as the Administrator, made a mistake. The reason I consider this an error is that you have to remember the administrator becomes virtually a ‘dictator’. He now takes the place of the five board members and, at all times, must be transparent in any dealings with the various issues involved in the direction of the Corporation’s affairs.

T

There are no checks and balances and as the lawyer representing the Corporation at that time informed me, the Courts would carry out the checks and balances. With all due respect, I don’t think the Courts have the necessary experience and knowledge to manage condominium corporations. Owners within this Corporation applied to have the Administrator removed and the Board that was elected at a general meeting to be recognized. I was appointed as “facilitator” in the transfer of control from Administration to elected Board of Directors. This judgment was carried out by a Winter 2007

thecondovoice

11

Justice of the Court and, in the opinion of the writer, the Judge in this situation made the correct decision.

At the present time, to my knowledge, there are seven condominium corporations under Administration and this is the ‘tip of the iceberg’. Most of the Corporations that are under Administration are older and are suffering from inadequate Boards and Management who have allowed them

At the present time, I am an Administrator for three condominium corporations. One of those is a 296 townhouse complex in Toronto. On the Monday after my appointment as Administrator, I attended the bank to make arrangements for new banking documents and signing authority. I was shocked to find in the Corporations’ Reserve Fund the balance was $800 and in Operating, there was $400. The previous Board had written cheques and

another period of time. The General Meeting will be held on the 29th of November where it is my aim to have a new By-law #1 confirmed by the owners, which will reduce the Board to five members with staggered terms. At the present time, they have nine Board Members who are elected for three years – no staggered terms. This is a recipe for disaster. We have carried out an audit for 2006, which is the first audit since 2004. We will probably

The difficulty the Courts have in appointing Administrators is, they must come from the Condominium industry with a background and knowledge which will enable them to direct the Management Company, involved with the Corporation, as a Board would do in the same circumstances. to descend into, what I consider will be very sophisticated slums in the future.

Anytime owners have to apply to the Courts for an Administrator to be appointed, the legal costs can be astronomical, which in most cases, cannot be afforded by most of the owners within the Corporations.

As referenced earlier, at no time should the Administrator be a property management company. This is tantamount to putting the fox in charge of the chicken house. Once the Administrator is appointed, he should keep the owners informed by carrying out Information Meetings and, if possible, form a ‘shadow board’ which can be a process of educating future boards and, as indicated earlier, being transparent.

There can be a misconception that when the Administrator is appointed, he also becomes the property manager.

Nothing can be further from the truth since he takes over the role of the Board of Directors which directs, and the Manager carries out the directives of the Board. At no time should the Administrator appoint himself or a subsidiary to be the Property Manager.

12

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

bankers orders for approximately $26,000. Some of those cheques were made out to cash – with explanation being “legal fees”. I am in the process of having these monies returned to the Corporation. Also, they had outstanding monies due to Roger’s Cable of over $120,000; water billings to the City of Toronto to the tune of $300,000; most of the street lighting within the complex did not work and virtually no maintenance had been carried out within this complex in years.

A special assessment has been levied for a million and a half dollars. Liens were placed on various units.

Fortunately, many of the mortgagees came forward and paid the outstanding amounts. Collection of the normal common expenses were improved which gave us positive cash flow and we are now in a position of having paid off Roger’s Cable; made arrangements with the City to pay down the outstanding arrears, over a period of time; street lighting is now fully functional and we have completed the replacement of 145 roofs.

Twice the Courts have extended the mandates of the Administrator and I feel we may have to continue there for

have to special assess again to bring the Reserve Fund up to a feasible level, which will then bring them into compliance with the Condominium Act.

I have been appointed Administrator to another Corporation in Scarborough and this appointment is for 15 months.

A report is to be made to the Court in March, 2008 and a second report in September, 2008. The reason for this appointment is the Board of Directors did not carry out their duties in maintaining and repairing the common elements. They used Reserve Fund monies to offset deficits, even though these deficits had shown up in the past three years with no effort within their budgets to increase the common expenses in order to collect prior years’ deficits.

The difficulty the Courts have in appointing Administrators is they must come from within the Condominium industry with a background and knowledge which will enable them to direct the Management Company, and be involved with the Corporation as a Board would do in the same circumstances. At one point, the Courts wanted to appoint a lawyer to be the Administrator, but he could not obtain

‘errors and omissions’ insurance which is crucial to the well-being of the condominium corporation. Therefore, I feel we will have to lean heavily on principals of companies to be appointed, but in doing so ensuring that their own management company cannot be used to manage any property in which they are an Administrator.

Reiterating my earlier statement, everything must be transparent to ensure that they are acting in the best interests of the condominium corporation which they are administering.

As indicated, to my knowledge there are seven condominiums under Administration. It is my opinion that there are probably more corporations that should be under Administration and I quote from one Property Manager “don’t worry about it – there are no condo police”. He is correct. We have 188 sections of the Act which the legislature took time to pass and proclaim and now there are Boards of Directors, Property Managers, lawyers and auditors who are ignoring the requirements of the Act.

The cost of obtaining an Administrator or bringing the Corporation back to what the Act requires, is astronomical.

It is the owners who end up paying this cost, which is due to lack of knowledge.

The checks and balances that are put in place by the Condominium Act are not being adhered to. We need to look to the Ministry of Government Services, which now administer the Condominium Act, in order to have some form of assistance to Corporations who are going through this trauma.

Andy Wallace has been involved in condominiums since 1972 as a condo director, property manager and, more recently, as a court administrator. He has tought property management courses at both Humber and George Brown Colleges and is a past director of ACMO. ■

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

13

CONDOMINIUM SECTION

Maclaren, Corlett LLP is a full service law firm with offices in Toronto and Ottawa; both having significant condominium sections. The condominium section of the firm’s Toronto office is headed up by Armand Conant, and represents many condominium corporations in Toronto and the GTA. We work closely with our clients to find practical, cost effective solutions to problems.

For more information please contact: Armand G.R. Conant

186 St. George Street, Main Floor Toronto, Ontario M5R 2N3 Tel: (416) 361-3094 Fax: (416) 361-6261 Email: aconant@macorlaw.com www.maclarencorlett.com

14

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

Appointment of an Administrator –

The Legal Perspective

BY BRIAN HORLICK, B.COMM., B.C.L., LL.B., ACCI HORLICK LEVITT BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS

he ability of a court to appoint an administrator for a corporation is an entirely new provision found in the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”). By virtue of s. 131 of the Act, upon the application of a corporation, an owner or a mortgagee of a unit, the Superior Court of Justice may make an order appointing an administrator.

Such an order will specify the powers of the administrator, along with which powers and duties, if any, of the board are to be transferred to the administrator. In extreme cases, a board may find itself without any powers and duties at all. The administrator, on the other hand, may find him or herself with all of the powers of the board.

T

Certainly, such an order can be described as draconian. In many cases, it will have the effect of transferring the democratic government of the condominium community to an unelected third party. Courts will not make such an order lightly. To do so, a court must be of the opinion that it would be just or convenient, having regard to the scheme and intent of the Act and the best interests of the owners.

The issue of appointing an administrator came before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in the case of Skyline Executive Properties v. MTCC 1385.

In that case, almost 50% of the units were owned and managed by Skyline, a company engaged in leasing out units for short terms. Other unit owners complained that this use had changed the character of the building from private single family residences to hotel.

The 2 groups had different interests and the corporation was in a state of dis-

equilibrium. In considering whether or not the circumstances of the case were such as to warrant the appointment of an administrator, the court looked to the leading case of Lum v. Strata Plan VR519, a British Columbia case dealing with that province’s comparable legislation. After reviewing the case law on the appointment of an administrator, the court stated that “historically…an administrator has been appointed in circumstances where there has been substantial misconduct or misWinter 2007

thecondovoice

15

16

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

management by those who control the strata corporation”. In that case, the court suggested the following factors be taken into consideration: (a) whether there has been established a demonstrated inability to manage the strata corporation,

(b) whether there has been demonstrated substantial misconduct or mismanagement or both in relation to affairs of the strata corporation, (c) whether the appointment of an administrator is necessary to bring order to the affairs of the strata corporation,

(d) where there is a struggle within the strata corporation among competing groups such as to impede or prevent proper governance of the strata corporation,

(e) where only the appointment of an administrator has any reasonable prospect of bringing order to the affairs of the strata corporation.

In addition, the court stated that the problem presented by the costs of involvement of an administrator is always to be considered. It also endorsed the comments in Cook v.

Strata Plan N-50 also from British Columbia, that “…the democratic government of the strata community should not be overridden by the court except where absolutely necessary”.

In Skyline, the court found that the above factors (c), (d), and (e) were present and ordered the appointment of an administrator.

The issue of appointing an administrator also came before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice in the case of Bahadoor v. York Condominium Corporation No. 82. In that case, the board was found to be dysfunctional and in crisis. The corporation had not had a property management company for the last year due to the inability of the board to come to a decision on who to hire. The corporation’s bank account

was overdrawn, and its insurance policy has been cancelled for non-payment.

In addition, there were numerous outstanding work orders and fire code violations against the buildings comprising the condominium complex. The corporation in debt by over one million dollars, and the last AGM had not been called for 2 years, nor had the financial statements been done since that time.

The court found this to be a text-book case for the appointment of an administrator, and made an order for such an appointment. However, many industry professionals are of the opinion that the court made an error in allowing the administrator to be the corporation’s property manager as well. It would appear that this unfortunate circumstance did away with one of the essential checks and balances of condominium administration, that being the separation between the directing and the managing of a corporation. In this regard, condominium expert Andy Wallace, in providing testimony to the court, stated that he was shocked at the amount of legal fees incurred by the administrator, and that he had never seen such a level of legal expenses in all his years (over 30) in the industry.

As set out above, the order appointing an administrator for a corporation must state which powers and duties of the board are to be transferred to the administrator. It is important to note, however, that the administrator can have no more power than a board could have.

In the case of Aviawest Resort Club v.

Strata Plan 1863, the court appointed an administrator and authorized the administrator to act in place of the unit owners with respect to the passing of resolutions. The owners appealed the terms of the administrator’s appointment to the British Columbia Court of Appeal. The court allowed the appeal and stated that “if the strata corporation could not act without the authority of a resolution, the administrator is equally restrained. The court went on to state that “Allowing the administrator to act without resort to the owners at all abrogates the rights of owners to vote on actions requiring their authorization by resolution”.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

17

The court was of the opinion that when considering the appointment or termination of an administrator, good reason must be shown why unit owners should not manage their corporation’s affairs through an elected board of directors.

Although the process of appointing an administrator may be costly, in many cases it is the only avenue available to a corporation suffering from one or more of the factors set out in the Lum decision. In the long run, the money spent on such an appointment may well be the most economical and prudent financial decision a corporation can make. Take for example the case of York Condominium Corporation No.8, a townhouse complex of almost 300 units. After suffering from years of neglect, mismanagement, fiscal irregularities and dysfunctional boards, an administrator was appointed. Under the guidance of the administrator, dozens of basements and roofs which had been suffering from leakage for many years began to be repaired and replaced on an urgent basis. It is safe to say that the quality of life of many of these unit owners has improved immeasurably.

