J60546E CHOA Fall 2015.indd

56 Pages·2015·6.98 MB·English

CHOA

5
JOURNAL 1
0
2

L
L
A
F
CC OO NN DD OO MM II NN II UU MM HH OO MM EE OO WW NN EE RR SS ’’ AA SS SS OO CC II AA TT II OO NN OO FF BBCC
WWWWWW..CCHHOOAA..BBCC..CCAA •• 11..887777..335533..22446622
CHOA Journal • Summer 2015
WE WORK HARD
SO YOU DON’T HAVE TO.
OUR PROPERTY MANAGERS TAKE A
-
HANDS ON APPROACH TO HELP YOU
MAKE INFORMED DECISIONS.
CONSUMER CHOICE
AWARD WINNER (cid:42)(cid:76)(cid:89)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:68)(cid:3)(cid:70)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:82)(cid:71)(cid:68)(cid:92)(cid:4)
(cid:25)(cid:19)(cid:23)(cid:17)(cid:27)(cid:21)(cid:20)(cid:17)(cid:21)(cid:28)(cid:28)(cid:28)
(cid:41)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:3)(cid:37)(cid:40)(cid:54)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:53)(cid:40)(cid:54)(cid:44)(cid:39)(cid:40)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:44)(cid:36)(cid:47)(cid:3)(cid:3)
(cid:80)(cid:92)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:87)(cid:92)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:17)(cid:70)(cid:68)
(cid:51)(cid:53)(cid:50)(cid:51)(cid:40)(cid:53)(cid:55)(cid:60)(cid:3)(cid:48)(cid:36)(cid:49)(cid:36)(cid:42)(cid:40)(cid:48)(cid:40)(cid:49)(cid:55)(cid:3)(cid:3)
(cid:44)(cid:49)(cid:3)(cid:42)(cid:53)(cid:40)(cid:36)(cid:55)(cid:40)(cid:53)(cid:3)(cid:57)(cid:36)(cid:49)(cid:38)(cid:50)(cid:56)(cid:57)(cid:40)(cid:53)(cid:17) (cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:35)(cid:80)(cid:92)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:87)(cid:92)(cid:80)(cid:68)(cid:81)(cid:68)(cid:74)(cid:72)(cid:85)(cid:17)(cid:70)(cid:68)
C O N T E N T S
CONDOMINIUM HOME OWNERS’
ASSOCIATION OF BC
The Condominium Home Owners’ Association of BC promotes
the understanding of strata property living and the interests
of strata property owners by providing: advisory services;
education; and resource support for its’ members.
MEMBERSHIP IN CHOA
The Case of the Disappearing Banning AirBnb, VRBO,
New members are always welcome. All members may access P7
CHOA’s advisory services, publications, CHOA journals, Landscaping and short term rentals:
resources, seminars and workshops. For more information What Strata Corporations
P33
on the benefits of membership, contact our head office, Mark your calendars: Need to Know?
or go to our website: www.choa.bc.ca
Celebrating 40 Years
P38
CHOA CONTACT INFO of Success P13 Choa Fall Seminars
Toll-Free: 1.877.353.2462
Website: www.choa.bc.ca P43
Strata Collections Privacy Matters
Email: [email protected] P19
and Estates
Head Office (Lower Mainland):
Suite 200 – 65 Richmond Street How to Treat Components
New Westminster, B.C. V3L 5P5 Civil Resolution That Will Last Longer
T: 604.584.2462 F: 604.515.9643 P23 P47
Tribunal Update Than the Complex
Vancouver Island Office:
Suite 222 – 1175 Cook Street
P25 P50
Victoria, B.C. V8V 4A1 Maintance Matters CHOA Business Members
T: 250.381.9088
Kelowna Office:
#26 – 1873 Spall Road
Kelowna, B.C. V1Y 4R2
T: 250.868.1195 F: 250.868.1195
STAFF
CHOA’s
Tony Gioventu, Executive Director
Heidi Marshall, Communications Officer & Strata Advisor
Rosalina Munro, Policy, Researcher & Strata Advisor
Bill Miller, Strata Advisor, Interior
Melanie Lietuvinikas, Strata Advisor, Lower Mainland
Donna McKinnon-Heide, Member Services Coordinator
Leo Wang, Accounting & Records
ADVERTISERS WELCOME
For advertising information and rates, please contact our office.
