CondoVoice - Fall 2009 by LS Graphics

www.ccitoronto.org

VOL. 14, NO. 1 • FALL 2009

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

Condominium of the Year

2009-2010 Quarter Finalist

Plus: ■

■

■ ■ ■

Fair Taxation for Condominium Taxpayers Insurance Policy Deductibles Who Should Pay? Budgeting for the Harmonized Sales Tax Information Meetings Balcony Repair Condominiums and Small Claims Court

… and more PM #40047055

Canadian Condominium Institute / Institut canadien des condominiums Toronto & Area Chapter

Contents Features

2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310, Toronto, ON M2J 1W8 Tel.: (416) 491-6216 Fax: (416) 491-1670 E-mail: ccitoronto@taylorenterprises.com Website: www.ccitoronto.org

Fair Taxation for Condominium Taxpayers

2008/2009 Board of Directors

Insurance Policy Deductibles - Who Should Pay?

And the Price is…

Mario Deo, LL.B. (Chair, Public Relations Committee Member, Conference Committee) Fine & Deo LLP

Information Meetings

Bill Thompson, BA, RCM, ACCI (Vice -Chair Membership Committee and Vice-Chair Education Committee) Malvern Condominium Property Management

Balcony Repair

Budgeting for the Harmonized Sales Tax

One Viewpoint – Legislated Change, Early Replacement, Current Construction Standards

PRESIDENT Armand Conant, B.Eng., LL.B., D.E.S.S. (Co-Chair, Legislative Committee, Chair, Conference Committee) Heenan Blaikie LLP

by Herbert Taylor

by David A. Di Lello

by Mary Kahn

VICE-PRESIDENTS

SECRETARY/TREASURER Bob Girard, B.Comm, RCM, ACCI (Chair: Special Projects Committee, CAI Liaison) AA Property Management & Associates

PAST PRESIDENT John Warren, C.A. (Member, Education Committee Member, Legislative Committee) Adams & Miles LLP

EX OFFICIO DIRECTOR

by Sally Thompson & John Kosednar

by John AbedRabbo

By John Warren

BOARD MEMBERS Gordon Chong, DDS (Member, Legislative Committee) MTCC # 0620 Gina Cody, P.Eng., M.Eng., Ph.D., ACCI, FCCI (Chair, Education Committee, CCI-National Liaison) Construction Control Inc. Brian Horlick, B.Comm., B.C.L., LL.B., ACCI (Chair, Legislative Committee, Member, Conference Committee) Horlick Levitt Barristers & Solicitors Lisa Kay (Member, Public Relations Committee, Conference Committee, Website Committee) Maxium Condo Finance Group Julian McNabb (Member, Public Relations Committee and Membership Committee) Simerra Property Management Ltd. Vic Persaud, BA (Chair, Membership Committee, Chair Website Committee) Suncorp Valuations Ltd. Sally Thompson, P.Eng. (Member, Education Committee Member, Legislative Committee) Halsall Associates Ltd.

by Michael Clifton

The Value of Community Vibe

Condominiums and Small Claims Court

by Robert Durko

by Kristen Bailey

CCI News 5 6 8 42 53 55

President’s Message Contributors From the Editor Condo of the Year - Quarter Finalist New Members Upcoming Events

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

ADMINISTRATOR - Lynn Morrovat ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT - Josee Lefebvre

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

President’s Message elcome back to all CCI Toronto members from a somewhat cool and wet summer! Hopefully you found time over the summer to relax, unwind and just enjoy. While CCI Toronto also takes a bit of a hiatus during the summer, it does not completely rest.

The summer is a busy time for our membership department processing all membership renewals and updating member information. At this time, well over 60% of members have already renewed their memberships for the coming 2009-10 fiscal year. If you have not yet renewed, we urge you to do so today. Contact our membership department at (416) 491-6216 if you have not yet received a renewal notice. Support through your annual membership provides CCI-T with a strong voice when working with various levels of government on matters concerning condominiums.

And speaking of working with the Government, this summer has been very busy for the joint CCI Toronto/ACMO Legislative Committee as we work to complete our Legislative Brief to the government on recommended amendments to the Condominium Act, 1998. Countless meetings have taken place over the past two years with Engineers, Managers, Lawyers, Owners and Auditors to name a few, to ensure input from all concerned within the Industry. The joint Legislative Committee has also met recently with MPP Rosario Marchese to discuss common goals with respect to his proposed Bill 186 and has met with MPP Sophia Aggelonitis in her role as Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Small Business and Consumer Services. The joint CCI/ACMO Government Relations Committee has also been hard at work advocating against the HST for condominiums. Our work includes meetings with government officials, speaking at townhall meetings, undertaking studies and writing the Premier and other members of the government in protest. We encourage every corporation and owner to write or contact your local MPP.

The summer is also a busy time with preparations for the CCI-Toronto/ACMO annual conference together with our partner Rogers Cable. This year the conference will be held on Friday November 6th and Saturday November 7th as we return to the Hilton Suites Conference Centre at Warden and Highway 7 in Markham. This year’s conference theme will focus on From the Foundation Up. The preliminary program of speakers and topics is out and can also be accessed at: www.condoconference.ca. It will be another great conference so mark your calendars and plan to attend.

Finally, CCI Toronto’s Annual General Meeting will be held on Thursday November 19th, 2009, Detailed information will be mailed to members in mid October. There will be an update session on the HST before the AGM and a wine and cheese reception after the meeting which will allow an opportunity to meet, mingle and share information with other CCI Toronto members. I hope to see you there. Cheers, Armand Conant President, CCI Toronto & Area Chapter

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Contributors BERT TAYLOR (Fair Taxation for Condo Taxpayers, page 10) Retired (1986) Director of Advertising and Creative Services, Pitney- Bowes of Canada Ltd. Became a Condominium owner, Swan Lake Village Markham in 1997. In 2000,with others in the Village, began a crusade for Fair Taxation in the Town of Markham. Helped in the formation of the Markham Association of Townhome Condominium Owners, MATCO, expanding the condominium voice in the community.

DAVID DILELLO (Insurance Policy Deductibles - Who Should Pay?, page 15) is a partner at Horlick Levitt. He graduated from Osgoode Hall Law School in 1998, and is a member of the Ontario and New York State bar. David’s practice includes advising and litigating on behalf of condominium corporations and property and casualty insurers.

MARY A. KAHN, CPM., CRP., RCM (And the Price Is..., page 18) is CEO, Mareka Property Management Inc. She has twenty eight years experience in property management and prior to launching Mareka Property Management twenty years ago, which specializes in condominium property management, Mary Kahn managed a diverse selection of commercial and residential properties including Canada Post 2 million sq ft Gateway Postal Plant.

Mary was trained by the Institute of Real Estate Management (IREM) in Chicago to teach the (CPM) Certified Property Manager designation courses. Mary has also designed and hosted seminars on condominium living, disaster planning and an online tutorial on the importance of status certificates.

Cover photo –

MTCC #595 Manhatttan Place

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

MICHAEL H. CLIFTON, MA, LLB, ACCI (Information Meetings, page 23) is a Condominium Management and Land Development lawyer with the firm Clifton Kok LLP in Ayr, ON. He holds bachelor and master degrees in philosophy as well as a degree in law and he was called to the bar in 2000. Michael earned his ACCI designation from CCI in 2008 and has served on the Golden Horseshoe CCI Board of Directors since 2006. Michael has co-authored two Ontario Condominium law books, “A Planners and Municipalities Guide to the Condominium Act, 1998” and “Essential Issues for Realtors on the Condominium Act, 1998”

SALLY THOMPSON & JOHN KOSEDNAR, P.ENG. (Balcony Repair, page 29) Sally Thompson started her career with Halsall in 1990 and became a shareholder in 1995. She has a Masters Degree in Structural Engineering from Queen’s University and is a licensed Professional Engineer in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. Sally is currently the Practice Leader for Halsall’s Building Audit service, but also fulfills a Project Principal role and has participated in the preparation of Reserve Fund Studies and/or Performance Audits for several hundred corporations. Sally is often invited to speak at Condominium Conferences as she brings compelling, clear and common sense answers to difficult questions. Sally is currently a member of the Board of Directors of the Canadian Condominium Institutes Toronto Chapter.

John Kosednar is a Project Principal for Halsall Associates Limited in Toronto. He has over 20 years experience evaluating and restoring reinforced concrete structures including balconies, parking facilities, tunnels and bridges. John is a member of American Concrete Institute [ACI], Structural Steel Painting Council [SSPC], and also serves on CSA Committee S413 ‘Parking Structures’, as well as several international technical committees of the National Association of Corrosion Engineers [NACE] that are producing recommended practice standards related to design and restoration of reinforced concrete structures.

JOHN ABEDRABBO for the (Budget-ing Harmonized Sales Tax, page 31) John AbedRabbo is a partner at Polyzotis & LLP, Chartered Co. Accountants. John works on a number of condominium corporation audits and other owner manager businesses in various industries.

JOHN M. WARREN, C.A., (Legislated Change, Early Replacement, Current Construction Standards, page 34) is a partner with Adams & Miles LLP, Chartered Accountants. He is Past President of the Canadian Condominium Institute–Toronto and Area Chapter and a past member of several committees of the Association of Condominium Managers of Ontario. He is a frequent speaker and author on accounting and financial matters in condominiums.

ROBERT DURKO, (The Value of Community Vibe, page 39) is the President and CEO of Trustlink Property Manage-ment Inc. focusing on small to large residential and small to medium commercial/industrial condominiums within the GTA. Robert has a BA in Psychology and Economics, graduating with distinction from the University of Western Ontario and also holds a RCM designation from ACMO. Robert has lived in a condo, has been an active board member and a property manager for 15 years. Robert is a professional member of CCI and ACMO.

KRISTEN BAILEY, B.A. HONS., B. ARCH.SC., LL.B AND DR. GINA P. CODY, P.ENG., M.ENG., ACCI., FCCI (Condominiums and Small Claims Court, page 48) Kristen was called to the bar in 2005 and joined Fine & Deo in 2007. She practices in all areas of condominium law and litigation, as well as employment law. Kristen completed her LL.B. at Queen's University. Prior to attending law school, she completed an undergraduate degree in Architecture Science from Ryerson University and a Bachelor of Arts degree from York University majoring in Sociology. Kristen is a member of the Canadian Condominium Institute.

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

EDITOR: Mario Deo MAGAZINE DIRECTORS: Lisa Kay and Julian McNabb ADVERTISING: Marie McNamee COPY EDITOR: Ruth Max COMPOSITION: E-Graphics All advertising enquiries should be directed to Marie McNamee at (905) 852-2802 or marie@mcnamee.ca

If you are interested in writing articles for TheCondoVoice magazine, please contact Marie McNamee at (905) 852-2802 or at marie@mcnamee.ca. Article topics must be on issues of interest to Condominium Directors and must be informative rather than commercial in nature.

The authors, 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. Publications Mail Agreement #40047055 Return undeliverable Canadian addresses to Circulation Dept. 2175 Sheppard Ave. E., Suite 310, Toronto, ON M2J 1W8

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Intense Directors – Can you spot them? eing a director of a condominium corporation is much like being a councillor of a municipality. Essentially, both positions involve the governance of a community. Both positions require decision making on important elements of the community, including its budget. Common expense payments are very similar to the taxes levied in a municipality. Both positions have a certain term (usually for a number of years), and both positions are elected positions based on a vote of interested community members.

Unfortunately, there are some significant differences between the two positions that should be noted. Generally speaking, condominium directors govern a smaller community group and, therefore, one or two directors who may be inordinately intense, profoundly (and usually negatively) affect their community. The positions also differ in that condominium directors are able to not only canvass their constituents, as prospective councilors may do, but they may also request proxies in their favour, which municipal candidates may not do.