The question for owners becomes, “Once appointed, how long should an administrator stay on?” The Ontario Superior Court of Justice weighed in on this question in the above-mentioned

18

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

case of Bahadoor v. YCC 82. The court stated that the test found in the Act for the appointment of an administrator should apply equally to its discharge.

The question to be asked was “Would it be just or convenient, having regard to the scheme and intent of the Act and the best interests of the owners, to terminate the Administrator?” In this regard, the court in Bahadoor considered whether there was at that point a reasonable prospect for the orderly selfgovernance of the corporation, and whether the elected board of directors had formulated an operating and project expenditure plan that presented a reasonable prospect of achieving the orderly management of the affairs of the corporation. The court was of the opinion that when considering the appointment or termination of an administrator, good reason must be shown why unit owners should not manage their corporation’s affairs through an elected board of directors.

The court stated that self-governance is the norm: administrators are the exception. Just as importantly, the court stated that it was its responsibility to take

into account the impact that the discharge might have on other interested persons, including the corporation’s creditors and relevant municipal agencies.

Prior to the coming into force section 131 of the Act, there was no authority in Ontario for the appointment of an administrator to take over the affairs of a condominium corporation where the corporation was suffering from factors set out in the Lum case noted above.

Due to this new legislation, many unit owners may finally be able to realize the reasonable expectations which they had when they decided to buy into their communities. This new section provides corporations, owners, and mortgages with a much needed remedy.

Experience has shown that for a number of condominium communities, the appointment of an administrator has been and will continue to be their only hope of ever being part of a well run, fiscally responsible corporation. It may well be the best investment that such a community can ever make. ■

Enforcement: The Path to Success

BY ROBERT MULLIN, B.A. (HONS.), LL.B. SMITHVALERIOTE LAW FIRM LLP

Overview

Living in a residential condominium represents a compromise of choice. In exchange for relinquishing a measure of control, unit owners are freed of the many day-to-day chores, or outright headaches, of home ownership. This compromise only works, however, if everyone agrees to live by the rules.

Although the vast majority of unit owners are nothing less than ideal ‘condominium citizens’, some condominiums are also home to the ‘condo-commando’, for whom the rules are merely optional. For the unbending unit owner unwilling to lower his stereo’s volume or remove his biting dog, enforcement measures await. As it should be, for many volunteer directors bringing enforcement proceedings against a neighbour is an unsavoury job. Taking your neighbour to task, no matter how commendable, leaves little comfort during the next mutual elevator ride. Enforcement proceedings, no matter how black and white they may appear to the board, the property manager or condominium lawyer, come with no guarantee other than costs.

Nonetheless, adopting a uniform enforcement strategy, and consistently ‘controlling the controllables’, may ensure a corporation’s consistent path to success.

What is Enforcement?

In this article, enforcement is a generalized term, implying that the condominium corporation has exhausted all attempts at voluntary compliance.

Despite the phone calls, letters and outright pleas, the unit owner demands to park her car in visitor parking every night, notwithstanding the outright prohibition in the condominium’s declaration. The condominium must finally turn to the enforcement provisions of the Condominium Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c.19; (“the Act”), invariably meaning referring the matter to a mediation/arbitration process, or directly to the courts via a compliance order application.

Although different, they both represent the resolution of a dispute by an independent decision maker who has the legal authority to grant a binding decision. Every action and decision made

by a board should be made with this final process in mind and the question, ‘will this step ensure our corporation’s success should a hearing be necessary?’

Here, perhaps, are a few tips to ensure that the answer is a consistent yes.

Hypothetical

The remainder of this article will utilize the following hypothetical situation. The condominium corporation is a twenty-year-old high rise apartment styled building. With sixteen units per floor, it is considered high density living. Since creation, its declaration has maintained a blanket ‘no dogs’ clause.

The condominium corporation has always had a property manager, and through the efforts of both the property manager and board, has historically been able to resolve any breaches with little more than a phone call. Recently, Winter 2007

thecondovoice

19

a new unit owner was seen walking a dog through the common element foyer, in clear view of the prominently displayed ‘no dogs please’ sign. What is a board to do?

Know Thyself

First, knowledge is a powerful tool. As a result, every board member and property manager, despite their busy and competing schedules, should be well versed in exactly what the condominium’s declaration, by-laws and rules demand, or prohibit. Often subtleties will exist in a declaration. Although it may be ‘commonly understood’ that no dogs are allowed, has anyone read the declaration recently? A careful reading of the declaration may uncover surprises contrary to commonly held assumptions. Are visiting dogs permitted? Was there a phase-in period to this prohibition? Are there weight exemptions, in effect permitting small dogs? Find out now. Deferring to either a generalized

understanding of the declaration, bylaws or rules, or to one member of the board who has taken the time to familiarize himself with these documents is not enough.

That said, it is appreciated that these documents, when piled up, may amount to the size of a small municipal phone book. To assist, have the board strike a committee to create a ‘document précis’ outlining in chart form the operative sections of the declaration, by-laws and rules. Although there is no substitute for a careful and complete reading of these documents, also having a short thumbnail sketch of these documents is powerful.

Be Consistent & Be Diligent

Second, with a firm understanding of what the declaration, by-laws and rules demand, be consistent in applying these documents across the condominium high-rise. The board in this hypotheti-

cal situation must ask itself, have we enforced this provision in the past, and with an even hand? To this hypothetical scenario the answer is yes, but for many boards, the answer might be a maybe.

If the Declaration has an absolute ‘no dogs’ provision, and the board has historically cast a blind eye to small dogs, then the board may find itself unable to enforce the prohibition at all. An arbitrator or judge will ask these questions, and if evidence is found that ‘cute dogs’ were ignored by the board, then the prohibition may be in serious jeopardy.

With consistency also comes diligence.

Instruct your property manager to conduct scheduled walk-abouts, accompanied by a board member. If during a walk-about a barking dog is heard from behind a unit’s door, it is not enough to ignore it. Only replying to a complaint from a unit owner is not enough. Be aware, and if a potential breach of a condominium provision has occurred, and follow-up.

Continued on page 22

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

21

Avoid the Confrontation

So, the board in this case knows its declaration cold, and it was during a walkabout that both the property manager and treasurer witnessed Ms. Jones walk into the foyer with her small, albeit cute, puppy. Always remember that the condominium represents someone’s home, surrounded by their neighbours.

Confrontation never works. In the public setting of a condominium’s foyer, nothing more than a polite hello should be exchanged.

Document, Document, Document

The property manager should then immediately document the event in his or her log book. A written entry should be made, which will be invaluable evidence later. It does not have to be exhaustive, merely little more than, “December 7th, 2007 – Ms. Jones accompanied by dog, common element foyer, seen during walk-about with Ms.

22

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

Jane Doe (Treasurer) Signed: Ms. Smith – Property Manager”. Although it may not be applicable in this hypothetical scenario, ‘preserving the evidence’ at this time is also key. For such things as an unapproved satellite dish, the taking of immediate photographs removes the argument at a later hearing of “I have no idea what you are talking about.” The opening of an active file is a wise consideration.

The Board

The next step should be an immediate reporting to the board of directors. A meeting should be swiftly called, to recount the event, and to seek a motion to appoint the property manager and/or board member with direct follow-up responsibility. Again, the discussion and resolution should be clearly added to the minutes, which will also be useful evidence. A board that waits for its duly scheduled monthly or quarterly meeting may lose valuable initiative.

Delay can be fatal to an enforcement

proceeding, and if six months go by before the board finally musters a letter, an arbitrator or judge may be very skeptical to demand enforcement.

The board should also be very clear with its directors and officers. Only the assigned property manager and/or director shall have direct follow-up responsibilities. One perennial defence heard in almost every enforcement hearing is, “I was in the workout room when I chatted with Mr. Johnson, a director. He said I could keep my dog.”

Never let a board member fall into this perpetual trap. Every director or officer should understand, beyond debate, that only the property manager and/or the assigned director may deal with the matter directly. All other board members must avoid the conversation, even if the unit owner eventually knocks on his front door.

The First Phone Call & Letter

The first contact with the unit owner is

preferable by phone call. Again, it avoids the potential for a confrontation. The property manager is the ideal choice, because unlike the board, he or she goes home at night.

The phone call should be pleasant, but to the point. “Unfortunately Ms. Jones, we saw you three days ago, specifically December 7th, 2007, with a dog.

M.T.C.C. No. 1234 has a no dogs provision in its declaration. In fact it is Article V, section 4. Do you need a copy?” The conversation should be pleasant and short. Another recurrent defence is that, ‘the property manager called me and started screaming obscenities.’An arbitrator or judge does not like heavy handed property managers or directors. So keep the conversation short, polite and to the point.

The entire conversation should then be reduced to another log sheet, articulating in abbreviated detail, what was discussed, and what Ms. Jones’ responses were. An immediate follow-up letter should then be written to Ms. Jones on the same date, signed by the property manager, in net effect stating, “Thank you for our conversation of today’s date. On December 7th, 2007, you were witnessed bringing your dog into the condominium corporation. This is a breach of the declaration, and we ask that you comply with this provision.

Please find attached a copy of the declaration for your records, and for your convenience we have highlighted this section. In addition, (for satellite dishes, etc.) we have included recent photographs taken depicting this breach.”

The letter’s tone should be firm and polite. Neither an arbitrator nor a judge expects any letter from the condominium to be aggressive. The tone should be informative, and seek immediate compliance with the declaration. The letter should also ask for a written response within fifteen (15) to thirty (30) days.

informed at the outset, he or she may save unnecessary upset, time and energy, by helping the board to avoid the many pitfalls that await enforcement.

The Reply & Second Letter

Another perpetual defence is that the unit owner never received the letter, and doesn’t remember the phone call.

Registered mail destroys this argument, at nominal cost, so always consider it.

Pull the Records

Another routine defence is that the unit owner never knew of the ‘no dogs’ prohibition. On its own, this argument rarely works, as both arbitrators and courts routinely recognize that you must take notice of declarations and bylaws registered on title. If the unit owner elects not to read them, that is at their peril, not at the condominium’s.

That said, if the unit owner is a new purchaser, check the files to see if a Form 13 status certificate was requested prior to his or her purchase. If one was, forward it to the active file. Should the matter go to a hearing, this document will likely shatter this argument in outright fashion.

The Lawyer

Up to this point, the active participation of the condominium’s lawyer may not be warranted, but he or she should be copied on all of the correspondence, and kept in the loop. Likely only the briefest of phone calls from the property manager may be necessary. All too often though, the lawyer only hears of the matter when the final impasse has been delivered to his or her desk. By keeping the condominium’s lawyer

Carefully diarize the response deadline. Ideally, the unit owner will remove the dog and send a confirming letter. Unfortunately in this case, the unit owner provides no reply and is seen routinely walking her dog through the foyer. The registered letter may even be returned with the notation, “Refused by Addressee”.

The board should then instruct a second letter, again asking for a reply. This letter should raise the prospect that this matter will be referred to the condominium’s lawyer if not resolved within seven (7) days.