Tel: [phone] Email: [email protected]
CHOA BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Bill Thorburn, President – VIS5081
E
Keith Davis, Vice President – VIS2044
Jeannie Pearce, Treasurer – NW3258
C
David Carter – LMS1383
Mary Stojanovic – VR53
Eli Mina – BCS1871 I
Mark your Calendars
Michael Krygier – NW1370
T
Broc Braconnier – KAS1884
Ryan Abbott – LMS3679
O
Ley Lefeuvre – KAS33
Strata Symposium
Allyson Baker, Business Member
Adrienne Murray, Business Member N
Mark Will, Business Member
and
DISCLAIMER
This publication is designed to provide informative material CHOA AGM
of interest to its readers. It is distributed with the understanding
that it does not constitute legal or other professional advice.
5 Although the published material is intended to be accurate neither May 4, 2016
1
0
2 we nor any other party will assume liability for loss or damage
ng as a result of reliance on this material. Appropriate legal advice
pri or other expert assistance should be sought from a competent Italian Cultural Centre, Vancouver
S
nal • pinr otfheses iConHaOl. TAh eJ soeurrvnicael sa orre p rnoodtu cntesc oefs tshaer ialyd veenrtdisoerrsse cdo nbtya inthede
ur Condominium Home Owners’ Association. Educational seminars Exhibitors CHOA AGM
Jo (cid:79) (cid:79)
A
O The CHOA Journal is printed by Still Creek Press Ltd., Burnaby, BC
H
C
3
CHOA Journal • Fall 2015
(cid:37)(cid:17)(cid:58)(cid:17)(cid:41)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:41)(cid:50)(cid:39)(cid:38)(cid:43)(cid:56)(cid:46)(cid:3)(cid:47)(cid:36)(cid:58)(cid:3)(cid:38)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:51)(cid:50)(cid:53)(cid:36)(cid:55)(cid:44)(cid:50)(cid:49)
RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL
INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION
Dryer Ducts | Booster Fans | HVAC Ducts | Furnace Systems
Over 15 years of Excellence
FOR INQUIRIES CALL 604-589-2553
OR VISIT WWW.MASDUCT.COM
CONTACT US
FOR A PROPOSAL
COMPLETE STRATA
MANAGEMENT SERVICES VANCOUVER WHISTLER
604.685.3828 604.905.0138
SURREY ONLINE
RELATIONSHIP BASED SERVICE 604.635.0260 PACIFICQUORUM.COM
Robust online services
Top Choice Award
Routine site visits Mark of Excellence
Experienced Managers Top Residential
Management Company
SERVING METRO VANCOUVER, Awarded in
THE FRASER VALLEY & THE SEA-TO-SKY CORRIDOR 2008 2009 2012 2013 2014
4
5
1
0
2
all
F
al •
n
ur
o
J
A
O
H
C
5
CHOA Journal • Fall 2015
6
The Case of the Disappearing
Landscaping
Adrienne Murray /
Hammerberg Lawyers LLP
A
recent decision of the British existing landscaping would be replaced the resolution was overwhelmingly
Columbia Supreme Court, with rock ballast. approved by 32 of the 34 owners present at
Getzlaf v. The Owners, Strata Plan the meeting. The membrane replacement
The strata corporation held a special
VR 1591 will be of assistance to strata work was carried out in the Fall of 2014.
general meeting in March 2014 for the
corporations that are dealing with owners
owners to approve a resolution to replace In September 2014, Mr. Getzlaf wrote to the
who object to changes to common
the parkade membrane. The notice strata corporation requesting permission
property and that are dealing with owners
indicated that the specifications for the to install a fence to enclose his patio.
who, without permission, make alterations
to common property. membrane replacement had been prepared The strata council refused permission for
by a roofing consultant. The Judge a number of reasons including that the
In 2010, Mr. Getzlaf purchased a ground commented that pursuant to section 71 construction of any fences or enclosures
floor strata lot at the rear of the building of the Strata Property Act (the “SPA”) the on common property needs to be carefully
which contained 36 strata lots. All rooms resolution required approval by means of considered so as to not compromise the
in Mr. Getzlaf’s strata lot overlooked a lush a 3/4 vote. Section 71 of the SPA provides design and integrity of the new roof system.
and extensive back garden. The garden that a strata corporation may not make The strata council confirmed that nothing
at the rear of the building formed the roof a significant change in the use or was to be installed on the patio. The strata
of the underground parkade. The parkade appearance of common property unless council also advised that once the reroofing
membrane covered a large area below the the change is approved by a resolution project was complete, the inspection
garden as well as below Mr. Getzlaf’s strata passed by a 3/4 vote at an annual or company would provide recommendations
lot and his patio. At the time the strata special general meeting. Thus, although for the type of construction for which
lot was purchased, the patio consisted not specifically stated in the Court’s permission may be requested.
