There are times when an owner, or a group of owners, are so determined
to have their way they become make governing the condo community
almost impossible. They will do all they can to prevent the existing board from being able to function.
I am not talking about owners having normal disagreements about who
should be elected to the board, or owners who have reason to believe
their condo is poorly managed, or owners who want lower condo fees; all
of that can and should be discussed, argued and voted on as part of a
healthy democratic process.
I am talking about individuals who put their personal interests ahead of the interests of the majority.
Sometimes they hound the manager, the directors, the superintendent and
the cleaners. They spread rumours and defame all that oppose them. When
all else fails, they will seek redress outside the corporation by
appealing to the city building inspectors, the Human Rights Tribunal or
to the courts.
Here is a case where a small group of owners, in my opinion, went too far in their attempts to gain control of the board.
Kamal v. Peel Condominium Corp. No. 51
Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario
File Numbers: 2013-15958-I; 2013-15959-I; 2013-16113-I
Peel Condominium Corporation No. 51 had a troubled history. In 2010, the board
scheduled an AGM, during a week day, within the month of Ramadan. This
would be their first AGM since 2007.
This was an urgent meeting because the previous management had failed
to maintain and/or refused to provide any of the records PCC
#51 needed in order to have an audit done. The auditor who had audited
the accounts for the 2007
AGM had withdrawn his report and resigned, claiming that he had been
pressured by the previous Board to engage in “window-dressing”.
It took until 2009 to collect the records required to have audited
financial statements for 2007 and 2008 that could be presented to the
owners at the 2010 AGM.
One of the candidates for the 2010 AGM demanded that the meeting be
re-scheduled for a Saturday or Sunday. The board believed that this was
because a candidate did not have enough proxies to get elected and he
was stalling in order to gain more time.
The board held the meeting on the scheduled date but had to cancel the
meeting because a group of unit owners, including the candidate for a
director's position, were shouting and demanding that it be rescheduled
Saturday or Sunday. The name cards that had been set
out on tables for the meeting had been thrown on the floor.
so much disruption that the Board
determined that it could not go ahead with the meeting, and would have
to reschedule it to another date.
The manager was shocked by the
screaming and behaviour of some
unit owners at what was to have been his first AGM since becoming PCC #51's
When they could not get their way, they launched a Human Rights complaint against the condo which failed.