Enforcement Proceedings

If after the second letter’s timeline has elapsed, neither compliance nor a response has been provided, then the board should instruct the condominium’s solicitor to draft a letter. If the lawyer can resolve the matter, he or she would be wise to ask for a signed undertaking from the unit owner. In effect, it will be a document signed by the unit owner agreeing that there was a dog in her unit, but it has since been removed. Should the dog turn up later, the condominium has a very strong case to ask an arbitrator or judge for enforcement.

If the unit owner also ignores the lawyer’s letter, the board will have to consider bringing an enforcement proceeding against the unit owner. This decision should be made in concert with legal advice. In this scenario there is very little grey area. Many condominium corporations are appropriately Winter 2007

thecondovoice

23

24

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

concerned about the cost. Either a mediation/arbitration process or compliance order proceeding can be costly, and the condominium corporation pays for these, upfront. One tool to moderate a lawyer’s bill is to ask for a flat fee service.

With the lawyer’s letter sent to no avail, and the lawyer instructed to proceed with enforcement, will come the million dollar question, to proceed with either mediation/arbitration or straight to court? Due to the vagaries of the Act, no two lawyers agree on when either option should be taken. The case law indicates that the prudent course is to proceed with mediation/arbitration.

The effect, however, will be the same.

If mediation fails, an arbitrator will conduct a hearing and render a decision. If a compliance order is sought, a judge will review the evidence and provide a ruling. Despite the brilliance of the lawyer, the attention of the arbitrator or judge will turn to the evidence. They will pore over the declaration, the let-

ters, the photographs, the log book, the minutes, the status certificate, and the registered mail receipts. A clear and consistent chain of evidence is very difficult for the opposing side to overcome.

In addition, should the condominium corporation prevail, both the arbitrator or judge have the discretion to award costs, those monies spent to bring the matter before them. A careful, balanced and thorough process taken by the board will bode very well in their favour for costs. A costs order is then recoverable like common expenses, ultimately the subject of a lien.

Conclusion

For many, condominium living is an enriching and rewarding lifestyle choice. For the few, however, their choices come at the expense of others.

Ensuring compliance with the declaration, by-laws and rules is as vital for a board as is collecting the monthly com-

mon element fees. Although the Act’s enforcement procedures ultimately grant such duties to an independent party, through a careful and consistent series of steps, every board can ensure that they put their best foot forward towards their own path to success.

Robert Mullin, B.A. (Hons.), LL.B., is a lawyer at SmithValeriote Law Firm LLP in Guelph. Robert practices extensively in the area of condominium law and development, currently completing his Masters of Law at Osgoode Hall Law School. He acts in both the creation and management of condominiums. As a result, throughout Ontario, Robert regularly works with developers, property management firms and condominium boards to find creative, practical and cost-effective solutions for the unique challenges that condominiums face. Robert currently serves as a director for CCI’s Golden Horseshoe Chapter. He can be reached at rmullin@smithvaleriote.com. ■

CONDOMINIUM DIVISION

Concierge, Gatehouse and Patrol Services Valet Parking Services Mobile Patrol Services By-Law Enforcement Services After Hours Call Centre

INTEGRATED ELECTRONIC SECURITY SYSTEMS In-Suite Security Systems Card Entry Systems Underground Parking Lot Duress/Panic Systems Video Surveillance Systems

G4S Security Services (Canada) Ltd.

65 Overlea Blvd. Toronto, ON M4H 1P1 Telephone: (416) 421-2900

5770 Hurontario Street, Suite 503, Mississauga, ON L5R 3G5 Telephone: (905) 270-7032

Serving over 200 properties in the GTA... and growing!

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

25

The Condo Dream

BY STEVEN CHRISTODOULOU, R.C.M. PRESIDENT & CEO ICC PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LTD. very condo when it is born has the potential to lead a wonderful and exciting life.

However, oftentimes, something happens along the way to divert it from that path of being a shining star and being all it can be. So when this occurs, do we immediately subscribe to condopsychotherapy notions where we classically toss blame on the Mother/Developer?? Perhaps we need to dig a little deeper and examine the cause of the problems. Maybe the condo was born with a physical defect, has not had the benefit of a good education, encountered financial difficulties later in life, developed a myriad of health problems or perhaps the condo is anti-social.

E

26

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

Some of these issues can adversely affect our condominiums which can in turn contribute to the “Downward Spiral” in which an alarming number of condominiums today are caught up.

Once trapped in that web, a condominium becomes labeled and known as being “that” condominium. But, if we can take that newborn condominium and wrap it with the nurturing and attention it deserves, the statuesque beauty and pristine image left behind keeps everybody wanting more…

The Birth

To begin, a well constructed condominium will provide a strong foundation to build on. Moving forward with a solid structure and components, a complete preventative maintenance program will ensure that the building envelope and equipment are maintained in order to maximize their operation and life expectancy. This will allow the creation of a reserve fund study where life expectancies are closer to reality and the condominium will have the funds set aside to pay for future major repairs and replacements.

The Board of Directors

Elected members of the Board of Directors are representatives of the homeowners. From the point at which the condominium is turned over to the homeowners by the developer, the Board of Directors are charged with the task of ensuring that their condominium is being well managed with the future in mind. A pro-active Board of Directors will create policies and procedures to ensure that the condominium is run with the same dedication and fiscal responsibility for years to come. A well run condominium will have a Board of Directors devoid of personal agendas and who are all committed to the task at hand. The Board of Directors will: • strive to constantly educate themselves through courses, seminars or their property managers; • work together as a cohesive unit, not allowing internal politics to get in the way;

Cost saving measures are very important, however, never at the cost of providing quality service to the residents.

• not always make the popular decision in order to “stay in power”, but will make an educated decision for the overall benefit of the condominium; • Hire an ACMO 2000 Certified property management firm, support them and allow them to manage effectively.

Fiscal Responsibility

The health of the condominium’s bottom line is crucial as the Board of Directors and Management work together to ensure that the building is well maintained and adequately funded for present as well as for future expenditures. Boards whose main concern is saving money may not be looking at the larger picture – a view most often responsible for causing problems which can lead to the building being improperly maintained and may trigger future special assessments.

It is imperative to create an annual budget that is reasonable and it is recommended to include a contingency for unexpected items. It is imperative to ensure that the reserve fund is properly funded with regular updates. Cost saving measures are very important, however, never at the cost of providing quality service to the residents.

Professional Management

There are many property management firms in our industry, however not all are quality management firms. A Board of Directors should take the time to source and retain the services of a quality property management firm with the knowledge, experience, support and capability of providing the condomini-

um with professional management including managers who are well paid.

An ACMO 2000 Certified firm would have the qualifications and systems in place to ensure any condominium is all that it can be.

Communication

One cannot stress the importance of good communication. In this day and age, there are so many different forms of communication to choose from that there is no reason not to effectively do so. Newsletters, notices, letters and cctv channels provide fluid mediums through which residents can be kept abreast of matters pertaining to their homes – their single most valuable investment. One must be mindful, however, not to lean too heavily on electronic modes of communication as while they are effective, they are also more impersonal and less expressive.

We need to be sure to maintain the personal and human element of relationships by regularly having face-to-face conversations with homeowners, board members, staff and those tending to the condominium. Oftentimes, these personal interactions facilitate better understanding, express more feeling, and are less time consuming in the long-run than the utilization of electronic modes of communication.

Homeowner’s appreciate knowing what is happening with their single biggest investment. They appreciate transparency and appreciate the Board not waiting until the Annual General Meeting to be informed of important issues.

Committees

While each member of the Board is also a resident, they are charged with the significant responsibility of overseeing the affairs of the condominium. This task can become very overwhelming as many of these Board Members do not generally have the knowledge and expertise in making decisions for things such as setting policies or undertaking significant projects. Oftentimes, however, there are residents in the building Winter 2007

thecondovoice

27

whose education, professional background or personal interests lend themselves knowledgable in these areas and they wish to become involved. For this purpose, committees and sub-committees can be very useful and assist the Board of Directors by managing the assigned tasks. For example, a social committee, finance committee, decorating committee, landscaping, major projects committee (all reporting to the Board of Directors) will aid the Board of Directors in their decision making process along with reducing their overall workload. Committees get the owners involved – contributing to the betterment of their condominium.

Social events – not just a home, but a community

Residents of the condominium should not be strangers to one another.

Creating an environment in which residents can socialize is helpful in establishing a feeling of community and harmony. Holding regular events such as a summer BBQ, wine and cheese reception, movie nights or regular theatre outings can be instrumental in developing stronger relationships between the residents, the Board and management, as well as building a stronger sense of community.

Mindful and respectful residents

The proper maintenance of a condominium is the responsibility of all residents. Being mindful of things such as the proper disposal of household trash, muddy boots in the corridors, smoking in common areas to name a few, will not only aid in the appearance and presentation of the building, but will help in reducing budget costs for incidental and possibly contract costs.

When all residents are respectful and are mindful of the rules, regulations and by-laws, everybody has an equal opportunity to enjoy their home to the fullest.

• Keeping noise in the unit to reasonable levels, keeping in mind that noise in a concrete structure reverberates throughout which can disrupt

28

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

When all residents are respectful and are mindful of the rules, regulations and by-laws, everybody has an equal opportunity to enjoy their home to the fullest. the quiet enjoyment of other residents.

• Properly exhausting cooking and other odors – windows open and fans on – NOT the suite door open!

• Pick up your bike instead of wheeling it indoors • Pick up your pet in the common areas and be sure to stoop and scoop.

• Maintain your parking spot – sop up oil spots and do not use it as storage space for anything other than the intended vehicle.

Treating every part of the condominium (not just your unit) like it is your home will go a long way in helping to preserve the useful life of the common areas and equipment and will increase everyone’s enjoyment of condominium living.

Energy conservation and efficiency

Going green is very important not only for the environment, but contributes to the financial success of a condominium by reducing costs. Efficiency in waste disposal and reduction through recycling and composting, boiler retrofits and energy controllers, lighting retrofits and water conservation such as toilet replacement and sprinkler controllers, go a long way in reducing consumption, increasing efficiency and cutting costs in order to better control common expenses all while reducing the strain on the environment.

Uniformity and Curb Appeal

A pro-active Board of Directors will ensure conformity and uniformity from day one. By-law and rule enforcement from the onset of occupancy such as maintaining blinds and drapes in a neutral colour, uniform garage door colours, exterior lights, house numbers and mailboxes is extremely important.

Landscaping is another very important aspect which can really set the pace and tone of the condominium. Manicured lawns, pruned trees and shrubs, healthy and abundant flowers combined with well-maintained hard surfaces are instrumental in establishing a good impression of the condominium. Curb appeal is a purchaser’s first impression of the condominium – make it a good one!!

Higher real estate values than their neighbors

For most people our homes are our single biggest investment. As such, our dream condo will be one whose real estate values are maintained and continually increase. The combination of effective management, forward thinking, maintenance and hard work will result in making your condominium the one everyone wants to live in

From birth to maturity, there are many important factors in the making of a dream condo. The continual caring and nurturing of the condominium by residents, the Board, Management and trades will be the most effective on the overall development and presence of the building. It is a total and united effort that can make a condo the most sought-after, highly regarded and respected in a sea of condos. The birth of the condo dream is a reality …Is it yours?

