Back charges

If a board has "trouble" with an owner, they can bill him for damages that may be unjustified. Here is a letter from a condo owner in Mississauga:

Condo Owners Need Representation
Condo owners are the only breed I know who own an investment but are denied the right to know how it is run. They must have blind faith in a few strangers and have no where to go when things go awry.

The potential for misuse of funds is there and even worse for condo owners to be held hostage in their own homes. It is too much to expect condo owners themselves to deal with situations that have become toxic

Small Claims Court is programmed to have condo owners settle any dispute with their board of directors. This means they have no accountability to other condo owners. Those same condo owners pay for the board’s lawyers while unable to afford legal fees for themselves.

I was presented with a common element charge of $800 for which I was not responsible. Going to court was undesirable but unavoidable. Details eventually given to me only confirmed that they had no case.

The board was a no show for the first trial date. A trial did take place after attempts by the board to avoid the process. The court deputy called for settlement just before the corporation’s lawyer was to begin cross-examination. After three years of stress, the court ruled in my favour.

However, there was no compensation for my legal fees. At no time throughout the process did board of directors offer a defense. Small claims court is a waste of time if this is the result.

The condo corporations are paying big bucks for lawyers out of the condo owners’ maintenance fees for trivial matters. They must be made to give an account for their actions.

An attempt was made to remove the board after the first small claims no-show.

This is why I stated it is too much to ask condo owners to take of a problem like this on their own. Many elderly wanted to be involved but were afraid of becoming targets since they had to depend on staff for their needs. Condo owners don’t know who to trust and with out details they don’t know who to believe.

The boards have ways and access to intimidate condo owners for their proxies. At the end of the owners meeting to vote for dismissal of the directors, I approached the corporation’s lawyer about questionable proxies and was told that the method used by the board was not illegal but should not have been done that way.

Condo owners are in a mess. Guidelines must be set in place to take away any potential for abuse and victimization of condo owners.

After the court case, the directors did clean up their act, however they did shut down all communication with the condo owners for approximately nine months. This is the danger, after a while condo owners move out and new unsuspecting ones take their place. The Board  discourages any meetings or interaction between condo owners.

In a few years it will be back to business as usual. This is unacceptable for hard working families who are struggling to make ends meet and for the elderly who are living in fear and being intimidated at a time of their lives when they need to be taken care of.

How to fix this? I don’t have answers. The Government and many other concerned individuals are working on this with the Condo Act Review which is long overdue. From my experience I would like to offer these suggestions:

Board of directors should have to justify any threat of lien. This is used as an effective weapon to coerce extra funds from condo owners who because of the small amount versus the cost of legal fees, just pay up. That small amount multiplied a few time makes for quite a killing.

Small claims court too is guilty of minimizing the position of condo owners. The very first statement of every lawyer, court deputy to me was that it was a small amount. As far as I understand and by its very name, small claims court is for ‘small’ claims.

Lawyers will always represent the board of directors as opposed to condo owners. Courtesy of condo owners, the directors don’t have to worry about paying their bills since it is not coming out of their own pockets.
A condo owner must have access to some unbiased entity in a dispute with Board of directors and the Board of directors must show (not hiding behind lawyers paid for by that condo owner) the evidence for the action before a threat of lien is given to a condo owner.
•  
A Board of directors unable to justify going to court to other condo owners must face some kind of reprimand. They are not shy to announce the court case at the AGM presumable to intimidate the condo owner taking them to court.

They use other condo owners to malign the condo owner and manipulate information and details to cause disruptions among all condo owners especially at AGMs. The best solution I believe is that all members of the Board of directors must resign if they cannot demonstrate to other condo owners that their money spent to go to court will be retrieved.
• 
Lastly, special meetings for important decisions should be voted on in person. Proxies are too easily attained by intimidation especially from the elderly.

Expecting condo owners to take care of a bad situation only causes discord and disharmony among neighbours. I had another owner curse me in the elevator, many distant themselves from me and would not talk to me openly.

The way things are now makes for a very slow process and is unacceptable. There must be a way made to settle matters quickly. The desire of every condo owner is to live in peace in their own home.

My hope and prayer is that those reviewing the Condo Act would make sure that condo owners are given more protection. Board of directors must have protection also. They already do. It is time that condo owners are afforded the same.
J.F.—Mississauga


top  contents  chapter  previous  next