I would like to make it perfectly clear that the system of condominium governance functions extremely well in the vast majority of cases. In fact, a building may never have a governance/director problem for many years, until a director whose objective and business manner is counterproductive to the welfare of the community is elected to the board. This is a delicate topic. There can be no generalizations that apply in every case. However, here is a list of things that would point to a director whose personality is too intense for the good of his or her community. One or two of the items on the list may not necessarily qualify a director as a condo board zealot, but if, as a director, you answer “yes” to four or more of the items on the list, then you are likely headed in the wrong direction and should consider resigning from the board for your own good and for the good of your community.

Here’s the list:

• You declare often, and more than anyone else on the board, that you are acting in the interests of the owners

• You often find yourself formally asking for condominium records

• You are making technical objections to procedures the board is taking

• You are in the management office more than 2 hours per week (even two hours is a bit excessive)

• You are sending correspondence directly to owners (without a board resolution) telling owners that the board is wrong on one or more business issues

• You campaign for proxies to get on the board and some of the owners who gave you a proxy feel that what you told him or her to get their proxy was inaccurate. • You are on the wrong side of an issue that the board has decided, yet you do not accept the democratic decision and instead you make plans outside the board environment that you think will get you what you want

• You feel the rest of the board is ganging up on you • You have little or no constructive dialogue with opposing board members

• You have little or no constructive dialogue with management

• You do not feel part of a team and you want to be in charge

• You feel that one or more of the following are not on your side: the corporation’s lawyers, auditors, engi-

neers or other professionals.

• You don’t like to admit it to yourself, but you have little or no ability to lobby the other board members to your way of thinking

• You have been asked to resign by your peers

• Before you became a director, the board members did not dread board meetings, but now they do.

• Contractors and management complain about your behavior.

• The board requests that you not interfere with contractors and management

• You feel that you are essential, not replaceable, and the administration of the building cannot survive without you.

Personally, I would resign. It is not worth it to have so much going against you and constantly swimming upstream. You may feel you are right, but chances are you are negatively affecting your community. Unless you can build consensus quickly and turn things around, you should give someone else the chance to contribute to the effort. Really, ask yourself if it is worth it. You will feel better and you will likely gain more respect from your neighbors and the board.

Mario Deo, LL.B.

So what do you do if you have said “yes” to many of the above issues?

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Fair Taxation for Condominium Taxpayers

BY HERBERT TAYLOR he purpose of this article is to invite every one of the almost 7000 Condo Corporations in Ontario to make an all-out effort to convince their Councils to join with the Town of Markham in advocating for a change in Legislation that would recognize the differences between Townhome Condominiums, High-Rise Condominiums and all other residences. When the Market, or Current Value Assessment System was enacted, it assumed that all homes were equal, disregarding the obvious differences between the Single Family home and the Condo Home, thus creating an unfairness in the Municipal Tax System.

This unfairness is exemplified by the fact that although condominium owners are taxed at the same rate as all other residential taxpayers, they must provide privately for such services as street lighting, sewer and water system maintenance, road repair and maintenance, and snow clearing and removal. While this is more evident in townhome condo communities which may have extensive road networks, it is also a fact for all condominium taxpayers. Because of this, many Condo Corporations approached their local Councils for some form of compensation. In every case they received the same 10

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

answer, “condominiums are on private property and as such, we can do nothing for you”.

This, together with the old line “you can’t fight City Hall”, was enough for some. Others carried on, trying to get support from their local politicians, and when that failed their efforts also petered out.

After making our case to each councillor in separate meetings we were able to convince almost half of them that our case was worthy of further study. A group of five townhome condominium corporations in Markham decided that if their efforts were ever to gain traction, they would have to have a larger base, and speak with the voice of a greater number of taxpayers, thus was born the Markham Association of Condominium Townhome Owners (MATCO).

After making our case to each councillor in separate meetings we were able to convince almost half of them that our case was worthy of further study.

After one more presentation to Council we were rewarded with the formation of a Condominium Working Group.

This Group, made up of three Councillors, two MATCO members, one high-rise condo member, two non condo homeowners and two staff Finance Department members.

This Group was to identify issues/ options with the respect to services received and taxes paid by condominiums that the Town of Markham could support, and advocate for, at the Provincial level. When it was mentioned that this problem affected many Condo Corporations beyond Markham, it was suggested that the more municipalities we could enlist in any presentation to the Province, the better our chances would be of achieving success. There are many precedents that can be cited for the necessary changes.

Not all residential properties are treated the same. Multiple family dwellings (rental apartments) were, at one time, taxed at a much higher rate than other

Continued on page 12

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

S erv i ng ov er 200 propert i es i n t he GTA . . . and grow i ng!

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

dwellings. Today they enjoy a lower tax rate than other dwellings, presumably to compensate for not receiving certain services.

Some municipalities provide rebates to certain property owners in lieu of services not provided.

Tax rebates are also supplied to property owners of specific types of property. The previous examples are changes made by certain Municipalities. The following is an example made by the Province in response to persistent lobbying by the City of Toronto.

In January 2007 the Act was changed. When these changes were made, the Province issued a Press Release which quoted comments made by Mr. Doug Reycraft, President of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. “This is a noteworthy and welcomed piece of Legislation. It encompasses a new accountability framework that sees the end of the one-size-fitsall, over-legislating and over-regulating provincial approach that has hindered municipal governments in the past.”

This Press Release continued:

“Municipal governments now have broader powers to pass bylaws ranging from local governance structure to the economic, social and environmental well-being of their communities to the protection of persons and property, including consumer protection.”

On the surface, it would appear that municipalities now had the power to make the changes necessary to accommodate condominiums. This is not a legal opinion and it may need clarification from the Province. If it is not currently within the jurisdiction of local councils to make the needed change, the force of our overwhelming numbers have a good chance of having the legislative changes we request. Naturally, there will be objections. The

argument will be made that the changes we want would adversely affect other taxpayers. There are two responses to this argument:

1. In the case of Markham this increase in the taxes of “other” residents taxes would be about .006% or $27.00 per year on average.

2. This is the important argument — until the changes we request are implemented, each condominium taxpayer will continue to subsidize all other residential taxpayers when they pay for services they do not receive. Once again, in Markham’s case this is over $200.00. a year on average. This is not an insignificant amount.

The current system is riddled with examples of a recognized imbalance.

Our request is legitimate and justifiable. And every possible effort should be made to correct this situation. But it may not happen if enough of us don’t make the effort.

Contact your Council. Make them aware that one municipality is prepared to advocate with the Province and suggest that they join the movement for change.

Send me an e-mail, hat@sympatico.ca, confirming that you have contacted your Council. We will then relay your support to Markham Town Council. You can also e-mail me if you have any questions or need any help.

Remember, this is one of the most important “self help” exercises you may ever be involved in. Yes, you will be helping us attain our goal of fair taxation, but you will also be helping yourself. No longer will any Council be able to hide behind the “private property” or any other excuse to charge us for services not delivered.

This article has been written and approvedby the Markham Association of Townhome Condominiums. Any comments or questions should be address to: H.A. Taylor at: hat@sympatico.ca ■ Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Insurance Policy Deductibles

Who Should Pay? BY DAVID A. DI LELLO B.A. (HONS), LL.B. HORLICK LEVITT BARRISTERS & SOLICITORS

t is common knowledge that a condominium corporation’s insurance policy will provide coverage for required repairs after damage is incurred to the common elements and/or the standard units in a condominium, but not to any improvements to those units. What is less straightforward is the responsibility for payment of the insurance policy’s deductible. Who pays this where an act or omission of a unit owner or occupant causes damage to another unit or to the common elements? What if the damage is caused to their own unit? What exactly constitutes an act or omission?

If an act or omission of a unit owner or occupant causes damage to other units, or to the common elements, Section 105(1) of the Condominium Act 1990 (the “Act”) renders the payment of the deductible a common expense of the condominium corporation. In the former scenario, namely where a unit owner or occupant causes damage to their own unit, Section 105(2) of the Act provides that the condominium corporation has the right to add the lesser of the deductible limit of the insurance policy or the cost of the repair to the common expenses payable by that particular unit owner. However, the corporation can only do so if the unit owner or occupant caused the damage as a result of his or her own act or omission. In the absence of such

an act or omission on the part of the unit owner or occupant, the deductible is payable as common expense of the corporation. Section 105(2) of the Act reads as follows (emphasis added):

(2) If an owner, a lessee of an owner or a person residing in the owner’s unit with the permission or knowledge of the owner through an act or omission causes damage to the owner’s unit, the amount that is the lesser of the cost of repairing the damage and the deductible limit of the insurance policy obtained by the corporation shall be added to the common expenses payable for the owner’s unit. 1998, c. 19, s. 105 (2).

This leaves us with the question: what constitutes an act or omission as referred to in Section 105(2) of the Act? Our instincts would lead us to believe that this phrase equates with negligence. However, case law and principles of statutory interpretation appear to say otherwise.

For example, in Zafir v. York Region Condominium Corp. No. 632, the Plaintiff was a condominium unit owner who went away on vacation after turning off the shut-off valve on a pipe below the kitchen sink. The condominium corporation had requested that unit owners do so if they were going to be absent from their units for an extended period of time. Water leaked into condo-

minium unit below the plaintiff’s unit while the plaintiff was away and caused damage. The condominium corporation repaired the damage, but charged the plaintiff with repair costs and registered a lien against his or her unit.

In addressing what exactly constitutes an act or omission, the court reasoned that, if Section 105(2) of the Act was drafted to capture negligent acts or omissions, it would have said as much. Similarly, if the Section was meant to impose strict liability, the language would have reflected that the requirement was damage to the owner’s unit, howsoever caused.

Accordingly, the judgment held that any act or omission (not just the negligent variety) qualified, as long as such acts or omissions were attributable to the owner or occupier. Based on this reasoning, the court found that the unit owner did not cause damage through an act or omission for which she was responsible when she turned off the valve, since it was the condominium corporation that requested that unit owners do so.

You may be wondering why the court in Zafir didn’t just rule that the corporation couldn’t pursue the deductible since the damage was incurred to a unit other than the plaintiff’s unit. (Remember, Section 105(2) only permits a condominium corporation to add the Fall 2009

thecondovoice

deductible limit of their insurance policy to the common expenses payable by a particular unit owner where that particular owner’s unit is damaged as a result of an act or omission attributable to that particular owner or his occupant.)

The answer is that the condominium corporation in Zafir had passed a bylaw that altered the standard obligations, and allowed the condominium corporation to charge back the insurance deductible to an owner as a common expense for damage caused to other units or common elements.

Section 105(3) of the Act authorizes a condominium corporation to extend the circumstances set out in Section 105(2), whereby the deductible is payable as a common expense of a particular unit owner, as follows: (3) The corporation may pass a bylaw to extend the circumstances in

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

sub (2) under which an amount shall be added to the common expenses payable for an owner’s unit if the damage to the unit was not caused by an act or omission of the corporation or its directors, officers, agents or employees. 1998, c. 19, s. 105 (3).

There is much debate as to whether Section 105(3) means that the insurance deductible can be charged back to an owner as a common expense for damage caused to other units or common elements, or whether the Section only permits the condominium corporation to extend the circumstances under which the owner is responsible for repair costs or the deductible arising from damage to its own unit (for example where the act or omission is attributable to a party other than the owner or occupier.) The court in Zafir chose not to directly address the debate regarding the prop-

er application of Section 105(3), and instead decided the matter based on the court’s interpretation of the act or omission language as discussed above. However, in passing, the court offered the following comments:

“…I do think there is a good argument to be made that Section 105(3) is intended to enable a condominium corporation to establish a regime whereby owners can be held responsible for damages (up to the insurance deductible) to other units and common elements, even where the owner’s unit has not been damaged. This would appear to be consistent with the case of Stevens v. Simcoe Condominium Corp. No. 60, [1998] O.J. No. 5843 (Ont. Div. Ct.), which was decided before the new Act came into force and recognized the desirability for condominium owners to be able to apportion liability for the insurance deductibles by making provision to that effect in the

declaration, bylaws or rules of the condominium corporation.”