Steven Christodoulou, R.C.M. is President and CEO of ICC Property Management Ltd., a professional condominium management company. Mr. Christodoulou can be reached at (905) 940-1234 ext 24 or at stevec@iccpropertymanagement.com. ■

11th Annual Condominium Conference he 11th Annual CCI/ACMO Joint Condominium Conference was held on November 2nd and 3rd, 2007. The theme this year was “Building Better Communities – Going Green” and delegates were treated to a wide array of sessions on things “Green”.

T CCI-Toronto President, John Warren welcomes delegates to the 11th Annual Condominium Conference.

Mohamed Kanani from Rogers shakes hands with Brenda Knie, the winner of the grand prize 42” Panasonic TV donated by Rogers.

Also present are John Damaren, President of ACMO (far left), and Harold Cipin, Past President of ACMO (far right).

30

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

The numbers continue to grow – with close to 700 managers, directors, trades, professionals and others in attendance. Delegates this year arrived not only from CCI Chapters and Condominium Manager Associations from across Canada, but we were also honoured with two international guests; Mr. Tom Skiba, CEO of the Community Associations Institute (CAI) in the United States and Mr. Paul McKimm, representing the National Community Titles Institute (NCTI) in Australia. Regardless of where they came from though, all delegates were offered excellent networking and learning opportunities over the two days.

The conference was launched on Friday morning by Guy Dauncey, President of the BC Sustainable Energy Association. Guy provided an emotionally charged presentation to a ‘standing room only’ crowd, spreading a positive message about the possibilities of a sustainable future. Other outstanding sessions featured timely topics such as: energy efficiency ideas and financing, green landscaping, navigating the TARION system, clean air, smart metering, fire and emergency planning, LEED buildings, grow-ops in condos and a look into the odder side of the condo world by a lawyer, an auditor and an insurance specialist. We extend our sincere appreciation to the 59 speakers and moderators who participated this year.

The wrap-up luncheon and closing session: “The Final and Authoritative Word – The Year’s Review and Case

The sold out trade show offered information on the latest products and services available to the industry.

Conference Delegates are offered numerous networking opportunities.

Law Update”, was moderated again this year by Mario Deo and it was definitely the ‘grande finale’. ‘Kudos’ to Lisa Kay, for her innovative and humourous introduction of the case law panelists. She showed us that, in addition to being great condominium lawyers, they are also real and warmly human.

services on display. A record 81 exhibitors displayed their goods and services this year – far too many to list here, so be sure to check the conference website at www.condoconference.ca for a full list, along with their contact information.

An integral part of the conference is the trade show and delegates were treated to the widest ever range of products and

A sincere thanks goes out to all delegates, speakers and sponsors, as well as our conference partner, Rogers. The commitment of Rogers to condominium education through our conference contributes significantly to our ability to offer more and better quality programming each year and their support is truly appreciated.

Mark your calendars now for next years’ conference taking place on Friday October 31st and Saturday November 1st 2008. The conference is moving next year to enable us to enlarge our trade show and to accommodate our increasing attendance. The new venue is at the Hilton Markham Embassy Suites Hotel at Hwy #7 and Warden Ave. The format will also change to enable those with kids to partake in the Hallowe’en fun at home. See you there. ■ City Waste Committee representatives Doug King (Metro Group), left, and Bob Girard (CCI-Toronto) on right.

Toronto and Area Chapter

Panelists of the Tarion Session prepare for their session.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

31

11th AN

CONFERENCE HIGHLIGHTS ‌

Session rooms were packed with delegates learning tips on Going Green.

Mealtimes offered opportunities for informal discussions.

Keynote Speaker, Guy Dauncy, President of the BC Sustainable Energy Association opens the conference.

Get Smart session panelists (L-R]: Wendy Mortson, Rick Williams and Paul Rivers with Janice Pynn at the podium.

CCI National Directors [L-R]: Gina Cody, Charlie Oliver and Denise Lash.

More lunchtime networking!

32

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

NNUAL CONDOMINIUM CONFERENCE

The Wine and Cheese Reception at the 2007 Conference was a Huge Success!

CCI Conference Committee Member, Bruno Suppa of Corpland Contracting [right], with prize winner Wilma McGregor [left].

Entertainment at the Reception was provided by Salsa band, Havana Nights Express

Conference Prizes were handed out by Harold Cipin (left), ACMO Immediate Past President and John Damaren (right) current ACMO President.

Rogers representative Greg Stokes, with Fran Graf, past president of the CCI Ottawa Chapter, the winner of a 26� television donated by Rogers.

The reception was well attended and offered a casual networking forum for delegates and trades.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

33

34

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

6.5% INCREASE - NO / 6.5% DECREASE - YES

Requisition Meeting

BY JOHN WARREN, CA ADAMS, MASIN & TILLEY LLP his is the tale of how a wise property manager and the corporation’s Directors dealt with this issue. First, a little background; this is a well-maintained 20 year-old suburban, stand alone, high-rise building of 180 units and is largely owneroccupied. It has been managed by the same manager, (an RCM), and the same management company (an ACMO 2000 company) for many years and the average annual increase over the last 10 years, including the 2006 budget increase, was 3.75%. The Board levied a 6.5% increase in 2006 and two disgruntled owners decided that this was outrageous and started the paperwork to requisition a meeting to throw out the current directors and install a new board that would not only rescind the 6.5% increase but would reduce fees by 6.5% - a bit of a catchy phrase “6.5% Increase - No - 6.5% Decrease - Yes”.

As you can imagine they acquired enough signatures and the requisition meeting was duly scheduled.

T

The property manager, aware that requisition meetings are volatile, agendas can be changed and that reason may not prevail, in a stroke of genius, I think, suggested that the Board call an information meeting on the same night as

the requisition meeting but just before it to consider how to reduce costs in the budget by 13% or $146,000. Further he suggested that they bring the corporation’s lawyer, engineer and auditor to the meeting to address the issues surrounding such a decrease as they would be perceived as independent. The lawyer spoke eloquently about the variety of owners and their expectations

and how the Directors have to balance these competing interests in setting maintenance standards. He discussed the Directors duty to maintain the building emphasizing that there can be significant and serious consequences should Directors not carry out their duties responsibly. The engineer gave an outstanding presentation on how reserve contributions are calculated and

ONTARIO CONDOMINIUM CORPORATION NO. 100

REVENUE Common element assessments Interest and other Less allocation to reserve for major repairs and replacements EXPENDITURES Utilities Contracts and compensation Administration Repairs and maintenance

EXCESS OF REVENUE OVER EXPENDITURES

Budget 2006

Actual 2005

$ 1,198,000 .

17,000 1,215,000

$ 1,125,000 17,000 1,142,000

. 207,000 . 1,008,000

186,000 956,000

515,000 345,000 35,000 . 113,000 . 1,008,000

439,000 317,000 30,000 122,000 908,000

$

Winter 2007

-

$

48,000

thecondovoice

35

the consequences and liability issues if the Board does not follow the recommended plan. In order to discuss what it would take to reduce costs by $146,000 I distributed the budget and comparable 2005 actuals to enable an easy discussion of the options available to achieve the level of cost reduction promised by the dissidents.

General Budget Considerations

Budget discussions are not about condominium fees but rather are about condominium costs; the monthly payments are just each owners proportion of the total of the costs that the board has estimated will be incurred in the year.

There is no landlord and no profit margin to squeeze; whatever it costs to run the building has to be split amongst the owners. It should be self evident that to reduce costs by $146,000 means a reduction in the quality and/or quantity of services – a reduction in the standard of living in the building but it does not seem to be, for if it were, there would be far fewer requisition meetings. Owners generally understand in their private lives that you get what you pay for, however there seems to be a disconnect when it comes to condominium costs, people somehow seem to feel that the rules on price, quality and service do not apply in condominiums and that you can somehow buy the best quality services but pay only for the cheapest and we spent some time discussing this fallacy.

The only way to reduce fees is either to increase other revenues or decrease costs. Other revenue is difficult to increase substantially even if permission is granted by the owners to rent roof space to antenna companies or the side of the building to a billboard company which leaves cost reduction as the only viable solution. Further, owners should understand that the Directors and management have done their best to keep costs down while keeping the quality of the building and its services up to owner expectations. The budget has been examined in detail, account by account; directors don’t go to budg36

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

et meetings to spend money unnecessarily; after all they have to pay the same fees as everyone else.

Reserve for Major Repairs and Replacements

Reserve contributions in their study increase by 8.5% through 2014 and by inflation thereafter. These can be reduced only if the Directors decide not to follow the reserve fund study and this could leave them open to personal and uninsurable liability in the event that a financial loss from doing so can be brought home to them. It may make insurance more difficult to obtain and it’s likely to negatively affect unit marketability. Needless to say this was not popular with Directors or those selling.

No contribution to the $146,000 is coming from here.

Utilities

Next and usually the biggest cost category in most condominiums is utilities which are typically budgeted by taking the average annual consumption based on a two or three year rolling average and pricing that consumption at costs expected during the budget year. The cost of utilities is determined by only two factors, personal consumption and the weather.

Personal consumption can only be reduced by individual actions that raise the air conditioning thermostat, reduce the heating thermostat and turn off the taps. Personal consumption has proven not to be affected in any meaningful way by the amount the corporation has to pay for utilities, though we may see better results as sub-metering becomes more the norm, but for now consumption can only be significantly reduced through energy efficiency measures or by winning the weather lottery. Energy efficiency measures such as high efficiency heating, lighting and water heaters all come with a cost; that is you have to pay for new systems to reap the benefits and, while the benefits can be substantial over time, the corporation has to raise the funds necessary to achieve these benefits from – you

guessed it – the owners. The costs of these retrofits can be substantial and not all condominiums have the owner commitment and financial wherewithal to proceed with these projects. The weather lottery is a mugs game. Just because utility costs are under budget one year due to a cool summer and a warm winter does not mean that they will stay down every year thereafter, in fact the reverse may be true the next year. So it would not be wise to bet on any contribution from utilities to the $146,000.

Contracts and Compensation “People Costs”

Next we come to contracts and compensation and here reductions are possible, though not for all contracts.

Contracts such as maintenance of heating and air conditioning equipment and elevators may not be significantly altered due to legislative or health and safety reasons; the most that can be done to ensure that the corporation is getting the best price possible is to bid these contracts every so often. It should also be obvious that every service provider has to go to the same pool of people for the staff that provide their service and that condominiums can significantly reduce “people costs” only by hiring less skilled employees or hiring companies that do so. Cheaper staff are generally not as reliable and not as well trained or supervised and may not do the best job, they tend to turn over quickly and have no real commitment to the concerns of the residents. For other people type contracts, significant cost reductions are possible if owners will agree to significant service reductions, clean the hallways less, cut the grass less, clean the windows and the garage once a year, not twice and so on.

Management costs, for some, are always too high, but it is particularly true that Corporations that pay less for management get less.

Management costs, for some, are always too high, but it is particularly true that Corporations that pay less for management get less. We are independent of any manager or management company but over the years have dealt with condominiums managed by perhaps 90 or 100 different manage-

ment companies and our experience leads to the inescapable conclusion that the better management a corporation has, the better a community it is to live in, the better the building is maintained, the higher sales prices are and the better costs are contained. A good manager, independent of helping the community to function better, saves money, though this is difficult to demonstrate.