of a solid concrete aggregate slab over decision, it appears that the resolution
Notwithstanding that the strata council
the parkade membrane. The patio was that was to be voted on by the owners was
had denied Mr. Getzlaf permission,
surrounded by a brick perimeter wall for the purpose of approving a significant
Mr. Getzlaf constructed a fence on the
approximately 18 to 24” high. change to the appearance of common
patio adjacent to his strata lot. The strata
property or, at a minimum, included such
In 2013, the strata corporation received council advised Mr. Getzlaf that he would
a provision as part of the resolution.
advice from three engineering firms be fined for constructing the fence without
that the parkade membrane needed to The specifications provided that high permission and that he should submit
be replaced. During the investigation density concrete pavers were to be detailed plans for consideration by the
of the membrane failure it became installed over the filter cloth which strata council. In the meantime the strata
apparent to the strata corporation that covered the membrane on the patios council advised that he should cease all
roots of plants and trees had contributed adjacent to Mr. Getzlaf’s strata lot and work on the fence. Subsequently, Mr. Getzlaf
to the failure. All owners were provided the patio of another strata lot also on the replied that he would not remove his
with the information about the need to ground floor. Clear washed river rock privacy screen and he advised that he
replace the membrane and the problems was to be installed on the remaining would reinstall a shed on the common
created by the landscaping in a memo roof surface. Rock ballast was therefore property. Mr. Getzlaf proceeded to place
15 in July 2013. The strata corporation being proposed to replace the existing a firepit and gazebo type structure on the
0
all 2 then held an information meeting in landscaping on the upper parkade roof. patio. The strata council invited Mr. Getzlaf
nal • F Nmoeveetimngb,e orw 2n0e1r3s. Awte trhe aatd ivnifsoerdm tahtaiot nth e Although Mr. Getzlaf attended the tMo ra. tGteentzdl aaf srterfautsae cdo. uTnhcei ls mtraeteat icnogr phoorwaetivoenr
our meeting and voted against the resolution, proceeded to levy fines against Mr. Getzlaf.
J
A
O 1 2015 BCSC 452
H
C
Continued on page 8 7
CHOA Journal • Fall 2015 Continued from page 7
In January 2015, the strata council to Mr. Getzlaf’s new combustible screening, fencing and plants for the
received an estimate from a construction structure thereby increasing the risk benefit of both units 103 and 104, which
company for the installation of a privacy of fire; and was Mr. Getzlaf’s unit, that would be
fence, bench seating area and a garden consistent in appearance with the rest of
shed consistent with the strata complex.
the appearance of
the rest of the strata The Judge emphasized
complex for the two that the strata
ground floor strata “The Judge emphasized that the strata corporation has a
lots. corporation has a statutory mandate statutory mandate to
Mr. Getzlaf petitioned care for the common
to care for the common property and
the Court for an property and ensure
order that: ensure its available use for all owners.” its available use for
all owners. The Judge
(cid:79) the strata
referred to the decision
corporation restore
in Fenby v. The Owners,
the upper parkade
Strata Plan NW 228
to its original design
as authority for the
which was a rooftop garden;
proposition that it is not significantly
(cid:79) attaching a structure of combustible
unfair to order an owner to remove items
(cid:79) the strata corporation restore the construction to the building in
from common property that had not been
brick wall foundation at the perimeter violation of the strata corporation’s
permitted by the strata corporation.
of the patio so that Mr. Getzlaf bylaws and the zoning.
could install anchor posts for the
installation of a fence; The strata corporation also argued that The Judge found that there was no basis
for reversing the fines that had been
the structure Mr. Getzlaf erected posed
(cid:79) the strata corporation be ordered not levied against Mr. Getzlaf as Mr. Getzlaf
a risk of damage to the roof membrane.
to remove the existing privacy screen
was clearly in breach of the strata
The potential risk was confirmed by the
without Mr. Getzlaf’s authority; and
corporation’s bylaws. The Judge noted
roof consultants.
that Mr. Getzlaf had ignored clear
(cid:79) all fines be removed.
warnings that he should not proceed with
The Judge rejected Mr. Getzlaf’s
his intended course of conduct and that
Mr. Getzlaf argued that the strata argument that the strata corporation
the consequence of doing so included
corporation had acted in a manner that was acted in a manner that was significantly
the fact that fines would be levied.