With the greatest of respect, this writer disagrees with this portion of the Zafir decision, and with commentators that favour a less restrictive reading of Section 105(3) of the Act whereby owners can be held responsible for damages (up to the insurance deductible) to other units and common elements. While the policy justification for this interpretation appears to be that payment of the deductible should rest with an offending party as a deterrent, such an interpretation may be overstepping the authority garnered from the Act.

dominium corporation. The qualifier is nonsensical in that context. It appears that counsel for the plaintiffs in Zafir raised this oddity with the court, but to no avail.

Until the Court addresses this controversy head on, directors and managers should at least be aware that pursuing

liens based on unpaid common expenses that include the costs of the deductible based on an expansive reading Section 105(3) is not without risk. It is conceivable that a court could find that such liens are improper and slander the unit owner’s title. ■

Section 105(3) must be read in context with Section 105(2). Again, Section 105(2) only addresses situations where a unit owner has suffered damage to their own unit, and limits the unit owner’s responsibility for payment of the deductible to situations where the damage was caused by an act or omission of the unit owner or his occupant.

Accordingly, it follows that the proper interpretation of Section 105(3) of the Act is that it authorizes a by-law that would require a unit owner to pay the deductible as a common expense where damage has been incurred to their own unit, but regardless of whether it was caused by an act or omission of the owner or occupant. This would essentially make the owner strictly liable for any damage caused to his own unit, provided that the damage was not caused by the corporation, its directors, officers, agents or employees.

This writer submits that, if the intention of the drafters was to allow for owners to be held responsible for damages to other units and common elements, they would not have included wording in Section 105(3) exempting the acts or omissions of the condominium corporation. It simply does not make sense to say that a deductible may be charged back to an owner for damage caused by that owner to other units or common elements except where such damages are caused by the conFall 2009

thecondovoice

And the Price is… BY MARY KAHN, CPM, CRP, RCM MAREKA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

...Usually higher than you think! Many times when individuals buy condominiums, either new from a developer or older as a resale, they are totally unaware of many key issues. As a property manager for over twenty-eight years, we have seen countless occurrences where these key issues affect the purchasers’ day-to-day life, and more important, the pocket-book.

While condominium living is not for everyone, it is an excellent form of ownership and there are many who would enjoy this lifestyle, if they knew what the lifestyle truly entails.

The condominium industry is no different from any other industry. The vendor wants to charge the maximum price for the commodity, while the purchaser wants to get as much as possible, for as little as possible. With this in mind, the vendor (whether it be a developer or 18

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

existing condominium owner) and purchaser enter into a bargaining discussion until a deal is reached.

However, purchasers should remember what we’ve always known. Nothing is for free and you get what you pay for.

NEW CONSTRUCTION CONDOMINIUMS With regard to new condominiums, be cautious of the lure of “free”. Nothing is free.

For example, if a developer promises that marble counters are being thrown in for free, you can rest assured that this cost is buried somewhere else or the purchase price has already been set with this fact in mind.

Developers are in business like anyone else, to make money and not to lose it. Therefore, if a product costs $100.00 it won’t be sold for $90.00 without the assurance that $10.00 can be gained from somewhere else.

Read your purchase and sale agreement to ensure that it includes what you think you are purchasing. One Agreement revealed that the condominium unit purchased was on a floor much lower than the one that had been agreed upon at the time of purchase negotiation. Although not prevalent, condominium units both new construction and resale could have a price substantially lower than the same unit located on the upper floors. Again, with new condominiums the theory of “you get what you pay for” is very much a reality. Don’t be mesmerized by sales promises of “luxurious” if the price is not also as “luxurious”.

It is the purchasers of mid-level condominiums that are most vulnerable to this scenario, as the prices don’t fall into the obvious categories of high-end or low-end. Also, the word “luxurious” is very subjective. What a developer has in mind as luxurious might not necessarily be the same as the purchaser. For example, when a building was sold

as luxurious, the purchasers assumed that they would have marble or granite lobby floors. Much to the dismay of all, the developer placed porcelain type flooring down.

Tips on Purchasing New Construction Condominiums: ■

■

Ask for written confirmation on anything promised by a salesperson. This is especially crucial for suite finishes. Take photos of samples that may be on display at the sales office.

Upon receiving written confirmation, double check what you have received to make sure that it does say what you think it should say. Educate yourself on your rights and procedures with regard to construction delays. Unfortunately, occupancy for new condominiums is not always, but can be late. Many times the developer has no control over this. A common reason for the delay would be a strike from any one of the various trades involved in new construction. The purchase and sale agreement usually provides for tentative occupancy date which may be extended without penalty for many months.

■

Analyze the common element fees (more commonly known as maintenance fees) for the first year – especially if you are on a tight budget. Below are a few things to watch for:

• There is an escalation clause in most disclosure statements that allow increases to the stated common element fees. This increase is a set percentage each year from a specified date (usually the date of anticipated registration) to the date of actual registration. The increase is usually equal to the Cost of Living Allowance but I have seen this fall in the range from 2% to 4% per annum for each year delayed. I have seen delays as much as four years. Ask the question. Your first year common element fee could be a lot more than you think it is. • Are utilities included or are they separately metered? In other words, do you have to pay a gas and hydro bill in addition to your Common Element Fee? Don’t assume that just because there is a line item in the budget for gas and hydro it means that your unit’s cost for these utilities are included in the common element fees. There will always be a gas and hydro amount in the budget

to cover the utility cost for the common areas such as hallways and mechanical systems.

• Are there any costs excluded from the first year budget that the developer is “throwing in” for one year? For example, is the developer paying for concierge services in the first year? If so, in this case, the Common Element Fees will drastically increase in the second year to include the cost for the concierge. Something to keep in mind with condominiums is that you the purchaser, as an individual, have no way of opting out of any given common element expenses for which the condominium corporation decides to pay. (ie. a new treadmill in the gym, elevators if you live on the ground floor etc.) Depending on what the issue is, with the required percentage of Owners, disputed expenses can be addressed on a moving forward basis.

• On the opposite end of the spectrum, are you paying for something that you are not using and in some cases do not own?

• How realistic are the first year Common Element Fees? Developers try to stay in line with

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

industry cost per square foot for Common Element Fees, in order attract the purchaser and compete with other developments.

The first year budget is struck several years before the building is registered. The actual cost incurred by the Condominium Corporation in the first year may therefore be much higher. (A good example is the city’s decision to bill condominiums for garbage removal. Depending on the size of the condominium this can add about $20,000 to a condominium’s common element fees. The new harmonized tax due to come out in July 2010 will also increase a condominium’s common element fee.

Again, these items would not have been budgeted for in Condominiums that had budgets established two or more years ago. In accordance with the Condominium Act, the first year deficit must be paid for by the developer to the condominium owners. In other words Common Element Fees may be understated.

• Although not required by legislation, it is common practice for the purchase and sale agreement to require the equivalent of two months’ common element fees to be paid to the newly registered condominium upon closing. In many cases, this money is put in the reserve fund to give the reserve fund a “kick start”. However, there have been cases where this money was earmarked to go to the operating account.

under the Condominium Act of Ontario. The funds are to be used strictly for the repairs and replacement of major structural components and equipment of the building. It is common practice in the industry for developers to budget the legal minimum of 10% in first year budget for the condominium’s “reserve fund allocation”.

However, one could argue that 10% as a legal minimum is a fallacy because the Condominium Act actually states that the reserve fund must be in accordance with what a reserve fund study determines and that only if the reserve fund study calls for a contribution that equates to less than 10% of the annual budget, should the minimum of 10% be allocated. Therefore, for example, with the onset of “individual sub-metering” for new construction condominiums, there is now a further adverse affect on the reality of the first year condominium fees. This is because sub-metering usually means that owners pay individually for hydro usage. The result is that the hydro budget

number in the first year budget is far lower than it would normally be. Therefore, the standard 10% allocation for the reserve fund is proportionately less, leaving a larger shortfall when the reserve fund study is done at the end of the first year.

This increased requirement will have to be addressed in the subsequent years of operation and perhaps even as early as the second year. The affect coupled with the scenarios discussed above could mean a possible huge Common Element Fee increase in the second year. It may be prudent for reserve amounts to be determined as much as possible in advance from drawings and specifications.

WHAT DOES ALL OF THIS MEAN?

It means that you could have extra costs as follows:

1. Somewhere to live during construction delays or move in with the in-laws

2. Higher interest rates and thus higher mortgage payments because your

Educate yourself by determining if you are required to pay an extra two months’ common element fee on closing that is to go to the operating account versus the reserve account. If so, there is a good chance that your annual common element fee should be the equivalent of fourteen months worth of maintenance fee.

• A reserve fund is mandatory

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

bank interest rate guarantee has expired

3. Higher finishing costs because the end result was not as you thought it would be

4. Higher closing costs due to extra common element fees being collected on closing

5. Higher common element fee for the first year as the budget increase is implemented for the first year

arrears in Common Element Fees, financial health of the Condominium Corporation, parking, pets and other rules that may not suit your lifestyle. Outlined below is more detail on some of the pitfalls to avoid: ■

6. Second and subsequent years being higher also as a result of #5 above

7. Then there is the mirage of lifestyle rules that could also result in costs of which the most common is pets and parking.

TIPS ON PURCHASING RE-SALE CONDOMINIUMS

With regard to re-sales, the pitfalls to avoid are slightly different. Here, the caveats to look out for include; unauthorized changes to common elements,

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

tion. One minute later, there could be one of many changes, such as a returned cheque. Most status certificates state that fees are paid up except for those that are not honoured by the bank. It would be prudent to verify with the Condominium Corporation whether or not there were any returned cheques after the Status Certificate was written up.

■

All too often, purchasers ecstatically move into to their condominium, only to discover that something that they paid for has been removed. One example would be a hot tub on the balcony for which they paid an extra $20,000. In some cases the previous owner may have removed it, even though they charged you for it. In other cases, perhaps the hot tub will be removed by the Condominium Corporation because its installation was not authorized by the Board of Directors.

Don’t be fooled by a status certificate that states that a unit has no arrears. A status certificate is as accurate as at the time of prepara-

■

Ensure that the Condominium Corporation is indeed in a healthy financial position. A reserve fund of a million dollars does not mean “healthy” if there are repairs required that cost one and a half million dollars. This situation is not altogether impossible. ■

Information Meetings BY MICHAEL CLIFTON, MA, LLB, ACCI CLIFTON KOK LLP

rom time to time, condominium corporation boards deal with issues in respect of which the Condominium Act, 1998, (the “Act”) does not mandate a meeting, but that the board would like to share with owners in a manner more personal than a distributed notice without waiting until the next annual general meeting or other regularly scheduled event.

As a result, boards will sometimes wish to call special meetings to discuss such issues. These “information meetings” might introduce new budgets, or discuss proposed changes to common elements, assets or services (that fall within the exemptions with respect to notices and meetings, set out in section 97(2) of the Act), or other matters or projects about which there are or could be common questions, concerns, confusion or misapprehension.

Some condominium directors and managers hold the opinion that since such information meetings do not involve the transaction of any formal business of the corporation – no votes, no consents, no elections, etc. – there is no need to observe the formalities of the Act with respect to such matters as the manner in which notice of the meeting is distributed or the conduct of the meeting. While there might be legitimate disagreement on this point, in our view this is incorrect.