Management companies get volume discounts that can be measured, but the bigger savings and those impossible to quantify come from their monitoring and preventative maintenance programs and because their knowledge enables them to advise the Directors on the quality and amount of goods and services needed, eliminating unnecessary costs Major cost reductions can also be achieved if entire costs are eliminated.

Budgeted contract costs include

This does reduce costs but then the building is not as well maintained which affects curb appeal and market values. From the tone of the discussion at this meeting, it was apparent that the service level reductions that would result from buying cheaper services were not acceptable. So no major cost reductions here.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

37

$78,000 for cable television and $55,000 for overnight security that could be eliminated entirely.

Eliminating cable television is not a good decision as the condominium pays just over half the amount that owners would pay for the same package if billed individually, so no luck here.

Eliminating overnight security has consequences for those who come home late and for the security of the building generally, though it is unlikely in the

suburban location of the building that there would be substantial numbers of strangers in the hallways. These suggestions were not well received.

Administration

Administration costs are typically not material. The biggest is insurance and I understand that claims in condominiums in recent years has reduced the number of companies competing in this

marketplace and premiums and deductibles are expected to rise, not fall over the next few years. Office, telephone, professional fees and other administrative costs, though they should be monitored, do not offer the kind of savings the dissidents were looking for.

Repairs and maintenance

That leaves repairs and maintenance and here significant costs can be slashed by planting fewer or no flowers, not undertaking needed repairs or doing makeshift jobs and generally not spending the money necessary to maintain the building in its present condition. In the condominium industry this is called “deferred maintenance” and the consequence is that the building slides into disrepair. This suggestion also did not meet with approval.

Conclusion

So where did we end up? Well, it was summed up pretty well by an elderly lady who passed me as she left the meeting, looked at me and said “We’re doing alright aren’t we” to which I answered “Yes”. This is a nice building and there is no reasonable way to reduce costs by $146,000 without materially reducing the standard of living in the building and the owners were not willing to have that happen. Oh yes, the motion to throw out the board was defeated and last of all, 2006 actually had a small deficit due primarily to plumbing and electrical repairs in excess of budget.

John Warren, CA is a partner with Adams, Masin & Tilley LLP, Chartered Accountants who provide audit and financial services to over 200 condominiums. He is President of CCI – Toronto and Area Chapter and a member of the Associates Executive Committee of ACMO. He writes regularly on financial matters in condominiums and is a frequent speaker at educational programs for managers and directors and at condominium conferences and seminars. ■ 38

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

The Six Types of Condo Directors

BY MICHAEL E. LE PAGE, R.C.M. MAPLE RIDGE COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT LTD. ver the past 27 years I have had the pleasure of working with over 100 different Boards of Directors and well in excess of 1,000 individual board members. I have been very fortunate as many have enriched my life and my career in condominium management. At the same time a few board members have frustrated me, and putting a positive spin on the experience, have caused me to grow as a person. In retrospect I thank them for giving me the opportunity to grow.

O

I have always been amused by the fact that in stipulating what a Director can be—the act actually stipulates what a Director cannot be. It is a process of disqualification, not qualification. No person shall be a Director if: (a) The person is under eighteen years of age; (b) The person is an undischarged bankrupt; or (c) The person is a mentally incompetent person.

Now there is the old argument of what mentally competent person would want

to be a Director but we will save that for another time. There is no requirement that the person own or reside in the community or building, in fact there is no requirement that they even live in the country.

Why should anyone want to be a condominium Director? Well this is very easy to understand as the investment you have made in your home will more than likely be the largest financial investment of your life. However, your investment is not only in your unit, it is also in the common elements of the corporation. By putting yourself in a position on the Board of Directors, you can use your best efforts to ensure that the common property will be maintained to the fullest extent. This will enable you to protect your investments, and give you some direct control over the quality of lifestyle you and your family will enjoy.

Condominium Boards can be a diverse group of 3, 5, 7, 9 even 11 people. Each Board is charged with the responsibility of ensuring compliance with the Condominium Act and the corpora-

tion’s declaration and documents.

These duties have been abridged and amended by the current and former Condominium Act and are somewhat black and white, although some have grayed over time and interpretations often debated fueling the need for legal opinions and even litigation.

Healthy Boards debate at length, where debate is warranted, the merits and costs of each alternative before making a decision. They have come to appreciate that a good decision has weighed the options and this allows confidence and a degree of fortitude in going forward with the determination made.

Now what is interesting is how the debates are wrapped. There is a term in economics called opportunity cost. In the simplest of terms, opportunity cost is when the equation is not calculated in dollars and cents as it is the option that is sacrificed in the decision. For example: a corporation is experiencing premature failure of their roof and simultaneously the walls in the underground garage are leaking. There is not enough money to do both and the Board has

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

39

determined that a special assessment or loan is not desired at this time.

They know that if they choose the roof, the underground will not be repaired to the extent desired and they also know that if they choose the underground, the roof may have to have a band aid repair just to get by for now. The cost of one repair is often that the other repair does not get done as properly or fully as it should.

It is debates such as these where repair priorities are established – however, debates that are centered on the enforcement of the rules require a consistent approach. A nameless, faceless every-time-this-happens-do-X approach. Such standing orders need not be debated again, but rather stand as a precast procedure going forward.

Each and every time, consistency is key.

In my tenure in property management I have found that there are primarily six distinct types of Directors and I ask that you indulge me as I elaborate on my observations – hopefully you can relate to some of these:

40

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

they are the vast majority, there are not enough Good Samaritan Directors out there.

2. The Self-Serving, Private Agenda Director

1. The Good Samaritan Director

These people are golden and fortunately they are the majority of Directors as they become involved in the Board out of a sense of community duty and responsibility. They are commonly of the opinion that everyone should take a turn to do what they can to help. Their sense of community is admirable.

Often they volunteer for a number of different interests and they bring to the table a genuine desire to serve and an open mind to listen and evaluate. We should all be thankful that such individuals step forward and hope that they will stand for re-election. They attend seminars and know that knowledge is personal empowerment. Even though

This Director often arrives with a personal mandate, a predisposition that will provide a personal benefit of sorts or provide an opportunity to right what they perceived to be a wrong done to them. They are often close minded and fortunately don’t usually stay too long on the Board once they realize their agenda is not conducive with condominium living.

3. The Indispensable Director

These directors truly believe the place would fall apart without them. Let me rephrase, in their mind they know the place would fall apart without them.

The level of self importance is so high that they truly believe the condominium would fail if not for them. They are the buildings’ Atlas. Extreme individuals believe that their careers have been thwarted because of the demands placed upon them by the corporation.

When asked what they do career-wise they speak of their commitment to the Board — “I am a Director of the condominium”, followed by whatever their career may be. To them being on the board is not so much a volunteer position but it is a job that is resumé worthy and they are there for the power of the position. They fight and campaign for the position and one has to wonder what motivates such conviction for a volunteer role. There can only ever be one such Director on any Board; Boards just aren’t large enough for two.

Actually, the meeting room isn’t large enough for two.

Such Directors can at times be dangerous. They are yet to learn that everyone is replaceable and their forceful personalities often cost us many good Directors as their abrasive nature wears down the commitment or the interest of many others. Thus by default, they often become recruiters, which incidentally brings us to our next Director profile.

4. The Echo Director

The Echo Director is usually recruited.

Let me just pause for a moment and say that some of the best Directors I have ever had the pleasure of working with were recruited, but Echo Directors are not amongst the best. Chances are they would never stand for election but they are usually recruited by the indispensable Director and amazingly they share a common view. Well, common after the indispensable Director’s view is known.

They share opinions and they echo their leader, I mean fellow Director. Seldom is there an original thought but when things come to vote, it is somewhat easy to predict where they stand and who they stand with. On their own they are somewhat innocuous but when combined with another or in a smaller Board they empower those they echo and create a degree of autonomy and control for that individual. Truthfully, this Director is of little value to the

community but is extremely important to those they echo. Seldom do we see this type of Director at seminars, unless of course they are in the company of their leader 5. The Penny Wise and Pound Foolish Director

They arrive because fees are too high and we must find a way to get more for less in every aspect of the building.

Even after participating in a zero based budgeting exercise where they have acknowledged each allocation to be soundly determined, they argue the aggregate, voicing that we must magically hold or reduce the total regardless of the justification provided for each category. Oh, sacrifice the Reserve Fund, fees just have to be held! These Directors are sincere, they have conviction but in the end if we are able to pry open their closed mind they can be converted and become Good Samaritan Directors.

Continued on page 36

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

41

6. The Alpha Director

The individual who, in addition to the Good Samaritan qualities, possesses leadership skills and life wisdom of a higher tier. They offer a level of professionalism and appreciation for everyone involved. They are a gift to any Board and to any community. They provide strong leadership and will lead regardless of the office they hold; they do not need to be president. They maintain the course, keep the meeting on track and look to always making decisions for the good of the community and its owners, long term.

The Alpha Director comes with polish, reason and quite often understands the financials. They fully comprehend the bigger picture and their role in it. It is our hope that whatever the mix of Director types, your Board is comprised of individuals that share the common mandate: to serve with the best interest of the community as a whole. Boards do not need to be harmonious as much as they need to be professional, effective, decisive as well as respectful of one another.

The experience should be pleasant and insightful for all the participants — for if it isn’t interest will wane, other priorities will rise and good people are lost.

Both new blood and continuity are good things for Boards to experience.

However a delicate balance and proper mix is in everyone’s best interest.

No matter how diverse a group, no matter what the mix of individuals that comprise the Board, the Directors may be anything but dysfunctional. They need to be decisive, proactive and informed. The Board of Directors and Management must forge a teamwork approach in their combined effort to meet the needs of the community.

It is incumbent upon Management to adapt and read the Board and shape and reshape itself to fit as the Board composition changes. The intangible fit factor is such an important component —

42

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

and all of us, Directors and Managers alike, feel its presence.

During awkward times, Management must try to foster an ongoing spirit of appreciation and cooperation for all.

Property managers manage much more than property, they manage these relationships and the communities they represent.

At times Management may need to assist the Board in recognizing that they have reached an impasse on a specific matter then help determine when council should be called in. A good Manager also knows that a good litigation Lawyer is the one who strives to resolve matters before they get to court, as this is almost always in everyone’s best interest.

Directors must always remember that they are dealing with people’s homes, their community, their lives, families and their money – it is personal. The responsibility to remain cognizant of, and meet the duties of which they are charged, is paramount. Their position is one of honour, and they should feel complimented to be charged with the responsibilities at hand.

Directors are by far the most underappreciated group of volunteers I have had the pleasure of meeting. They step forward when many others don’t. They contribute their time, energy and at times emotions for the betterment of their community. They are a very special group and we all should thank them at every turn for their contribution. ■

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

43

NOW AVAILABLE!!

2007 Condominium Conference Session Synopsis Booklet & CD If you missed this year’s conference and would like to find out what you missed, order your copy of the 2007 Conference Session Synopsis booklet. This 144 page booklet contains articles and powerpoint slides from many of this year’s sessions.

