Why YCC #42 is important

The owners in well-managed and funded condos and everyone in all the newer condos believe that they have nothing to learn from YCC #42, and the other hundred or more distressed condos in the Greater Toronto Area.

I disagree.

What has happened in Dixon City may be repeated in dozens or even hundreds of newer and more prosperous condo corporations. Not to the same degree perhaps, not yet, but there are many other condo corporations where I know this is true because I am seeing other corporations following the same downward spiral that put YCC #42 in its present state.

All condo owners should read this section carefully. If you see similar warning signs of trouble starting in your condo, either immediately sell and run for the hills or work to get rid of your board and become part of the solution.

All condos are vulnerable
The unit values in one corporation that I am observing have dropped by $30,000 in six months. That is when a new board was elected on a promise of cutting the common element fees. The fees were cut by 15% and the "lucky" owners will need to enjoy that fee cut for the next 30 years to recover what they lost in property values. Worse, most owners are now trapped as they cannot afford to buy elsewhere. Some owe more on their mortgages than what the units are presently worth.

Another couple of condos have enjoyed extremely low condo fees for years as the corporations depleted the reserves and the city repeatedly threatened to disconnect the hydro.

The decline of YCC #42
YCC #42 got into this mess because of:

1.	The city gave hefty incentives to owners who would rent to newly arrived refugees. (Can't that happen again?)
2.	Overcrowded units greatly increased operating costs, prematurely wore out the common elements and increased vandalism.
3.	Far too many rented units.
4.	As prices fell, low-income buyers and absentee slumlords moved in putting pressure on the board to keep common element fees low.
5.	Mismanagement and infighting by the directors on the boards.
6.	The resident-owners wrestling with the landlords for control of the board.
7.	Low standards. The boards hired low-cost contractors, many who did shabby work.
8.	Corruption.
9.	Massive election fraud.

There is nothing in this list that is not presently happening to some degree or another in many other condo corporations.

Too old?

Maison Maillou Quebec City 1737

Age has nothing to do with it. How old is Beijing's Forbidden City, the Taj Mahal, Buckingham Palace or the Royal York Hotel?

A solid concrete building, if properly maintained, could outlast the pyramids.

Owner disinterest
I believe that this is the main reason for YCC #42's woes.

The owners, both the absentee ones and the owner-residents are not informed or involved in the political, social and financial issues that face the corporation.

Their apathy can be shown by the attendance at the owners' meetings.

Date	Meeting	In person	Proxies
Sept 2012	Elect directors (1st election in 7 years)	77	534
Mar 2013	Pass budget & appoint auditor	no quorum
May 2013	Requisition to remove director	129 total (no quorum)
July 2013	All candidates meeting	11
Sept 2013	AGM, 2 directors elected	37	398
Jun  2014	AGM (elections to be held in Sept) (failed to make quorum)	88	35

The lack of participation by the majority of owners gives the few that are active in the corporation's politics a disproportionate voice in controlling the corporation's affairs.

Is this not a common problem in many new condos that have a majority of absentee owners?


top  contents  chapter  previous  next