significantly unfair particularly because unfair. The Judge noted that the strata
it had not restored the landscaping to the corporation took reasonable steps to
In reaching his decision, the Judge
situation prior to the membrane project. inform the owners of the repairs and that
considered that the legal principles related
The failure to restore the landscaping they were required for maintenance and
to the matter included the following:
resulted in a lack of privacy for Mr. Getzlaf the preservation of common property.
and reduced the strata lot’s market value. The owners were clearly advised that
(cid:79) a strata corporation must act in the
Mr. Getzlaf also argued that the strata the garden that was removed was a
best interest of all owners and it must
corporation’s obligation to maintain contributing cause in the need for the
endeavor to accomplish the greatest
common property meant that it must extensive renovation project. The Judge
good for the greatest number; and
restore areas affected by remedial work noted that the strata corporation also
to substantially the same appearance as complied with the SPA’s notice and (cid:79) strata corporations must often utilize
it was before the work began. voting requirements when obtaining discretion in making decisions which
authorization to proceed with the affect various owners and that, at times,
The strata corporation argued that membrane replacement. the strata corporation’s duty to act
in the best interest of all owners is
Mr. Getzlaf was in breach of the bylaws for:
in conflict with the interests of a
The Judge also emphasized that the
(cid:79) altering common property without particular owner or group of owners.
strata corporation had not disregarded
permission;
the petitioner’s desire for privacy.
(cid:79) placing a propane fueled patio heater Rather, it was in the process of obtaining The Getzlaf decision confirms that strata
underneath the balcony and adjacent estimates for the installation of privacy corporations are not prevented from
8 Continued on page 9
Continue from page 8
making significant changes to common plantings and tree roots contributed to
property nor are they required to restore the damage. The Judge also considered
common property to its original state that the strata corporation had obtained
Find CHOA’s
when repair and maintenance is required. a quote to install a privacy fence, bench
However, in addition to noting that a seating and a garden shed consistent with
3/4 vote of the owners had been obtained, the appearance of the rest of the strata
the Judge also considered whether the complex for both ground floor strata lots 2015 FALL
decision to install rock ballast rather that faced the rear of the building thereby
than landscaping, notwithstanding that demonstrating that the strata corporation
SEMINARS
it had been approved by a 3/4 vote, intended to restore Mr. Getzlaf’s patio
was significantly unfair to Mr. Getzlaf. area in a manner consistent with the
Thus, simply because the decision to appearance of the building and in a
install rock ballast was approved by a manner that did not compromise the on
¾ vote of the owners was not enough to newly installed membrane.
avoid a possible outcome that the strata
corporation had acted in a manner that By upholding the fines against Mr. Getzlaf,
pages 38 - 39
was significantly unfair to Mr. Getzlaf. the decision should also serve as a
warning to owners that, by altering
common property without permission,
In reaching the decision that the strata
they do so at their peril. (cid:79) in this issue
corporation had not acted in a manner
that was significantly unfair, the Judge
considered that the strata corporation Adrienne Murray is a lawyer with
had a good reason not to replace the Hammerberg Lawyers LLP. For more
landscaping based on advice that the information please visit their website at:
www.hammerco.net
(cid:42)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:72)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:75)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:77)(cid:75)(cid:76)(cid:88)(cid:3)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:87)(cid:89)(cid:86)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:71)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:71)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:70)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:88)(cid:77)(cid:81)(cid:77)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:75)(cid:3)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:71)(cid:83)(cid:82)(cid:74)(cid:89)(cid:87)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:75)(cid:18)(cid:3)
5