Session Synopsis 1 1 T H A N N U A L J O I N T C O N D O M I N I U M

C O N F E R E N C E

November 2 & 3, 2007 DOUBLETREE INTERNATIONAL PLAZA & CONFERENCE CENTRE HOTEL Toronto, Ontario

Canadian Condominium Institute - Toronto & Area Chapter and the Association of Condominium Managers of Ontario

IN PARTNERSHIP WITH

Toronto and Area Chapter

SPONSORED BY

Article topics include: “Going Green – opening plenary”, “Cost Effective Retrofits for Your Condo”, “Financial Incentives for Energy Retrofits”, “How To Pay for Your Retrofit”, “Tarion – A Practical Guide to Navigate the System”, “Get Smart”, “South Kingsway Water Efficiency Program”, “What Smells?”, “Smoke Safety, Energy Efficiency and Occupant Comfort”, “Does Your Building Suck?”, “Something Smells”, “Clean Air”, “Fire and Emergency – How to Be Prepared” and “Requisition Meetings”.

Price: $15.00 plus GST and shipping. Bonus – price includes booklet on CD!

Order yours today online at: www.condoconference.ca or call the Condo Conference office at: (416) 491-6216.

44

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

CCI Events

Something New For The Presidents’ Club LISA KAY MAXIUM CONDO FINANCE GROUP, AND MEMBER, SPECIAL PROJECTS COMMITTEE, CCI TORONTO raditionally, the Presidents’ Club has been a forum where condo presidents come and listen to a panel of expert speakers that would share their knowledge, expertise and experience on several hot condominium issues. As successful as this has been, the Toronto Board of CCI decided to change the format. On October

T

19th, at the Toronto Convention Centre, CCI tried something a little different at their Presidents’ Club meeting. We held a networking dinner.

Five condominium experts joined a number of condominium presidents and engaged in several round table discussions over a fine meal. What was discussed was up to the presidents.

Anything “condo” was on the table.

Seasoned presidents provided insight on past decisions, shared pitfalls to be avoided and showed how dedication and tenacity can lead to successful decisions. New presidents shared fresh alternatives to obstacles discussed and no doubt learned a great deal. Experts also provided their experience, knowledge and ideas.

Each table was filled with nonstop conversation for the full two hours of our meeting. Our table discussed issues that included: Expectations between the Board and the Property Manager – We discussed the importance of communication between the Board and the Property Manager and the expectations for one another.

Effectively com-

municating to each other helps avoid misunderstandings and potential conflict between the two.

Communication – Effective communication to unit owners when implementing a significant change i.e. special assessment/loan – what is required?

Suggestions included information meetings and brief but thorough written communications to the owners on how it affects them individually.

Hiring a Property Management Company – Steps on how to choose a property manager for your condo. We discussed the interview process, philosophy of the property management company and the importance of meeting the person that could be assigned to your condo to ensure there is a personality fit.

Hiring Trades – How to hire trades for your condo. We discussed property managers’ involvement in providing a selection of trades, the interview process and obtaining references. We discussed the importance of Boards making an informed decision.

Encouraging unit owners to run for the Board– How to encourage “good” volunteers to sit on the Board. Ideas included information meetings to discuss the responsibilities of the Boards and the benefits of being on the Board Winter 2007

thecondovoice

45

and hosting social functions to promote involvement and knowing your community.

Security Systems – Benefits of keyless entry i.e. when ownership of units changes.

discussions were most helpful as each participant brought a unique position.

The facilitator was excellent – she was knowledgeable on many topics brought forward and listened to each participant’s thoughts. For future events, it would be good to receive a topic overview from each table or to have one person from each table do a précis at the end of the evening. The two hour format was very good and the food was delicious. Thanks for a great evening.”

This evening was a great success! One President wrote to us

Hope to see you there.

Liability Insurance – We discussed insuring your condo for “full value” of the building and liability insurance vs fidelity insurance.

Trespassing – What to do when the kids from your local high school are using your stairwell as a “smoking area”.

“Thank you for organizing the above dinner – there was good networking (we are planning to meet at the conference November 2/3). The informal

46

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

We will be organizing our next Presidents’ Networking Dinner in the Spring of 2008. Check out our website in the new year for a date and time and, of course, the list of discussion topics.

■

Check Out the CCI Bookstore

at

www.ccitoronto.org Resource material for Condominium Owners, Managers and Boards of Directors

Toronto and Area Chapter

CCI-Toronto 2007 Annual General Meeting The CCI Toronto Annual General Meeting was held on Thursday November 22nd at the Novotel North York hotel.

Despite the stormy snowy weather over 30 members gathered for the meeting and networking at the Wine and Cheese Reception which followed.

Elections for Board positions were held in accordance with the Chapter by-laws and five positions were filled that evening.

Returning to the Board are Janice Pynn, Bill Thompson, Henry Cohen and Lisa Kay. New to the Board is Julian McNabb, the Condo President of TSCC #1850. The Board is excited at the opportunity to work with Julian and the perspective of a Condo Owner, which he can offer. The Board extends best wishes and thanks to Tom Park, who resigned from the Board after having served as a Director since 2005. During his term, Tom was a valued member of both the Website and Membership Committees and often helped to staff the CCI Booth at various trades shows and events.

As in the past, the meeting also served as a forum for the Annual Awards Ceremony. The Condominium Newsletter of the Year Award for 2007 went to YCC # 510 – ‘The Harbourside’ and Board representatives, Ulla Colgrass, Jennifer Barber, Dieta Zuppinger, James Russell, Douglas Dempsey and Leah Lambert. were on hand to accept their award. (see photo) Ambassador Program Award Recipients were also announced that evening by Membership Chair, Bill Thompson. ■

Meeting head table - left to right John Warren, Armand Conant and Mario Deo.

YCC 510 newsletter committee representatives are joined by CCI President John Warren and Vice President and Public Relations Chair Mario Deo to receive their 'Condo Newsletter of the Year' award at the recent CCI-Toronto AGM. [l to r]: Ulla Colgrass, Jennifer Barber, Dieta Zuppinger, Mario Deo, John Warren, James Russell, Douglas Dempsey and Leah Lambert.

Attendees during the meeting.

CCI Treasurer, Bob Girard and CCI Past Director, Donna Swanson mingle with other CCI members during the reception which followed the meeting.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

47

CCI Director Profile

CCI-T Welcomes New Director Julian McNabb Julian is an Account Executive with S.i. Systems in Toronto, a provider of contract IT resources and staffing solutions. Julian represents the “New to Condominium� living component of CCI. He is become more and more active in the condominium community and currently sits as the President of TSCC1850 condominium. Julian supports the notion of delivering more education and information to Condominium owners across the Toronto Chapter.

Julian is a graduate of Latrobe University in Australia with a Bachelor of Arts degree specializing in Media Studies and Politics. Both come in handy during Condominium life as a means to achieve a more harmonious living environment, and better communication to keep owners and residents more informed.

Born in Toronto but raised in Melbourne Australia, when not facing the challenges of Condominium Construction or the demands of work, Julian enjoys playing hockey, traveling, taking photographs and exploring the culinary delights that Toronto has to offer.

48

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

49

Members’ Corner Peter Harris Receives FCCI Designation

Long time CCI-Toronto (past) Board member and current CCI-National Treasurer Peter Harris, received the distinguished honour of receiving his FCCI designation at the CCI National Gala Awards Dinner held on Saturday November 3rd, 2007.

changing rules. This same Task Force has been responsible for updating and re-issuing the “Accounting and Auditing Guidelines for Ontario Condominium Corporations” first published in 1982.

Heartfelt congratulations go out to Peter for this well deserved award.

Bob Girard Receives ACCI Designation

Peter has been involved in the audit of condominium buildings on a full-time basis since 1974 and is a Partner in the firm Harris Chong & Crewe LLP. In addition to serving on both the Toronto Chapter and National Boards, Peter has been a frequent presenter at CCI courses and seminars and has written numerous articles for the CondoVoice.

As Chair of the Ontario Institute of Chartered Accountants Condominium Task Force, Peter was instrumental in addressing the impact of changing accounting rules for the not-for-profit sector and to give guidance to public accountants in implementing these

Congratulations also go out to Bob Girard for earning his ACCI Designation in Property Management.

This designation was presented to Bob at the CCI National Gala Dinner Awards held on Saturday November 3rd, 2008.

Bob Girard is a graduate of Concordia University in Montreal with a Bachelor of Commerce Degree. He has served on the Board of YCC # 0050 for the past 17 years, 15 of them as President.

He is a Director on the Toronto Chapter of CCI, where he currently serves as Chapter Treasurer and Chair of the Special Projects Committee. Bob has been active in the Chapter – writing articles and press releases for the CondoVoice and website and also instructing the Effective Meetings segment of the Basic Condominium Course for Directors. He is also a regular attendee at CCI conferences and seminars as well as ACMO luncheons.

Bob has completed the Condominium Management Course at Humber College with honours and has earned his RCM designation. In addition, he has completed the Mediation Course within Humber’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Certificate Program. ■

Have you Renewed Your Membership for 2007-2008?

To date, over 70% of CCI Toronto members have renewed their memberships for the 2007-2008 membership year. Have you?

Your support of the Institute provides CCI with a greater voice when working on Government Relations initiatives such our recent success with the Ministry of Energy regarding the Regulations to Smart Metering legislative.

Membership with CCI also offers many other benefits to individuals, corporations, professionals and trades to the industry – including discounts on courses, seminars, publications and the annual CCI conference.

Renew your membership today!

(If you have not received a copy of your renewa invoice, please contact our membership co-ordinator, Cathie Breton at 416-491-6216 Ext. 241.)

50

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

New Members Welcome to the Following New CCI Toronto Members Corporate Members DSCC # 0206 MTCC # 0620 MTCC # 0797 MTCC # 0806 MTCC # 1364 PCC # 0202 PSCC # 0793 PSCC # 0802 PSCC # 0807 PSCC # 0809 TCECC # 1801 TCECC # 1846 TSCC # 1763 TSCC # 1845 TSCC # 1849 TSCC # 1859 TSCC # 1864 YCC # 0016 YCC # 0057 YCC # 0252

Professional Members

Maureen M. Barrey Affordable Property Management Inc. (APM)

Kristen Bailey Fine & Deo LLP

Paul Chisholm Wyse Meter Solutions Inc.

Simon Cort ScotiaMcleod

Movses R. Gulesserian Gulesserian Associates Inc.

Murray Johnson Simerra Property Management Inc. Mary Kahn Mareka Property Management

John Lea Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP

Michael Lieberman Fine & Deo

John J. Molnar J.J. Molnar Realty Advisors Inc.

Peter M. Rosa Daniel Home Management

Joseph Ryan Fine & Deo

Helder Vieira Equity Hill Properties Group

Sponsor (Trade) Members

Tony Alishah Universal Fire & Safety Service

Andrew Beacom Priorty Billing Solutions Inc. Geoff Grist Brook Restoration Ltd.