While the Act does not appear to include provisions specific to information meetings, or use that term, this does not mean that such meetings are not governed by it. In fact, it could be argued that if the Act does not govern information meetings, the board has no authority to call them. Since condominium corporations are creatures of statute, they and their boards have only those powers and authority that are given to them under the Act; therefore, whatever the Act does not clearly allow cannot be done. However, contrary to this possibility, it would appear that the following provisions of the Act do relate to, and govern, condominium corporation information meetings:

1. Subsection 45(4): Authority to Call: Information Meetings

As noted immediately above, condominium boards have only the authority that is given to them in the Act. Therefore, boards do not have authority to call meetings of the corporation that are not authorized under the Act.

The authority of boards to call meetings is primarily set out in section 45 of the Act. Subsection 45(4) of the Act grants directors the authority to call any meetings of owners that are not otherwise authorized by the Act, “for the transaction of any business”. Such “other meetings”, as we might call them, would not include the following meetings:

(a) meetings to deal with “anything that the Act requires to be approved by vote” (these meetings are called pursuant to subsection 45(1)); (b) the initial “general meeting” and subsequent “annual general meetings” of the corporation (authorized under subsections 45(2) and (3)); and

(c) meetings required pursuant to other sections of the Act, such requisitioned meetings and those relating to amalgamation or amendments to the declaration Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

and/or description (these meetings are called pursuant to such other sections of the Act).

In our view, there is little left for the category of meetings permitted to be called under subsection 45(4) of the Act other than information meetings. It is also our view that, if this provision of the Act is interpreted so as to exclude

mation about their corporation and/or the opportunity to give input about specific issues, it is clearly not inconsistent with the aim of consumer protection for boards to do so. In fact, it seems more reasonable and consistent with such aims to presume that this kind of information sharing and dialogue could be included under the generic label, “transaction of any business”.

The Act is to be interpreted liberally in a manner that is consistent with the aim of “consumer protection”. information meetings on the basis that no “business” is “transacted” at such meetings, then boards of directors of condominiums might be unable to call any such meetings that are not otherwise specifically authorized by the Act.1 In our view, this would be an over-technical reading of this provision and not consistent with the manner in which the Act should be interpreted. The Act is to be interpreted liberally in a manner that is consistent with the aim of “consumer protection”. While it is by no means required (and in some cases would not be advisable) for boards to call meetings simply to provide unit owners with additional infor-

1. Section 47: Notice of Information Meetings

With respect to meetings called pursuant to the board’s authority under subsection 45(4), both that subsection and section 47 provide direction with respect to providing the notice of meeting.

Subsection 45(4) states that the notice of meeting must “specify the nature of the business” to be carried out at the meeting. This merely reiterates a requirement set out in subsection 47(9)(a). In regard to an information meeting, it

would be advisable to specify (a) that the meeting is solely an information meeting, such that no votes or other formal decision making will be included, and (b) generally what the meeting is about: e.g., “new budget,” “introducing our new security guard”, “possible landscape changes”. Section 47 deals with when and where the notice must be delivered.

Subsection 47(1)(b) provides that a notice of meeting must be given to the owners “at least 15 days before the day of the meeting”. This subsection does not relate to a particular kind of meeting (such as the AGM), but to all owners’ meetings. In addition, the various other parts of section 47 will require that the notice of an information meeting: (a) be in writing; (b) specify the place, date and hour of the meeting; (c) be given to each owner and mortgagee whose name and address for service have been provided for the corporation’s record of the same at least 20 days prior to the date of the meeting; (d) be delivered to each person personally, or by prepaid mail to the record address, or by fax or email if the owners have agreed

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

in writing to receive notices in this manner, or, in the case of the unit owner, to the owner’s unit if not otherwise prohibited.

It is also recommended that the notice should contain an agenda for the meeting. 3. Section 52 and Subsection 56(1): Conduct of Information Meetings

While it could be preferable that there be a degree of informality to a condominium information meeting, it is not desirable for the meeting to be without any form or procedural controls. The more controversial the issue up for discussion, the more such controls may need to be relied upon to help guide the meeting effectively. It is therefore advisable that relevant provisions of the Act, and the condominium’s usual rules of parliamentary procedure, be applied to the meeting to the extent they are relevant.

While it could be preferable that there be a degree of informality to a condominium information meeting, it is not desirable for the meeting to be without any form or procedural controls. Since the information meeting is one at which no votes are to be taken, the provisions of sections 52 and 53 of the Act with respect to voting are not relevant. If a “straw vote” or “poll” is taken for the purposes of giving the board of directors an idea of what the owners think about a particular issue, there should be no confusion that this is not a formal vote of the corporation and has no binding power whatsoever. It is not necessary for the board of directors to act in compliance with the will of the unit owners as expressed by such a “straw vote”.

The provisions of section 52 relating to proxies might not seem relevant for an information meeting, but it is still advis-

able to issue and accept a form of proxy that owners can use to attend the meeting. The main purpose in doing this would be for owners who cannot attend themselves but wish to have someone (other than another unit owner or board member) attend in their place to ask questions and/or obtain information for them.

It is also advisable for the board to take attendance at the information meeting, although the necessity to count quorum would seem to be diminished. Since the meeting would not be one that the Act requires to be held and is not one at which a binding decision on any issue can be made by or for the corpo-

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

ration, it could be argued that meeting quorum is not necessary. While we cannot agree that quorum becomes entirely irrelevant simply because the meeting is an information meeting, we agree that there would be little need for it. It is doubtful a board would be faulted for failing to consider quorum at an information meeting, or continuing with the meeting even if quorum is not present. However, the board should count attendance even if the question of quorum is being overlooked, if for no other reasons than to assist in measuring the success of the meeting as a means of sharing information with the unit owners and measuring the interest of the unit owners in the issue at hand. There could be other reasons (i.e., relating particularly to future dispute resolution) that it could benefit the board or corporation at times to have evidence as to the number and names of persons who attended the information meeting.

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

It does not appear any other provisions of the Act would be relevant to the conduct of a condominium information meeting, but reference should also be had to the by-laws of the corporation in case they contain specific relevant provisions. Such by-law provisions would be authorized pursuant to section 56(1)(p) of the Act. (A by-law made pursuant to subsection 56(1)(c) of the Act is also relevant, but only to the extent that counting quorum matters.) It is generally in the by-laws of the corporation that the rules of parliamentary procedure for meetings of the corporation are specified. The principle that underlies the foregoing discussion is something most of us learn from our parents or at least at some opportune point in life: if something is worth doing, it is worth doing right.

In particular, if an issue is deemed important enough by a condominium board of directors that they desire to call a meeting about it, then why not ensure that the meeting is done right, that proper notice is given and proper procedures are observed?

It might be considered that to do any less could send conflicting messages to the owners about the importance with which both the issue and the discussion of it are being treated.

1 For example, the meeting required under section 107 with respect to proposed amendments to the declaration and/or description is essentially an information meeting. â&#x2013;

Balcony Repair BY SALLY THOMPSON & JOHN KOSEDNAR

eterioration of conventionally reinforced balconies is a major concern to Condominiums due to the high cost and disruptive nature of the repairs. Repairs often require the slab edge to be chipped off, which, as well as creating pervasive noise, usually requires balconies to be closed off for several months. The technical issues surrounding the deterioration are often poorly understood, so Condominium Corporations sometimes spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on repairs which do not adequately address the root cause. This can increase costs overall and, in the worst case, cause repairs to fail prematurely. This article explores the causes of the underlying deterioration and makes some recommendations for prevention and successful repair.

Steel embedded in concrete is immune to corrosion, except under two key circumstances: exposure to chlorides and carbonation.

Chlorides (salts) usually get into concrete from application of de-icing chemicals, but also salt-water spray from oceans, and in older buildings salt that was added to the concrete (or put on the formwork) during winter construction. Salt causes embedded rein-

forcing steel to lose its immunity to corrosion.

Carbonation is a process where carbon dioxide in the air reacts with the moisture in the the concrete, forming calcium carbonate in a process that reduces the pH of the concrete. It progresses in from the outside surface, penetrating deeper into the concrete over time for many years, until it halts its progress due to the self-limiting nature of the reaction. With a reduced pH caused by this carbonation, embedded reinforcing steel loses its immunity to corrosion.

The primary cause of highly disruptive slab-edge concrete repairs is often related to the simple drip slot at the edge of the slab. Drip slots are the small grooves at the outside edge of the balcony slabs. Their purpose is to intercept water running off the edge of the balcony so that it does not dribble back onto the balcony soffit, thereby preventing damage to soffit finishes and keeping water from dripping onto people on the balcony. An unintended consequence of the drip slot is that it reduces the thickness of the concrete covering the embedded reinforcing steel. This makes the reinforcing steel directly above the drip slot more prone to corrosion than any other steel in the balFall 2009

thecondovoice

cony slab (because the rest of the steel has a thicker layer of concrete over it).

The primary failure mechanism for balcony slabs is carbonation. The layer of carbonated concrete typically only reaches 10 to 25mm deep, largely on the underside of the slab (not the topside, because the wetting related to rain reduces the depth of carbonation penetration). In most areas of the slab, 10 to 25mm of carbonation is not an issue, because the steel is typically protected by 25 to 40mm of concrete. However, right at the drip slot, this cover may be reduced to 10 to 15mm, allowing carbonation to advance to the depth of the embedded steel, making it free to corrode. The reinforcing steel right above the drip slot corrodes; the corrosion product is bigger than the steel; the expansion causes the concrete to crack (typically along the drip slot); air and water get in the crack, increasing the rate of corrosion. Eventually the outer edge of the slab works loose and needs to be repaired. This failure mechanism is characteristically different from a chlorideinduced failure. If there are chlorides in the concrete, or applied to the topside of the concrete, there will be slab edge concrete deterioration (similar to carbonation-induced damage), but there will also be topside damage and/or soffit damage away from the drip slot.

To properly repair a balcony slab it is important to understand the underlying failure mechanism. Concrete repairs must be designed to avoid recurring damage by selecting an appropriate extent of removal, appropriate materials, and applying features which protect the adjacent concrete (which remains in place beside the patched areas) from suffering the same fate. Many buildings are waterproofing their balconies during repair as a preventative measure. Waterproofing a balcony that is failing due to carbonation may be a relative waste of money as it does not address the underlying failure mechanism. It may slow down the deterioration once 30

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

it starts, but is unlikely to prevent it, as the moisture from humidity in the air is sufficient to allow the embedded reinforcing steel to corrode once the concrete is carbonated. Waterproofing a balcony that is failing due to chlorides can sometimes be an good investment if the extent of remaining chloride contaminated concrete is known and managed through proper repair techniques.

For new buildings, looking to prevent concrete deterioration from happening in later years, it may be prudent to check the cover over the embedded reinforcing steel at the drip slot to be able to evaluate the risk of future deterioration. If cover is insufficient, it may be worthwhile to fill the drip slot and install a downward facing drip deflector such as a metal drip edge or an inverted bead of caulking. While these are not as attractive as a conventional drip slot, done properly they can be neat and tidy, while reducing the risk that slab-edge repairs will be needed in the future. Unfortunately, there is still little information available from product manufacturers to tell us which, if any, caulking installed in the drip slot will provide the carbonation protection that is desired.

We typically recommend a balcony condition survey, sampling at least 15% of balconies, when condos are about 15 years old, and about every 10 years after that. The evaluation budget should allow for chloride testing, carbonation testing, cover-meter testing, hammertap sounding and visual review. This can usually be done from within the suites, so outside stage access is not typically required. Although this evaluation will not prevent deterioration, it allows the corporation to gain a good understanding of the current situation and likely future deterioration, so they can budget appropriately in their Reserve Fund planning. Note that some balconies are reinforced by joist chord extensions, rather than conventional reinforcing steel. Their failure mechanism is different from that described above and a different repair approach is necessary. â&#x2013;

Budgeting for the Harmonized Sales Tax – A challenging process that can’t be lightly undertaken! BY: JOHN ABEDRABBO, CA, CPA (IL)

n July 1, 2010, Ontario may wake up to a new Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) under the McGuinty proposed changes to the Ontario tax system. This proposed change is likely to pass given the majority government status the provincial government currently enjoys. The new tax will be based on the Goods and Services Taxes (GST) and will be administered by the Federal Government.