1 (cid:38)(cid:42)(cid:48)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:37)(cid:50)(cid:37)(cid:40)(cid:37)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:79)(cid:73)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:87)(cid:88)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:87)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:88)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:74)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:84)(cid:86)(cid:83)(cid:71)(cid:73)(cid:87)(cid:87)(cid:16)(cid:3)(cid:84)(cid:86)(cid:83)(cid:90)(cid:77)(cid:72)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:75)(cid:3)
0
2
all (cid:71)(cid:83)(cid:90)(cid:73)(cid:86)(cid:69)(cid:75)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:76)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:180)(cid:87)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:80)(cid:83)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:81)(cid:69)(cid:72)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:74)(cid:83)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:93)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:18)(cid:3)(cid:42)(cid:83)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:81)(cid:83)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:77)(cid:82)(cid:74)(cid:83)(cid:86)(cid:81)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:77)(cid:83)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:71)(cid:69)(cid:80)(cid:80)(cid:3)
F
al • (cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:80)(cid:80)(cid:3)(cid:74)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:17)(cid:28)(cid:26)(cid:26)(cid:17)(cid:26)(cid:26)(cid:29)(cid:17)(cid:29)(cid:26)(cid:20)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:73)(cid:81)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:80)(cid:3)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:87)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:73)(cid:36)(cid:70)(cid:190)(cid:71)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:69)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:18)(cid:71)(cid:69)(cid:3)(cid:83)(cid:86)(cid:3)
n
ur (cid:75)(cid:83)(cid:3)(cid:88)(cid:83)(cid:3)(cid:91)(cid:91)(cid:91)(cid:18)(cid:70)(cid:190)(cid:86)(cid:73)(cid:69)(cid:80)(cid:73)(cid:87)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:88)(cid:73)(cid:18)(cid:71)(cid:69)
o
J
A
O
H
C
9
CHOA Journal • Fall 2015
Professional Strata Property Management
Competent and Effective FULL SERVICE STRATA PROGRAM
Strata Management 604.549.0099
530 – 171 West Esplanade Ave
North Vancouver, BC V7M 3J9 24/7 EMERGENCY CALL CENTRE
(cid:37)(cid:51)(cid:58)(cid:1)(cid:37)(cid:48)(cid:56)(cid:47)(cid:1)(cid:116)(cid:1)(cid:51)(cid:38)(cid:35)(cid:54)(cid:42)(cid:45)(cid:37)(cid:1)(cid:116)(cid:1)(cid:36)(cid:48)(cid:47)(cid:53)(cid:38)(cid:47)(cid:53)(cid:52)
Telephone [phone]
Fax [phone]
Email [email protected] Since 1996
www.cccm.bc.ca COQUITLAM – SURREY - WHISTLER
Terry Hawes, MBA, CPA, CGA, CFE
LOCATED IN PRINCE GEORGE
PORT MOODY OFFICE
BC’S NORTHERN CAPITAL 84 Moody Street, Port Moody, BC V3H 2P5
455 Quebec Street, www.terryhawes.com PH 604-469-3733 TF 1-877-894-2937
[email protected] FAX [phone]
Prince George, BC V2L 1W5
PHONE:[phone] Does your Strata require Audited or WE CAN PROVIDE:
YOUR FULL SERVICE
REAL ESTATE COMPANY FAX:[phone] Reviewed Financial Statements? (cid:81) Audited and Reviewed Financial Statements
Email:(cid:17)(cid:286)(cid:425)(cid:455)@PaceRealt(cid:455)(cid:856)ca (Including Strata Management Firm
Serving Northern Bri(cid:415)sh Columbia What are your concerns? prepared financial statements)
Website:www(cid:856)PaceRealt(cid:455)(cid:856)ca
We can help, with over 15 years experience (cid:81) Tax Returns, regulatory compliance
Professional, Licensed Strata, Residen(cid:415)al &ResourceSectorHousing assisting Strata Corporations throughout matters and opinions
Management Services BC. Our primary focus is on small to (cid:81) Budget compilation, projections,
mid-size strata corporations (owner and unit entitlement
Full(cid:455) Sta(cid:299)ed O(cid:312)ce ProvidingAccoun(cid:415)ng &Recep(cid:415)onServices
professionally managed). (cid:81) Full Cycle Bookkeeping
Large or Small, We Can Manage Them All
Contact us Toda(cid:455) for All Your Management Needs CONTACT US FOR A FREE CONSULTATION (cid:81) Cmoannsauglteamtioennt o mn afitntearnsc…ia la anndd m storraeta.
IN I T I A T E D INTO OTUALR I NGDLAUSSST R YRECYCLING
(cid:54)(cid:83)(cid:72)(cid:70)(cid:76)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:76)(cid:86)(cid:87)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:76)(cid:81)(cid:171)
• APARTMENT ENTRANCE AND PATIO DOOR REPAIRS
• SECURITY PRODUCTS • WINDOW HARDWARE
• DOUBLE GLAZING (SEALED UNITS) & WINDOWS
[email protected]
(cid:22)(cid:24)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:83)(cid:89)(cid:86)(cid:3)(cid:41)(cid:81)(cid:73)(cid:86)(cid:75)(cid:73)(cid:82)(cid:71)(cid:93)(cid:3)(cid:55)(cid:73)(cid:86)(cid:90)(cid:77)(cid:71)(cid:73)
604-525-5365
10