Dean Kovacs Cox Roofing Systems Michelle Smith Rikos Limited

Patrizia Spadafora Diamante Development Corporation

Chrsitopher Stewart Mysuper.Net

Individual Members

D. Blumenthal P. Campbell C. Cronin M. Farago T. Flinders M. Gaina O. Ghani J. Walsh

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

51

Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP Barristers and Solicitors

GMA - The Condolawyers™ (Winning Condominium Law Solutions)

We led the battle for improvements to the new Act and Regulations

Our standard of excellence focuses on practical legal solutions for Condominium Boards J. Robert Gardiner Mark H. Arnold Gerald T. Miller Christopher Jaglowitz Warren D. Ragoonanan

1202 - 390 Bay Street, Toronto, Ontario M5H 2Y2 Tel: (416) 363-2614 Fax: (416) 363-8451 www.gmalaw.ca

52

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

When “Personal Service Beyond The Contract” Really Counts!

There Is Only One Name

Property Management Services Inc. 1256 Cardiff Blvd., Unit A Mississauga, Ontario Phone: (905) 696 (8376) Fax: (905) 696-0729

jvero@veropropertymanagement.com www.veropropertymanagement.com Condominium Property Management Specialists

DONNA SWANSON ACCI, FRI

Real Estate Brokerage

For your Real Estate Needs call: 416-515-2121

• Real Estate Broker of Record - specializing in Condominium Sales since 1982 • Current condominium Owner & Director and a Past President • ACCI - An Associate of the Canadian Condominium Institute • Past Director of Toronto Chapter of CCI • FRI - Fellow of the Real Estate Institute of Canada and current Director of Toronto Chapter of REIC

Email: donnaswanson@sympatico.ca

Check Out the CCI Bookstore at www.ccitoronto.org Resource material for Condominium Owners, Managers and Boards of Directors

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

53

CCI Course Calendar

Mark Your Calendars!

Condo 101 Course Saturday January 19th, 2008 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m.

Novotel North York Hotel $60 for CCI Members and $95 for Non Members

Have you visited the ‘Member’s Only’ area of the CCI Toronto Website?

This half-day seminar will focus on the topics that every Director should be aware of and will provide participants with a basic knowledge of the condominium Act. The course is an excellent means to find out what you need to know to be effective as a condominium owner or director. The information presented will be of interest to those purchasing a condominium or to those who want to know what a condominium is and what it means to live in one.

Basic Condominium Course Wednesday, February 20th to Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. each evening Novotel North York Hotel $300 for CCI Members and $400 for Non Members

This informative six night course is a must attend for all new Directors or Condominium Residents who want a better understanding of the way Condominiums function and should operate. Topics covered include: The Directors' Role, Insurance, Property Management, Budgets and Finance, Reserve Funds, Physical Building Management and Effective Meetings.

CCI Toronto Advanced Course Tuesday, April 29th, May 6th, May 13th and May 20th, 2008 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.

Novotel Hotel North York – 3 Park Home Ave.

Designed for the dedicated condominium director, the CCI Advanced course will run for four consecutive Tuesday evenings from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. beginning April 29th 2008 through May 20th, 2008. Upon completion of the course, participants should understand all aspects of reserve funds, major repairs and replacement, financial management, common problems and solutions, legal responsibilities‌ and in the last session, learn about mediation/arbitration and the new enforcement remedies available under the Condominium Act, 1998.

The cost for CCI members is $175 and non- members $250.

To register for the Condominium Course and/or to obtain further information, please visit the CCI-Toronto website at www.ccitoronto.org or call the office at (416) 491-6216.

54

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

If not, check out www.ccitoronto.org/Login.asp to view archived issues of the CondoVoice, the 2007 Professional & Trade Services directory and Nomination Forms for those interested in running in the 2007 elections for the CCI Toronto & Area Board of Directors.

www.ccitoronto.org/Login.asp Season s Greetings!

On behalf of everyone at the CCI Toronto & Area Chapter office, we wish all of our readers a wonderful Holiday Season and a Healthy and Successful 2008!

Kindly note that the CCI Toronto administration offices will be closed for the holidays from Monday, December 24th through Tuesday, January 1st. The office will re-open on Wednesday, January 2, 2008.

Diversions & Distractions

CONDO WORD FIND s e r u s a e m e t e r i n g s n s

l a b o l g t n i a l p m o c c o r

i c v m s w a y s s s s s s s i i e

g h i e s o m i a s o s c t s n t k

h e a t s r i e e s d e a h s a a a

t c b e s l l l d s n t s r s g r e

a k l r s d c d i s o a e e s r o p

p i e s s s s s s s c r s e s o p s

p t l a n d s c a p e x p e c t r f

e c n a n r e v o g v r r h c n o o

a h c a l l a t s n i o o i i e c o

l e t s s s s s s s t t p j s m h r

i n i r s s n o w s i i e a s n a o

o r f e s g e p n s s d r c s o l t

s a o b s n e t o s o u t k s r l c

p e r m s i r i i s p a y s s i e e

o l t e s v g o r s s s s s s v n r

t n e m y a p n a s e s s i o n g i

y m r o t s u s t a i n a b l e e d

appeal appeal auditor auditor bleed bleed call call cases cases cash cash cci cci challenge challenge check check climate climate complaint complaint condo condo corporation corporation director director each each environment environment expect expert global global governance

governance property rates green green rates retrofit hijacks hijacks retrofit roofs ideas ideas roofs save install install save savings kitchen kitchen savings session landscape landscape session slight learn snow measures learn slight speakers members measures snow mentor stormy members speakers metering sustainable mentor stormy tarion meters metering sustainable three options meters tarion topsoil organics options three viable payment organics topsoil ways pays payment viable world positive pays ways yield property positive world yield

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

55

Revisiting the “Open Book” A Response to “Condominium Records: Still an ‘Open Book’?” 1

BY MICHAEL H. CLIFTON, M.A., LL.B.2 CLIFTON KOK LLP, PARTNER Introduction It is likely that I enjoyed reading Rob Mullin’s article, “Condominium Records: Still an ‘Open Book’?”

(CondoVoice, Fall 2007) more than most readers3, since that article was the first gauntlet thrown down in a friendly joust between the two of us.

Mr. Mullin and I first met representing opposing parties in regard to a request by his client for copies of (my client) the condominium corporation’s records.

The issue came down to an interpretation of section 55(3) of the Condominium Act, 1998 (the “Act”) – in particular, the meaning of the closing phrase, …for all purposes reasonably related to the purposes of this Act,

which was not included in the comparable section of the previous legislation (the “old Act”).

My client’s position was that the board of directors was not obliged to permit the examination of the corporation’s records unless the requesting party’s reasons “reasonably related to the purposes of the Act.” Mr. Mullin responded that his client was not required to give any reasons.

Eventually our clients’ main issues were resolved despite this disagree-

56

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

ment, but Mr. Mullin and I (who now serve together as directors of the CCI Golden Horseshoe Chapter) decided it would be of mutual interest and enjoyment to examine the issue in greater depth, resulting first in his article and now this response.

The initial version of this article is a lengthy essay that was handed out at a recent CCI Level 200 course in Kitchener along with a copy of Mr. Mullin’s article. For publication, however, the article has been significantly reduced. The complete text can be found on our firm’s website at http://www.cklegal.ca/doc/Revisiting_ the_Open_Book_Longversion.pdf.

It might be important to point out that this argument is not a personal one between Mr. Mullin and me. Lawyers can disagree pretty vehemently on many points of law without consequence to personal or professional relationships. Neither is the disagreement between us quite so deep as these articles might make it appear. I believe Mr. Mullin and I agree, in fact, that unit owners should have essentially “open” access to the records of the corporation, and that condominium boards really ought to have nothing, per se, to hide.

In my view, however, this does not invite us to disregard the limitations on such access that are clearly set out in the legislation.

ably related to the purposes of this Act” in order to have access to the corporation’s records.

Arguments and Conclusions

Our disagreement can be narrowed down to these points:

MULLIN: Mr. Mullin argues that the owners’ right of access to condominium records is or ought to be unconditional.

Therefore, he writes in his article,

[This] new passage [meaning, the closing words of section 55(3)]… has led some boards to now control or ‘gate-keep’ unit owners access to records. A growing number of unit owners have only been granted access to condominium records, once they have supplied their reason, intention or purpose behind their request…

[I]t is strongly believed that this interpretation is wrong, that it contradicts the overall pursuit and aim of the new Act, and ultimately spells trouble for a board of directors who embrace it.

Relying on a statement by an Ontario court that “the corporation and its board of directors are an open book to the members of the corporation, the unit owners,” 4 he concludes that requiring unit owners to provide reasons for wanting to examine corporate records: a)

improperly diminishes the “open book” approach to condominium records; and

b) undermines the consumer protection intent and purposes of the Act.

In addition, Mr. Mullin argues that in fact the legislature intended section 55 to expand the “open book” concept referenced in such earlier case law.

ME: I take the position that the owner’s right of access to examine condominium records is subject to certain reasonable conditions and limitations that are set out in the Act; and that:

a) it was the intention of the legislature, in drafting section 55, to strike

I believe Mr. Mullin and I agree, in fact, that unit owners should have essentially “open” access to the records of the corporation, and that condominium boards really ought to have nothing, per se, to hide.

2.

• A proposed interpretation of section 55(3) that renders the requirement expressed in its closing words ineffective in my view only ignores, rather than interprets, such words.

b) it is necessary to require owners to give reasons for wanting to examine records in order to give relevance, meaning and proper effect to section 55 of the Act; and

The bases for my views are summarized in the following points: 1.

Board Has the Right to Require Reasons

• Although section 55 does not expressly state that the board can demand reasons before providing access to records, a condominium board is required to comply with the Act and has a clear right to require such compliance from others. See sections 119(1) and 119(3).

• This necessarily includes the right to require compliance with section 55(3), including that owners have “purposes reason-

Denying Board’s Right Ignores Clear Wording of the Act

• A denial of this right renders meaningless and ineffective the closing words of section 55(3) of the Act.

a balance that both reasonably restricts the “open book” and reinforces the ability of unit owners to take advantage of it;

c) such practice is not contrary to the “consumer protection” purposes of the Act and does not unreasonably diminish unit owners’ entitlement to examine records of the condominium.

• The only way a board can exercise this right is to ask for the reasons.

3.

• One cannot simply ignore the clear wording of legislation because it is not convenient or consistent with one’s personal views. It should be presumed that those words were added to section 55(3) by the legislature with the intention that they should somehow be given both meaning and effect by persons interpreting and applying the Act.

No Significant Expansion of Rights

• The changes brought in by section 55 compared to the relevant provisions of the old Act serve to clarify and entrench good corporate practices relating to condominium records, but do not expand significantly the “open book” concept. They only marginally support it by: a)

entrenching a right to copies of the records upon payment of reasonable compensation; (This provides greater access to the records for those unable to visit the corporation or management offices to examine the originals. However,

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

57

PROVIDING EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE TO THE CONDOMINIUM INDUSTRY FOR OVER 25 YEARS SPECIALIZING IN COMPLETE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SERVICES: Residential High-rise & Townhouse Condominiums Industrial & Commercial Condominiums

Hands-On Management Individually Designed and Tailored To Meet And Exceed Your Communities Needs For more information, please contact: Gary Atkin, RCM, ACCI Matthew Atkin, RCM, CMOC, ARM, CPM or Nathan Atkin, B.A., RCM

G.S. Atkin Property Management Specialist Inc. One Shady Lawn Court Mississauga, Ontario L5N 1H2 24-Hour Emergency Line (905)-567-6820 Direct Line: (416)-258-6011 Fax: (905)-567-6930 Website: www.gsa-pm.com Email: info@gsa-pm.com

58

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

this is the minimum reasonable improvement since they must be able to afford the cost of labour and copying charges) and

4.

b) charging a $500 penalty to boards that fail to provide access to records “without reasonable excuse”. (This might make some boards less likely to unreasonably refuse to provide records, but this does not prohibit reasonable refusals. Also, a board that wants to refuse records unreasonably still can if, based on a cost-benefit analysis, it presumes to come out better in the end, although this is not usually going to be advisable.)