For the average person living in Ontario this may not seem like a big deal on the surface as the GST at 5% and the Provincial Sales Tax (PST) at 8% will be replaced with a single HST at 13%. Add the two together and things seem fine and dandy.

However, one must realize that the PST is not collected on everything that GST is collected on. The catch phrase is “services”. PST is not currently collected on services, but under the proposed budget changes, services will now cost an additional 8%. Some of the items that will be affected by this change, just to mention a few, include utility bills (gas, hydro and water), internet, cable, and professional fees such as lawyers and accountants. Thus, on July 1, 2010, certain items will cost

a whole 8% more than what you paid for them the day before. Unfortunately, you cannot stock up on utilities! This is a huge increase in times of an economic slowdown when consumers are cutting back.

Impact on condominium corporations and fees

Under the current system and as mentioned above, utilities, professional fees, management fees and most repairs and maintenance services (e.g. cleaning, landscaping, snow removal, furnace and air conditioning maintenance, etc.) are not charged PST in a condominium corporation. Thus, the HST will result in an increase of 8% to these expenses, which will translate into an increase to your total condominium’s Operating Fund and Reserve Fund expenses. Consequently, it’s likely that your monthly condominium fees will also increase by the same proportion.

Unlike most businesses, residential condominium corporations don’t get a break in terms of the input tax credit mechanism. That is, most businesses will be able to apply the HST paid against the HST collected, resulting in a minimal or no impact on a net basis. In a condominium corporation, the HST represents

an additional direct expense, since condominium corporations don’t collect any sales taxes from owners and can’t claim input tax credits.

Condominium Boards and Management need to factor the proposed changes in their 2010 budget. This is a challenging process and would require detailed analysis of the expenses to ensure a deficit is not created by undercharging condominium fees. On the other hand, condominium fee increases need to be reasonable to avoid overcharging unit owners.

In addition to the impact on the Operating Fund expenses, the Reserve Fund will also diminish due to the 8% increase on certain expenses. Thus, most Reserve Funds may be underfunded by the end of the year the proposed changes take effect. For example, if the budgeted Reserve Fund expenses, based on a most recent Reserve Fund study, are $800,000, one must realize that these expenses may end up at $850,000 to $860,000 due to the 8% increase in sales tax. In this particular example, and if the actual Reserve Fund expenses were in line with Reserve Fund study and budget, the condominium Reserve Fund would be underfunded by about $50,000 to $60,000.

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

A Board has two viable options to ensure that the Reserve Fund does not become significantly underfunded; one option is to increase condominium fees and consequently the allocation to the Reserve Fund by 6% to 7% (in addition to the annual average increase). This can be done gradually if the condominium corporation is financially healthy and has a surplus in its Reserve Fund. Alternatively, the Board may decide to get an updated Reserve Fund study that factor in the increase in sales taxes at 8%. Both options, if done accurately, will result in the same or similar output. Simply put, condominium owners can safely assume that their condominium fees will most likely increase by 6% to 7% in addition to the regular annual increase of 3% to 5% due to inflation. Thus, total fee increases may range between 9% to 12%.

What should owners, boards and management do?

The proposed HST represents the biggest tax increase in Ontario and will most likely hit most condominium owners and consumers hard. This is especially true given the current economic slow-down which resulted in many people losing their jobs and/or taking a pay cut. For condominium owners, in addition to paying more for their own daily necessities, they will be bearing the higher costs of their condominium corporation.

There is not much a condominium owner can do aside from ensuring the board and management have done their due diligence in determining the appropriate fee increase.

Alternatively, the Board and Management should proactively schedule a budget meeting to diligently review and explain the fee increase to unit owners. If the condominium corporation is barely meeting its balanced budget, this is the time to take a hard look at reducing expenses and implementing a gradual increase to common expenses fees. Having a cushion in place to absorb higher costs is essential to avoiding scenarios where special assessment is the only remaining option. A gradual increase in common expenses may be the best option available at this point.

If the increase in fees and other expenses will still result in a financial hardship to an owner, relocation or other financing options should be proactively considered. Relocating takes time and thus it is important to carefully plan and review your financial situation. In terms of financing, one must keep in mind that it would be easier to obtain financing when you donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t need it than when you are in a financial crunch. Using a home equity line of credit may provide temporary relief of the increase in expenses. However, you must have a plan to repay any loans used to finance a short term cash flow shortage.

Conclusion It is important to have a plan. The Board, with the assistance of its management company, needs to carefully budget and factor the increase in sales taxes into their budget. Unit owners need to review their financial situation as well, to avoid a financial crisis.

Reality is, even if prices were to remain the same or decrease slightly, the overall out-of-pocket costs for such goods and services will increase with the introduction of the HST. A gradual increase in common expenses is by far a preferable and affordable option than sudden, large lump sum assessments. â&#x2013;

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Update on What CCI Has been doing re the HST ●

●

In May 2009 CCI President, Armand Conant participated in a town hall meeting with Yasir Naqvi, M.P.P., Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Revenue and with the local M.P.P. to discuss HST and advocate for condominiums.

In late June 2009, the joint CCI-T/ACMO Government Relations Committee had a follow up meeting with MPP Yasir Naqvi and various representatives of the Ministry of Revenue and Ministry of Finance to discuss in depth the effect of the HST on condominiums There is continued ongoing correspondence and discussion with Ministry of Revenue representatives

During the summer of 2009, members of the joint Government Relations Committee met with Minister McMeekin, Minister of Consumer Services and Sophia Aggelonitis, MPP Parliamentary Assistant to Minister McMeekin concerning HST and Bill 186

●

A follow up meeting with MPP Sophia Aggelonitis is planned for early September 2009

A meeting with Minister Donna Cansfield, Minister of Natural Resources is also planned for September 2009

There is continued action by the government relations consultant, retained by CCI (Toronto) and ACMO to advocate against HST for condominiums

On September 18th, CCI Toronto President, Armand Conant is scheduled to be on the ACMO luncheon panel with Yasir Naqvi, MPP and John Warren, CA.

CCI and ACMO have struck a sub-committee to research and provide an evaluation of the likely impact of HST on Reserve Contributions to demonstrate why requiring current and future owners to fund HST on all future projects is inherently unfair.

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

– ONE VIEWPOINT –

Legislated Change, Early Replacement, Current Construction Standards

BY: JOHN WARREN, C.A.

wners would like to use reserve funds to pay for expenditures forced on them by legislation and for early replacement to achieve benefits such as energy efficiency so that they do not have to increase fees currently, special assess or borrow to fund these costs. They are receiving mixed messages from their professionals as to whether they can do so.

In order to discuss these issues, I have set out my interpretation of the permitted uses of reserve funds, of the nature of additions, alterations, improvements and current construction standards and finally, whether legislated changes and early replacement may be paid from reserve funds.

Whether reserve monies can be used to pay for any given expenditure revolves around the interpretation of Sections 93(2) of the Condominium Act as it is affected by Section 97(1). Section 93(2) states: “A reserve fund shall be used solely for the purpose of major repair and replacement of the common elements and assets of the corporation.” Section 97(1) states: “If the corporation has an obligation to repair the units or 34

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

common elements after damage or to maintain them and the corporation carries out the obligation using materials that are as reasonably close in quality to the original as is appropriate in accordance with current construction standards, the work shall be deemed not to be an addition, alteration or improvement to the common elements or a change in the assets of the corporation for the purpose of this section.”

These sections, read together, are generally taken to mean that repairs and replacements may be charged to the reserve fund only to the extent that (1) they are major, (2) they are made to existing common elements or assets and then only to the extent of current construction standards, beyond which they become an improvement, and (3) they are not an addition or alteration. Costs that do not meet all three tests may not be paid with reserve funds. There is no definition of “major” in the Act and various methods are used to calculate the dollar threshold, but for the purposes of this discussion I will assume that all items are “major”, however, that number may be calculated by each condominium.

Conceptual disagreements arise in the interpretation of what constitutes an addition or alteration and how to interpret the meaning of current construction standards to determine what constitutes an improvement. As there are no definitions of these terms in the Act we have to fall back on dictionary definitions and the common understanding of these terms.

The wikipedia definition of addition discusses only mathematical addition but the ordinary understanding of the word is quite clear. Wikipedia is more helpful with alteration; it is the act of altering or making different; the state of being altered; a change made in the form or nature of a thing; changed condition. For improvements wikipedia offers; to make something better and later indicates examples such as upgrading heating, ventilation and air conditioning systems and increasing the capacity of plumbing and electrical systems.

My interpretation is that an addition adds something new and an alteration makes a change to the land or physical structure of the buildings. Addition or

alteration are not terms I apply to the security, mechanical, plumbing, heating and air-conditioning systems, interior finishes and similar items because, in my view, there are no new systems added and the present systems are not altered, they are only repaired, replaced or improved. Others have concluded that addition means any item not previously there, that alteration means any item that is changed and that improvement means any quality above the quality of the item being replaced or the quality required by the building code.

My view is broader, that is I apply the addition, alteration and improvement criteria, structure by structure and system by system not item by item, so that, for instance, reserve funds may be used to replace a treadmill with a stepper or similar item and replacing six pieces of old fitness equipment with eight new pieces is just part of replacing old equipment with new equipment that is appropriate to current standards for fitness centers.

My view is that current construction standards means the quantity and quality of materials that are similar to those used in new construction, notwithstanding that both quantities and/or quality may be in excess of that required by the building code. Similarly, if a mechanical repair or replacement uses more efficient equipment or technology or requires more valves or meters or uses greater quantities of materials such as pipes, it is my

opinion that these are not additions or alterations no matter how much more efficient the new equipment is or how many additional valves and feet of pipe are used; it is just the replacement of an old system with a new one and that these are not improvements as long as the equipment and technology is currently used in new construction.

For instance, when replacing windows I think it permissible to use reserve monies to replace old single or double glazed windows with new ones that, in addition to being double glazed, have features that exceed the building code such as low e-argon and internal shades as long as those types of windows are used currently in new construction.

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

In this example, triple glaze would be an improvement as it is not used, or at least not in current condominium construction and the cost of the third glaze could not be paid with reserve monies.

The opposing view is that current construction standards are limited to replacing items with the better of similar quality or as required by the building code and that anything over and above is an improvement.

In my opinion, where the repair or replacement is required by legislation, then by virtue of the change being required it becomes a current construction standard and so is not an improvement and, as discussed above, these costs are not an addition or alteration unless they change the physical structure of the building. Recent examples of legislated changes are costs to change coolant in air conditioners to meet new environmental regulations, disability accommodations on door openers, installation of rope grippers on elevators and, potentially, changes required in Toronto to meet the requirements of new waste disposal regulations.

In my opinion, any of these costs may be charged to the reserve fund; the dissenting view is that legislative requirements are not relevant to the determination of what is an addition, alteration or improvement and that these items may not be paid with reserve monies.

An energy retrofit project may include such items as replacement of chillers, furnaces and hot water heaters with high efficiency ones, better and more automated controls over HVAC equipment operation and air movement, installation of CO2 detectors in the garage so that the garage fans do not have to be on all the time, conversion to energy saving lighting fixtures and perhaps insulation and draft reduction measures.

In my view, these costs may be paid with reserve funds if they are major and if they repair or replace existing systems. 36

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

I have concluded they are not an addition or alteration even though the configuration may be different unless they change the building structure and to the extent that there are “green” buildings being constructed using these technologies, they are not an improvement.

On early replacement to achieve better energy efficiency or for any other reason for that matter, I do not think that it is the intent of the Act to put limits on the Directors’ ability to make economic decisions in the best interests of their communities. I think that the Directors’ decision as to the need for or utility of any major repair or replacement expenditure is always well thought out; they never approach these decisions lightly and we should not second guess the decision, but only apply the three tests discussed above to determine if the costs may be charged to the reserve fund.

However, some hold that unless the item is “worn out” or “at the end of its useful life”, its replacement may not be

…“worn out” or “at the end of its useful life” are so subjective that they have limited utility. charged to the reserve fund. I see nothing in the Act that supports this view.

Further, “worn out” or “at the end of its useful life” are so subjective that they have limited utility – is the carpet worn out or at the end of its useful life when it is first stained and, if not, how badly does it have to be stained; is it when the first wear marks become evident near the elevators or only when wear marks are evident throughout the carpet or is it only when it becomes threadbare? The time between the first signs of wear and threadbare is too long for worn out or useful life to be used as the standard. I suggest, as with beauty, that it’s all in

the eye of the beholder and so I am comfortable that repair or replacement costs are not, by virtue of age alone, precluded from access to reserve funds.

To summarize – in my opinion additions and alterations apply only to the building structure which does not include building systems and interior finishes, which may only be repaired, replaced or improved.

The terms addition, alteration and improvement should be applied system by system not item by item. Legislated changes are part of current construction standards and those standards are more than just building code requirements.

Finally, whether a repair or replacement is “early” is not relevant to determining whether such costs may be charged to the reserve fund. All this being said, I recognize my views are not universally held and that there is a need for legislative change to clarify these matters. ■

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

SUMMA PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC. PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT & CONSULTING

“Your condominium deserves personal attention and service.”

Over 24 years experience! We provide Professional Condominium Property Management with attention to detail. Your property is important to us! Regular on-site visits and inspections, attendance at all meetings. We are available to be personally contacted by Board Members at almost any time – not just ‘business hours’. We provide Superior Service and a commitment to quality property management no matter what size your condominium is! At Summa we take pride in managing your property! 416.913.7990 416.728.2429 (Cell) propman@summapm.com www.summapm.com

When experience and quality counts!

PROVIDING EXCEPTIONAL SERVICE TO THE CONDOMINIUM INDUSTRY FOR OVER 25 Y EARS 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

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

The Value of a Community Vibe

ith new condo developments happening all over the city, developers are taking the time to invest in good design, the right location, stunning layouts and highquality upgrades to provide the purchaser with the greatest condominium living experience. As developers continue to push the envelope on new designs and on creating condos which stand out from the rest, they are missing a fundamental aspect of living within a condominium. When I reflect on my University days, I remember being surrounded by a beautiful campus and a great social environment where students took great pride in school activities. Today, I am left with fond memories of this experience and it is the people that I met and have remained friends with to this day, which have had the biggest impact on me. Building a strong community is a foundational part of condominium living that will leave a lasting impression on the resident.

BY ROBERT DURKO TRUSTLINK PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC.

The social pride and making the community your own is an important part of building a strong condominium. This will add value, build relationships, improve communication, develop creative ideas and help with the education of the laws and rules which govern the condominium. When I enter a building, I can sense a tone or culture – a ‘vibe’ of some sort emitting from the residents. This ‘vibe’ requires careful attention, as it is the essence of social pride. The manager, the board of directors and the residents need to embrace this vibe to ensure that their community is a unique, fun and responsible place to live. I believe that this missing ingredient is the reason why many condominiums are in turmoil. There will always be problems and disagreements about how things should be done, but the only way that people will overcome the formalities of daily living is by creating a mission statement, a common goal for the condominium which will, in turn, build

value on long-term living conditions. The culture of a condominium is what truly makes each one unique. Even though the residents may have reasons for choosing the condo initially, culture, ideologies and economics will weave their way throughout, thus creating the fabric of a unique identity for that condo. Wikipedia defines a mission statement as a ‘brief statement of the purpose of a ‘condo’ (company, organization). It is ideally used to guide the actions of the organization. The mission helps to define what the condo is, what the condo aspires to be and is broad enough to allow for creative input. It will help distinguish the condo from all others, serve as a framework to evaluate current activities and be clearly stated to be understood by all. Wikipedia uses company in their definition, but I replaced it with condo to show that it is easily transferable to this medium. The challenge is to integrate community living with the bureaucratic rules, Fall 2009

thecondovoice

by-laws and board of director motives, to try and heighten and allow this uniqueness to shine through. I have seen it happen with residents who were very excited to move into a new condominium and experience everything that the advertisements promised. After a few years, the resident becomes discontented and wants to move, as the experience was not at all what they thought the experience would be. As residents begin to learn about the rules, the bylaws and the Board, they sometimes feel that this wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t what they were expecting. Perhaps the solution could be a program or information available after the purchaser has put their down payment on their suite that CCI or ACMO could offer through the developer. This would be helpful to the developer as it may help build value in the proposition. Such a program could focus on what it means to live within a condominium with the emphasis on the lifestyle component. This could include a questionnaire or survey indicating why the resident purchased this particular condominium. Based on the answers, the program could implement information through an introductory presentation to ensure the new owner could enjoy the utmost in condominium living. Rules and by-laws are important as they help create guidelines. Problems arise

The challenge is to integrate community living with the bureaucratic rules, by-laws and board of director motives, to try and heighten and allow this uniqueness to shine through. when the culture of the building does not understand or support these guidelines. One example was in a building along the Lakeshore where many residents would walk, use public transit, bike ride or use motor scooters or smaller motor vehicles to commute to work. The culture of the building was one of being green and environmentally friendly. The by-laws and rules did not allow for more than one motor vehicle in any parking spot. At first impression, this might seem like a reasonable by-law, but for an extremely green condominium it did not support the fact that some residents might prefer to park two small motor scooters rather than

one large SUV within the spot. This created tension within the community. After receiving letters from the corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lawyer to remove all second vehicles, some residents decided to sell their units.

Most by-laws and rules are generic in nature and most developers use a template that has been used at other condos. This can be a big mistake if it does not reflect the values and culture of the community. The guidelines can also take away from building a great community vibe. In the example above, the parking regulation was both a by-law and a rule. Perhaps developers could create more specific by-laws prior to the transfer that would reflect the particular needs of the owners based on their marketing demographic studies. This would to help to encourage a community environment.

Just as architects and engineers spend the time to ensure that the design and structural components work well with each other, the property management industry needs to take the time to ensure that proper information is available to residents which would focus on community living. â&#x2013;

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

CONDO OF THE YEAR Manhattan Place - MTCC No. 595 BY JACKIE HOGAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND THE COMMUNICATIONS COMMITTEE

anhattan Place is a vibrant and diverse condominium community that recently celebrated its 26th anniversary.

This 23-storey tower at 131 Beecroft Road, just northwest of the Yonge Street and Sheppard Avenue intersection, opened for occupancy in 1983. The interior finishes of its common spaces are outstanding, especially the hammered copper artwork in the highceilinged main lobby. Amenities include 24-hour concierge and valet parking services; a spacious, sunlit indoor swimming pool with saunas and change rooms; a large library with table tennis and billiard equipment; a busy and well-equipped fitness room, plus racquetball and squash courts; a BBQ patio, VIP Lounge, and a board/party room with full kitchen.

The building is surrounded by extensive green space, featuring mature hardwoods and evergreens, a Japanese garden with reflecting pool, pleasant pathways and patio space that is well used by residents. An attractive colour brochure of the property is always available at the front desk in the building for any residents, visitors or agents. 42

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Board of Directors

Manhattan Place enjoys progressive and responsive governance from our Board of Directors. Budgets are balanced, often enjoy a surplus, and there have been no special assessments ever. While in recent years there have been heavy demands on the Reserve Fund, the challenge of the major capital and replacement schedule has consistently been met.

The Board, comprised of seven directors, is supported by five standing committees, made up of enthusiastic volunteers from our many interested residents, who are involved in gathering information, reviewing, recommending and advising the Board through a Board liaison in each of the following important areas of concern that affect our condominium environment: Social, Safety and Security, Energy, Communications and Landscaping Committees. More on these committees later. An Annual Budget Meeting is held every January for the owners and any

other interested residents, to explain the approved budget for the current fiscal year to them, and answer any questions or concerns they may have regarding expenses or anticipated repair/replacement projects around the property. The Annual General Meeting is held in June of each year and is always attended by a majority of owners, in person or by proxy, allowing the Corporation to move forward with any important business. Elections for new directors are often contested, with multiple candidates standing for election to the Board. Town Hall Meetings are held two or three times per year, to inform and communicate with the residents on any issues or upcoming projects. Our information meetings are often characterized by lively question and answer sessions between the owners, residents, Board of Directors and management.

Candidates who have declared their intention to stand for election to the Board are given an opportunity to speak to the assembled owners and residents at a Town Hall Meeting a month or so

in advance of the Annual General Meeting.

The Board has undertaken the challenging task of informing and educating the owners of the need to update our Bylaws and Rules for the Corporation and,

over the past couple of years, a new General Operating By-law and Mediation and Arbitration By-law have been passed by the owners. A Standard Unit By-law is currently before the owners. The Rules and all Forms in use for our internal procedures have been exhaustively reviewed and were extensively revised in 2008 to realistically reflect the style of living at Manhattan Place, while continuing to protect and ensure the quiet enjoyment of the units by our residents.

During the past four years our building has undergone a major capital repair, replacement and upgrading program. This has included an extensive energy efficient lighting initiative throughout the common elements, new recirculation piping lines, a complete boiler plant replacement, chiller and cooling tower, a new emergency generator with enhanced capabilities, garage waterproofing and installation of a carbon monoxide detection system, a complete renovation of the indoor swimming pool, saunas and change rooms, and extensive exterior building cladding renewal. A comprehensive window replacement program is ongoing and a modernization of our elevator equipment is

planned for 2010.

The Board has instituted both an Occupational Health & Safety Policy and a Human Rights Policy within the past three years, which are prominently displayed for the review and information of residents, staff, visitors and contractors. These are important indicators that this Corporation takes its duties and responsibilities to all parties seriously.

The Board of Directors enjoys the benefits of annual membership with the Canadian Condominium Institute (CCI) and keeps informed by sending directors to some of the CCI conferences, as well as reading the CCI Review, Condo Voice and CM Condo Manager Magazine provided by the Association of Condominium Managers of Ontario (ACMO).

Staff Relations

We enjoy a unique place as an employer in the condominium housing sector in that we hire our own personnel, rather than use an outside staffing contractor. Our turnover for concierge, valet and moving guard positions is very low. There are always two staff members available at the front desk to assist our residents and visitors to the

property. Many of our staff members, including our very experienced building operator and superintendent in residence, have been with us for years, allowing residents and staff to develop a warm familiarity with each other. This contributes to a friendly and harmonious environment for residents and staff alike. We are proud of our highly motivated, knowledgeable, and helpful Fall 2009

thecondovoice

staff. Our cleaning staff, while not employees of the Corporation, have also been with us for years and are well known and liked by our residents.

Community Spirit

Residents are encouraged to participate in our many committees and activities, which are held on and off the property.

Social Committee

This collection of community-minded residents stage two lively parties annually, a summer pool patio event and a winter holiday season gathering, which affords newcomers an opportunity to meet and socialize with their new neighbours, Board members and the property manager. Both events are well organized and very well attended. Nonperishable food items are collected from the residents at the holiday season party and donated to the North York Food Bank, and many gifts to management are given to the North York Womenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Shelter.