5.

Closing the Book Somewhat…

• In repealing the old Act and crafting section 55 of the new, it is evident the legislature elected to limit the “open book” approach.

• The restrictions in section 55 overall simply, and reasonably, ensure that unit owners’ access to records is to be kept in line with well understood and accepted concepts of privacy and privilege that are essential to the ethical maintenance of such records.

• Particularly note section 55(4) of the Act, which had no counterpart in the old Act, specifically restricts access to three categories of document making it clear that the legislature did not intend to give unit owners carte blanche access to the corporation’s records.

• Such restrictions are consistent with, and support, the well established principle of Ontario courts opposing “fishing expeditions” – the practice of asking questions (and insisting on answers) in order to find out something of which one knows

6.

nothing now, that might enable the questioner to make a case of which he has no knowledge at the present.5 This view is supported by the decision of the Ontario Divisional Court on appeal in Fisher v. Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corp.

No. 596, [2004] O.J. No. 5758.6

…But Not Entirely

• The requirement to provide valid reasons for examining records makes such records like books in a library: freely accessible to everyone on condition only of having to show your library card. The analogy is not perfect, but the point is substantially right: access to the records is not “closed” simply because there is a condition attached to it.

• Requiring a purpose to be stated that is consistent with the purposes of the Act is not an onerous demand.

Consumer Still Protected

• Requiring unit owners to provide reasons for examining records before providing access to them is not contrary to the “consumer protection” purposes of the Act.

• The board of directors itself and all of the powers given to it are part of the “consumer protection” afforded by the Act. The board’s power to require compliance with the Act, declaration, by-laws and rules, is an essential component of such protection.

• The unit owners are best protected when the board of the condominium complies strictly with the Act and requires such compliance of all others within the scope of its authority.

• This is as true of compliance with section 55 of the Act as it

is with respect to all other sections of the Act.

• Section 55 helps protect all owners from the costs and community disruptions created by unit owners who seek to use their rights to access corporate records solely for petty, frivolous and/or other improper purposes.

MTCC No. 551 v Mani Adam – Properly Understood Mr. Mullin’s analysis relies heavily on Metropolitan Toronto Condominium Corporation No. 551 v. Mani Adam (2006) Carswell Ont 7682 to show that under current case law, interpreting the current Act rather than the old one, the courts “will not permit the intention of the record keeper to be demanded, opting rather for the ‘open book’ concept.”

In the case, a significant costs award was granted against a condominium corporation that had, amongst other things, refused access to condominium records by a unit owner when requested.

Mr. Mullin’s argument centers upon the court’s statement that, “the statute does not… require a person to disclose his reasons for requesting the information as a condition of obtaining it.”

I disagree with Mr. Mullin’s reading of this case and believe that it does not alter or affect my interpretation of section 55 of the Act.

First, in my view the condominium’s refusal to provide records in this case did not contribute substantially to the cost award of $32,000 against the condominium. It appears fairly certain that it was the corporation’s refusal to settle the matter when a reasonable settlement was possible that resulted in the court’s significant costs award against it. In addition, the court refers to the generally discourteous and unreasonable conduct of the condominium board (including deceptive or misleading acts) which also appears to have influenced the court’s decision on costs.

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

59

The court noted a separate application had been made in Small Claims Court in which the unit owner was seeking the statutory remedy of $500 compensation set out in section 55 of the Act. The judge states that such matter would be heard in that court and not decided by this one. Such statements indicate that not only did the matter of access to records under section 55 not figure in the court’s assessment of costs in this case, but it also did not really figure in the judgment at all. In respect of section 55, the court expressly defers to the Small Claims Court where an application was already filed.

So, what was the court referring to when it stated in this judgment that, “the statute does not… require a person to disclose his reasons for requesting the information as a condition of obtaining it”? On careful reading of the judgment itself it becomes clear that at this point the court is not speaking of section 55 of the Act at all but is actually and expressly referring to section 77.

Section 77 of the Act states:

On the request of any person, the corporation shall, without fee, provide the names and address for service of the directors and officers of the corporation, the person responsible for the management of the property of the corporation and the person to whom the corporation has delegated the responsibility for providing status certificates.

The differences between this section and section 55 are immediately obvious: • This section does not contain the phrase, “for all purposes reasonably related to the purposes of this Act”; and • This section deals with only narrow and specific items of information. It is clearly primarily intended to facilitate the ordering of status certificates (though other purposes are not excluded).

60

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

It appears, then, that this case can easily be distinguished from almost any application relating to section 55 of the Act, simply on the basis that it really doesn’t deal with it.

Where the court speaks more generally about the unit owner’s right to access records, it never cites section 55, and it appears that the court did not refer itself to the actual text of section and provides no analysis of it in this case.

Therefore it seems to me that the issue of the interpretation of section 55(3) is still left for another court, in a later application, to determine.

Conclusion

Every right of any kind can only be properly exercised within certain bounds. With respect to legal rights, it is the right and privilege of the legislature to define their limits. I believe this has been done in section 55 of the Act with respect to so-called “open book” access to condominium records.

Therefore, notwithstanding a reasonable desire to protect the right of a unit owner to liberal access to condominium records, which I agree is consistent with the overall purposes of the Act, it is neither correct nor appropriate to disregard those provisions of the Act that clearly, deliberately, and, in my view, reasonably restrict the exercise of that right.

This article expresses my opinions on certain questions of law. It should not be relied upon or referred to by anyone as legal advice. Opinions are subject to change as information increases and circumstances change. Legal advice for a given situation is always suited to that case and may not perfectly accord with generally expressed or academic opinions. This does not mean I don’t believe what I write here is correct; however, it does mean that my opinions might change and, regardless, my advice to a client in any given situation might not always be exactly as set out herein.

1

2 I would like to acknowledge the assistance of Nelson Amaral, a lawyer at our firm, for his review of and helpful comments when preparing the full-length version of this article.

3 As

Mr. Mullin delightfully put it, “few topics

may evoke less of an emotional response.”

McKay v Waterloo North Condominium Corporation No. 23 (1992) CarswellOnt 622, per Cavarzan J. It must be noted that this case pre-dates the current legislation.

4

5 This definition paraphrases a classic statement of the idea by Lord Esher (Master of the Rolls) in Hennessy v. Wright (No. 2) (1980), 24 Q.B.D. 445 at p. 448, as quoted in 2004 by the Hon. Mdm. Justice Heneghan in Intel Corp. v.

3395383 Canada Inc., 2004 FC 218 (CanLII).

6 In this case, decided under the current legisla-

tion, the plaintiff unit owner was denied compensation under section 55 when a condominium refused to provide records despite several requests. The court’s decision was in part based on the fact that it was apparent at the time of such requests that litigation was contemplated by the owner, even though no action or application had commenced at the time of such refusals.

In effect, where the board merely sensed the owner’s only purpose was to look for things to litigate, or to find evidence to bolster its otherwise unfounded allegations, the court indicated it was not wrong to deny the owner access to the condominium’s records. ■

Total Security Solutions for Condominiums • • • • •

Visitor entry phones Access control Video surveillance Hands-free parking control 24/7 alarm monitoring

Lorne Middleton Manager, Sales & Operations, Central Ontario 5201 Explorer Drive Mississauga, Ontario L4W 4H1

Phone: 905-206-8458 Fax: 905-206-8486 lmiddleton@chubbsecurity.com www.chubbsecutiry.com

Winter 2007

thecondovoice

61

List of Advertisers A.R. Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 ACMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 Active Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Adams Masin & Tilley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Arthur Fire Protection Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Atrens Management Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 Brady & Seidner Associates Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Brokers Trust Insurance Group Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Brookfield Residential Services Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Brown & Beattie Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 Canlight Hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Carma Industries Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 Certified Clean Air Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Chubb Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Condominium Living Management (CLM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Condominium Services Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 Construction Control Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Corpland Contracting Limited . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 CPL Design Interiors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 Donna Swanson Real Estate Brokerage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 D-Tech (Nexus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 Enbridge Gas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 Enerplan Building Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 Essential Landscaping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Fengate Condominium Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29 Fine & Deo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Firenza Plumbing & Heating Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Fogler, Rubinoff LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 GENIVAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 Gerald R. Genge Building Consultants Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 G4S Security Services Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 GSA Property Management Specialists Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Gulesserian Associates Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18 Heenan Blaikie LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48 Horlick Levitt Barristers & Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 ICC Property Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 JCO & Associates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Larlyn Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 Les Consultants Ingenium (Condo Manager Software) . . . . .53 Maple Hill Tree Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 M & E Engineering Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51 Maclaren Corlett LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Malvern Condominium Property Management . . . . . . . . . . . .16 Maxium Condo Finance Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 McCall Wynne Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Metro Group of Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 Miller Thomson LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Morrison Hershfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Nadlan-Harris Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Ontario Screen Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Percel Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Pro-House Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 Provident Energy Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 RBC Dominion Securities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 RIKOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 Rumack, Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Samuel Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .34 Sayland Property Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Seal-Tite Roofing & Aluminum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 SR Wise Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Stratacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .55 Summa Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Suncorp Valuations Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Toronto Hydro Energy Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Toronto Star . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Vero Property Management Services Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Waste Solutions Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .52 Whiterose Janitorial Services Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .42 Wilson Blanchard Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43

62

thecondovoice

Winter 2007

“TheCondoVoice” is published 4 times per year – Spring, Summer, Fall and Winter, by the Canadian Condominium Institute - Toronto & Area Chapter.

Magazine Directors: Mario Deo & Brian Horlick Editor: Ruth Max Advertising: Marie McNamee Composition: E-Graphics

All advertising enquiries should be directed to Marie McNamee at (905) 852-2802 or marie@mcnamee.ca, or cci.toronto@taylorenterprises.com.

Publications Mail Agreement #40047005 - Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to Circulation Dept. 2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310, Toronto, ON M2J 1W8

The author, the Canadian Condominium Institute and its representatives will not be held liable in any respect whatsoever for any statement or advice contained herein. Articles should not be relied upon as a professional opinion or as an authoritative or comprehensive answer in any case. Professional advice should be obtained after discussing all particulars applicable in the specific circumstances in order to obtain an opinion or report capable of absolving condominium directors from liability [under s. 37 (3) (b) of the Condominium Act, 1998]. Authors’ views expressed in any article are not necessarily those of the Canadian Condominium Institute. All contributors are deemed to have consented to publication of any information provided by them, including business or personal contact information.

Consider supporting the advertisers and service providers referred to in this magazine, recognizing that they have been supporters of CCI. Advertisements are paid advertising and do not imply endorsement of or any liability whatsoever on the part of CCI with respect to any product, service or statement.