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Safety and Security Committee

This committee has been instrumental in overseeing the complete replacement and upgrading of our in suite alarm system, building card and fob reader access system, fire panel, security monitoring and video surveillance equip-

ment. A concrete ramp was installed at the back access door to the building to ease the transition from street level to interior hallway level for our residents, in a safe and convenient manner. A warning light at the bottom of the garage P2 level ramp was installed to warn descending vehicles of pedestrians passing. Access doors from the garage to the lobby areas of the building were installed with red warning indicator lights to alert someone coming the other way that an access door was about to be opened inwards towards them. All exterior fire route and other warning signage around the property and in the garage was replaced and increased to ensure fair and effective notice to all drivers and pedestrians entering the property.

Energy Committee

There has been a successful program of energy efficient upgrades to our mechanical, electrical and lighting systems initiated by this committee over

the past three years to reduce energy consumption and costs in the building, some of which have been noted above. All of the lighting for the common areas has been replaced with energy efficient fluorescent bulbs. The refuse rooms on every floor and pool change rooms were retrofitted with light sensors to keep the lights off when not in use. An Energy Performance Audit is still under review, with more recommendations coming to the Board on an ongoing basis. A carbon monoxide detection system for the garage has been installed, which is further reducing our energy consumption.

Our residents have become very environmentally aware, as a result of an ongoing initiative by this committee. For example, there has been a sustained and successful campaign through our newsletter to encourage residents to put far less in the garbage chutes and far more in the recycling and organics bins. Large blue recycling and green organics bins were installed in the refuse

rooms on every floor for the convenience of our residents, and there is a separate collection bin for batteries, conveniently located on the common elements.

Landscaping Committee

These volunteers work with the property manager and our landscaping contractor in overseeing the professional

Communications Committee

This committeeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s priority is to publish a lively, informative, easy-to-read newsletter. Named The Manhattan and printed five times annually, it was an immediate hit and went on to win the Newsletter of the Year Award from the Canadian Condominium Institute (Toronto Chapter) in 2006.

The Manhattan is designed to appeal to a cosmopolitan readership with varied tastes and interests. Each issue carries a profile of an interesting resident and a feature story to help our residents become better informed about their neighbourhood. There are also profiles and photos of new staff members as well as reports by Board members and articles highlighting Board decisions. The property manager also contributes a regular column. There is ongoing news to encourage common causes, such as energy conservation, recycling and reduction of solid waste output. Other articles keep residents informed of new upgrades and initiatives around the building, as well as reminders regarding rules and procedures that benefit all residents collectively.

A special supplemental series, written by a resident and former general contractor, provided residents with handy tips on in suite maintenance and minor repairs, including appliances, televisions, stereos, computers and the internet, as well as dealing with contractors and major renovations, and was very well received.

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

landscaping that provides a profusion of colour from spring through fall, making recommendations and selections of flower and plant material to enhance the visual beauty of the property. A major initiative to select and install a new generation of perennials will soon be underway.

Condo Care Group

This unique initiative has drawn the attention of the Toronto Star, which ran an extensive article with photos. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a practical way of neighbours helping neighbours and has proven to be a very popular service, providing assistance with small in suite maintenance and repair issues and volunteer driving services. An outgrowth of the Condo Care Group has been the efforts of one of our volunteers to ensure that all electronic equipment being discarded by our residents is effectively donated, recycled

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

and reused. Residents merely have to bring their old electronic equipment down to the front desk for temporary storage by our staff. Our very own volunteer of the year then makes deliveries on an ongoing basis to reBOOT Canada. In 2008, these donations totaled 113 items, including 17 computers, 22 monitors and 24 printers. As it says on its website, â&#x20AC;&#x153;reBOOT Canada is a non-profit organization providing computer hardware, training

and technical support to charities, nonprofits and people with limited access to technology.â&#x20AC;? Learn more at http://www.rebootcanada.ca/.

Pot Luck Club

This dinner is generally held on a quarterly basis and is open to all residents, with the many varied and delectable cultural dishes prepared and provided by the attendees themselves. This culinary smorgasbord is complemented with a generous selection of wines. Needless to say, a good time is had by all.

Ideas Galore

This creative group is dedicated to incubating ideas that have the potential to stimulate and strengthen the spirit of our social fabric and provide opportunities for residents to meet and mingle. Activities promoted by this group include the Book Club, Aquafit classes, Bridge and

Scrabble nights, and theatre excursions to Stratford and Niagara on the Lake.

Lectures

Qualified residents provide interesting talks in their professional field of expertise, or based on their life experiences, which are held in our spacious board/party room, for the convenience of our residents. Topics have ranged from eye surgery to a travelogue on China. Over the past year we have featured talks on colds and flu prevention, osteoporosis, arthritis, eye and heart health, diabetes and stress, sadness and depression presentations from a naturopathic perspective given by one of our qualified residents. These lectures are appreciated and well attended by our residents.

Welcome Manual and Website

Newcomers to Manhattan Place receive a recently updated Welcome Manual that provides a variety of useful infor-

mation about living in our condominium environment and our orderly procedures. The Corporation maintains an attractive website as another communications and information tool for our residents, prospective purchasers or agents, which can be viewed at www.manhattanplace.ca.

Management

Y.L. Hendler Ltd. has been providing superior property management services and successfully managing the property for a number of years now. Continuity in management is so important to the regular and effective daily operational routines and procedures that continue to make residents and staff members feel comfortable and relaxed in their condominium community and working environment. The Corporation generously provides for a full-time (onsite) property manager and very experienced part-time site administrator. The property manager is a qualified Registered Condominium Manager

(RCM) and member in good standing of the Association of Condominium Managers of Ontario (ACMO).

Management has proven to be open and responsive to the needs and concerns of residents and staff as they arise. Management also provides additional services to residents not normally associated with property management, such as personal use of the office copier and fax machine (within reason, of course), extended visitor parking privileges for visiting relatives and friends and, in the absence of family or friends and neighbours in the building, will collect and hold mail for vacationing residents for short durations.

On behalf of the Board of Directors, residents and staff of Manhattan Place, I would like to thank you for this opportunity to present a brief overview of our vibrant condominium community for consideration in the CCI Condo of the Year Contest. â&#x2013;

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Condominiums and

Small Claims Court BY KRISTEN BAILEY, B.A. HONS., B. ARCH.SC., LL.B.

n January 1, 2010, the amount that a plaintiff can claim in Small Claims Court increases from $10,000.00 to $25,000.00.

What is Small Claims Court?

Small Claims Court is a branch of the Superior Court of Justice for the resolution of “smaller” monetary disputes and is designed to provide a faster and cost effective means of dispute resolution for such claims. Small Claims Court is considered to be user-friendly for litigants: • The cost for commencing a claim or filing documents is relatively low;

• The system provides for a mandatory mediation step, called a settlement conference;

• The rules that govern procedure in Small Claims Court are less complex than the rules that govern the rest of civil procedure in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice; and

• A key component of the Small Claims Court regime, which attempts to make the system accessible by parties of all financial means, is the

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

limit on a costs award against an unsuccessful party, which is 15% of the value of the claim, with limited exceptions. This means that the maximum financial costs risk of bringing a claim and losing, is anticipatable as it is proportionate to the value of the claim.

How does the shift to a $25,000 maximum claim affect condominiums? No one knows for sure what will result from the increased jurisdiction in the monetary limit for small claims proceedings. It could result in more claims being brought against condominium corporations, if litigants (typically unit owners or service providers) would otherwise not have commenced a claim in Superior Court that was worth more than $10,000.00.

With the new increased claim limit in Small Claims Court to $25,000.00, some litigants might give it a shot in Small Claims Court, as the costs risks are much lower and the justice process is much faster. It is possible that more

lawyers will be representing parties on Small Claims matters starting in January, 2010 as a $25,000.00 claim limit will increase the maximum amount of costs that can be recovered by a successful party ($3,750.00 on a $25,000.00 claim).

What are the steps to get a Small Claim Court claim to trial?

In a nutshell, after a plaintiff commences a claim and serves the claim on the defendant, the defendant has 20 days to file a defence. If it is appropriate for a defendant to make either a counterclaim against the plaintiff, or to bring an outside third party into the proceeding as a defendant, then a Defendant’s Claim is commenced by the defendant against those parties, either within 20 days of filing the defence, or with permission of the court outside of the 20 days.

Once a defence to a claim is filed, the court issues a Notice of Settlement Conference. The settlement conference is scheduled for a date typically one to three months after the defence is filed.

Certain documents have to be served and filed prior to the settlement conference, at which the condominium corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lawyer and a representative of the board (or the manager) will attend. The conference is presided over by a deputy judge and the purpose of the conference is to see if a settlement can be reached and if not, then the judge may attempt to assist in narrowing down the issues for trial or make other orders.

If a settlement is not reached, either at the settlement conference or thereafter, then a trial date can be requested by a party, and the court will assign a date for the trial upon payment of a fee by the party requesting the trial. Your condominium corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lawyer will prepare for trial by interviewing your witnesses, discussing their evidence and refreshing their memories concerning documents on which the condominium corporation will rely.

Condominiums as parties in Small Claims Court

How do condominium corporations end up in Small Claims Court? A condominium corporation can either commence a claim as a plaintiff or be named as a defendant to a claim.

Typically a condominium corporation is the defendant to claims brought by disgruntled unit owners, which claims can be for anything and everything under the sun. A condominium corporation may also be a defendant to a claim brought by a service provider, most often for disputes surrounding termination of contracts and unpaid invoices.

Sometimes a condominium corporation is a plaintiff bringing a claim against a unit owner for costs incurred from damage to common elements or for unpaid common expenses, most typically if lien rights do not apply in the circumstances.

Sometimes claims are brought by condominium corporations against nonowner third parties for damages to the condominium corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s property.

Whether or not a condominium corporation should look to Small Claims Court to recover money from a unit owner will depend on the amount of money in question, balanced against the legal costs to be incurred by attempting to recover those funds, and the strength of the evidence available in the case to win at trial. Because of the relatively small amount of legal costs that can be recovered now against a losing party (for a $10,000.00 claim, the maximum is $1,500.00 in costs) if other options, such as a lien, for recovering the monies are available, then generally a condominium corporation will look there first.

Retaining legal counsel to represent your condominium corporation on any

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

legal proceeding should not be a difficult decision for a board to make. Even in Small Claims Court, having the expertise of a lawyer to represent you is a prudent step for the board to ensure that it complies with its requisite standard of care.

TIPS: When your Condominium Corporation is served with a Claim

• Make sure you note the date on which the claim was served, on whom it was served, and the method of service. • Notify the condominium corporation’s lawyer of the claim and the date on which the corporation was served with the claim. A defence must be filed on behalf of the condominium corporation within 20 days of service of the claim.

• The board and management should review the claim in detail and prepare a package of any documents that relate to the claim. • The board and/or management should prepare comments about the allegations in the claim for the lawyer to review in drafting the defence. In particular, if any of the allegations or facts (dates, people, conversations) mentioned in the claim are untrue indicate so and why. Then tell your side of the story about the circumstances surrounding the claim and the amount of damages sought by the plaintiff. If any outside third-parties may be responsible for the damages alleged in the claim, indicate who and why. • Put your condominium corporation’s insurance company on notice of the claim in writing.

• Until the claim is settled or resolved in the court, the claim should be noted in paragraph 19 of any status certificates issued. ■

EXCEEDING YOUR EXPECTATIONS “...combined security and emergency response with concierge and hospitality.”

“...our team prides itself on being able to provide our clients with a secure and pleasant environment in which to live.”

“...Sentinel gives you the ability to search for records on a fully integrated, secure database.”

• • • • • • • • • • •

Head Office

832-6614

Toll-free (877)

253-3648

49 Elm Street, Suite 201, Toronto, Ontario

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

2333 Dundas Street West, Suite 206 Toronto, Ontario M6R 3A6 Direct line: 416-777-1812 Fax: 416-777-0555

Condominium cleaning specialists WHMIS Trained Cleaners Underground garage cleanup Quality control communication log sheet Floors – wax and polishing Uniformed cleaners on premises Fully trained, bonded and insured Commercial and industrial cleaning service Carpet cleaning Exterior highrise window cleaning Building corridor renovations

(905)

Pillar Security has been providing exceptional concierge and security services for upscale residential complexes for 17 years. We offer a unique level of service that focuses on superior communication with residents, board members and property management. As a company, we embrace a simple business philosophy of “Exceeding Your Expectations”.

www.whiterosejanitorial.com

New Members

CCI Toronto Welcomes the Following New Members Corporate Members

MTCC # 0541 MTCC # 0571 MTCC # 1119 MTCC # 1372 PCC # 0143 PSCC # 0834 PSCC # 0855 TCECC # 1916 TSCC # 1528 TSCC # 1816 TSCC # 1949 TSCC # 1974 TSCC # 1996 TSCC # 2003 TSCC # 2007 YCC # 0163 YCC # 0341 YRCECC # 1147 YRSCC # 1145 YRSCC # 1152

Individual Members A. White M. El Kadi D. Minialoff

New Trade Members

Cristina Cipollone Fair Share Systems Inc.

Bill Kooy Kooy Brothers

Trevor Kruse Hudson Kruse Design Inc. Wolfgang Osada Rikos Ltd.

Professional Members

Syed Ahmed Gardiner Miller Arnold Llp

Robert Buckler Beredan Management & Consulting Inc.

Michael Campbell Deacon, Spears, Fedson & Montizambert Gino Cipollone Supreme Property Management & Consultants Kim Coulter Coulter Building Consultants Ltd.

Marko Djuroevac Deacon, Spears, Fedson & Montizambert Gabriel Dolnicianu Comfort Property Management Inc.

Blaine Fedson Deacon, Spears, Fedson & Montizambert Tania Haluk Simerra Property Management

Gregory Marley Deacon, Spears, Fedson & Montizambert

Kim Overbye Ontario Property Management Group Inc. Bora Nam Deacon, Spears, Fedson & Montizambert

Michael Spears Deacon, Spears, Fedson & Montizambert

Agri Alphonso Williams Esquire Management Group

Dean Schofield Landmark Landscaping Inc.

Peter Tolias Tolias Landscaping & Plowing Inc.

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

CLOTHES DRYER FIRE PREVENTION

“Serving the Condominium Community Since 1996” PROVIDING: • CLOTHES DRYER AND EXHAUST SYSTEM CLEANING as prescribed by the Fire Marshal and all Appliance Manufacturers • In suite and common area exhaust and ventilation ductwork cleaning • Fan coil preventative maintenance service • Washing machine flood prevention • Secondary dryer lint box conversions “Providing the most organized, cost effective service programs available”

Visit our website at www.dryerfighters.net to learn why clothes dryer fire prevention is required.

Dennis Monk: (647) 236-5643 Randy Mason: (647) 239-8787 Office: (905) 761-1761 Email: dryerfighters@hotmail.com

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Upcoming Events

Mark Your Calendars Condo 101 Course Dates & Times:

Thursday September 17th, 2009 from 7:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m., or Saturday January 16th, 2010 from 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m., or Thursday, June 3rd, 2010 from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm

Location:

Novotel North York Hotel

13th Annual CCI/ACMO Condominium Conference: Building Better Communities – From the Foundation Up

Cost:

$60 for CCI Members and $95 for Non Members

Dates:

Friday November 6th and Saturday November 7th, 2009

Times:

8:00 to 6:00 on November 6th and 8:00 to 3:00 on November 7th

Location:

Hilton Markham Suites Hotel and Conference Center – 8500 Warden Ave.

Cost:

Early Bird rate for members registering before Sept 30th is $ 275. Non-member fee is $400.

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.

Level 200 Course Dates & Times:

Tuesday September 29th, October 6th, 13th, and 20th, from 7:00 to 10:00 p.m. or, Saturday February 20th, 27th and March 6th from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

Location:

Novotel North York Hotel

Cost:

$300 for CCI Members and $400 for Non Members

This informative five night or three day 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.

Level 201 Course Dates & Times:

Saturday November 21st, 2009 from 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m., or Saturday April 10th, 2010 from 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m.

Location:

Novotel North York Hotel

Cost:

$75 for CCI Members and $125 for Non Members

This half-day course will teach Directors all they need to know about proper Governance and how to ensure a well functioning Board. The course will also provide valuable information on how to run effective condominium meetings. Topics covered will include: Board Confidentiality, Conflict of Interest, Notice of Meetings, Proxies, Nominations and Elections, Role of the Board and Management, By-laws and Rules, Directors Code of Ethics and more!

Level 300 Course Dates & Times:

Tuesday May 4th, 11th, 18th and 25th, 2010 from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm

Location:

Novotel North York Hotel

Cost:

$190.48 plus GST for CCI Members and $261.90 plus GST for Non Members

Designed for the dedicated condominium director, the CCI Level 300 course will run for four consecutive Tuesday evenings from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. beginning May 4th, 2010 through May 25th, 2010. 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. To register for these CCI Toronto courses and/or to obtain further information, please visit the website at www.ccitoronto.org or call the office at (416) 491-6216.

This popular two day conference and trade show designed for condominium managers, directors, owners and others interested in ‘everything condominium’ will focus this year on ‘From the Foundation Up”. The spectacular line up of speakers and topics to be covered this year are sure to offer information and solutions to managers and directors alike. Session topics this year will include: Keep the Cash Flowing, Branding Your Condominium, Aging In Place, First and Second Year Considerations, Condo Rapid Fire, The ABC’s of Tarion, Dealing with Disabilities, Insurance is NOT Boring, Protecting Your Assets, Motivating the Unmotivated, Aging Buildings and Condo Governance. Sponsorship and exhibit opportunities are still available – visit www.condoconference.ca for full conference details.

PM Expo Date: Wednesday, December 2nd - 4th, 2009 Location: Metro Toronto Convention Centre – South Building What the HST and HRTC Taxes Mean For Condominiums This session will focus on the effect of harmonized tax on the management of the Condominiums. The anticipated additional 8% tax on all services will require a drastic increase on the operating and reserve budgets. The federal Home Renovation Tax Credit (HRTC), which provides a 15% non-refundable income tax credit on eligible home renovation as it applies to condominiums will also be reviewed. Moderated By: Dr. Gina Cody, P.Eng, M.Eng, ACCI, FCCI Construction Control Inc. Speakers: Armand Conant, B.Eng, LL.B. D.E.S.S, Heenan Blaikie LLP Dean McCabe, RCM, Brookfield Residential Services Ltd.

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Have you Recently had your Condo AGM? Take this opportunity to make sure that all newly elected Directors have a copy of CCI’s pocket sized version of the Condominium Act, 1998 … perfectly sized to bring along to all Board meetings. To order, download an order form from our website at www.ccitoronto.org – or order your copy online.

And don’t forget to update the CCI Toronto and Area Chapter office with the name(s) suite numbers and email addresses of new Directors in order that they may begin receiving their copy of the CondoVoice and updates on upcoming events and courses.

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Condo Newsletter of the Year Award It's that time of year again....

We Want Your Newsletters!

OCTOBER

Do you think your corporationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s newsletter is well designed, informative, interesting and award worthy?? To enter, please submit current copies of your condominiumâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s newsletter to the CCI Toronto Office. Closing date is October 5th, 2009. The winner will be announced in October 2009 and will receive a complimentary registration for three Directors to attend a future CCI Toronto seminar. In addition, that corporation will be awarded a plaque at the CCI-T Annual General Meeting in November 2009 and will have their name published on our Website and in the Winter 2009 CondoVoice. Newsletters will be judged on style, presentation, and content.

Toronto and Area Chapter

CCI-Toronto, 2175 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 310, Toronto, Ontario M2J 1W8 Email: ccitoronto@taylorenterprises.com

Fall 2009

thecondovoice

Member News

The 2010 Professional and Trade Services Directory is Coming Soon….. Professional and Trade members should watch their email in mid October for a confirmation of their listing information. Changes and Updates must be made by November 15th, 2009. Advertising opportunities within this publication are also available to members only. This annual resource guide is a fantastic way to promote your products or services to the condominium community in the Greater Toronto Area. Don’t delay…. Contact Marie McNamee today at (905) 852-2802 or by email at: marie@mcnamee.ca

DONNA SWANSON ACCI, FRI

Real Estate Brokerage

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

Fine and Deo’s Condominium Meeting FAQs This handy 68 page pocket sized booklet covers all you need to know about condominium meetings. Topics covered in a Q and A format include: Preparing for Meetings, Notice of Meetings and Related Documents, Quorum, Proxies, Role of the Chairperson, Special Types of Meetings, Voting, Motions, Elections, Minutes, Director Meetings, Turnover Meetings and more….. Order your copy today! Cost: CCI Members: $12.00 plus GST Non Members: $15.00 plus GST

Shipping and Handling charge of $2.00 per copy also applies.

Visit: www.ccitoronto.org/Resources to order your copy online or download an order form.

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

• Real Estate Broker of Record - s peci al i zi ng i n Co ndo mi ni um Sal es since 1982 • Current condominium Owner, Pas t Pres i dent and Di recto r • ACCI - An Associate of the Canadian Condominium Institute • Pas t Di recto r of Toronto Chapter of CCI • FRI - Fellow of the Real Estate Institute of Canada and current Di recto r of Toronto Chapter of REIC

Email: donnaswanson@sympatico.ca

CLASSIFIED

thecondovoice

Fall 2009

List of Advertisers A.R. Consulting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 ACMO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53 Adams & Miles LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Atrens Counsel Insurance Brokers Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Atrens Management Group Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .43 Brady & Seidner Associates Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Brokers Trust Insurance Group Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Brookfield Residential Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27 Brown & Beattie Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Carma Industries Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .45 Certified Clean Air Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .35 Comfort Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33 Condominium Living Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4 Construction Control Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .64 Coulter Building Consultants Ltd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9 CPL Condominium Design Interiors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49 CPL Connoisseur Painting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28 Criterium Jansen Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 D-Tech (Nexus) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 Davroc Consulting Engineers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25 Donna Swanson Real Estate Brokerage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .58 Dryerfighters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Enbridge Electric Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20 Enerplan Building Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Enhanced Management Services . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46 Esquire Management Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .21 Fine & Deo Barristers & Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 Firenza Plumbing & Heating Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Fogler, Rubinoff LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 G4S Security Services Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Gardiner Miller Arnold LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7 Genivar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26 Gerald R. Genge Building Consultants Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 GSA Property Mana gement Specialists Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Gulesserian Associates Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Heenan Blaikie LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Horlick Levitt Barristers & Solicitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 ICC Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 J. Edick & Sons Landscape Contractors Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 J.J. Molnar Realty Advisors Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36 LAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44 Larlyn Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16 M & E Consulting Engineers Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30 Maple Ridge Community Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22 Mareka Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37 Markham Garage Doors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Maxium Condo Finance Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Metro Group of Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .41 Morrison Hershfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Nadlan-Harris Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Ontario Screen Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Pillar Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Pro-House Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .62 Provident Energy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .17 Rainbow International . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Regal Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61 Rogers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .63 Royal Grande Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13 Samuel Property Management Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 ScotiaMcLeod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 Simerra Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .59 SR Wise Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .56 Stratacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47 Summa Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .38 Suncorp Valuations Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .60 Training Wheel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Trustlink Property Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .40 Vertical Network Solutions Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19 Waste Solutions Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24 Whiterose Janitorial Service Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .50 Wilson Blanchard Management Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32 YARDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

thecondovoice

Fall 2009