FOLLOW US ON TWITTER
HOT NEWS BULLETIN
TRADES AND SERVICES
COA DIVISIONS
NON PROFIT PARTNERS
NEW ARTICLES
CONDO FEST
VIDEOS

COA Reports on Review (11)
Stages of Review
Ontario's Condominium Act Review - Have your Say
How Much Say do Condo Owners Really Have?
The Condo Owners Association is a "Stakeholder" in the Condo Act Review
We have identified a series of concerns.
All of our concerns relate to:
- Consumer Protection
- Governance and Accountability
- Reserve Fund - Assistance and better mandates
- Government Licensing for Property Management Firms and Property Managers
- Better Dispute Resolution
All Tax Payers, Home Owners, Condo Owners, Condo Buyers and the General Public need to ask a basic question "How much will the Condo Act Review cost Tax Payers?The Ministy of Consumer Service hired the Public Policy Forum to oversee the consultations of the Review Stages 1, 2, and 3. The Condo Owners Association believe that the process is flawed and PPForum have overlooked or maybe avoided or buried some very precious recommendation in all stages of the Condo Act Review. Unfortunately the Review carried over 90% of Condo Related Trades and many Associations who should have been involved; were not invited. Ontario has over 1.3 million Condo Owners yet Ministry reports show under 2,000 Condo Owners who participated. There was limited social media, news and awareness venues. Condo Owners are being expected to search the net and/or the Ministry/Provincial website to locate their own information.
Condo Act Review Public Awareness Campaign
Sadly, the Condo Owners Association believes it is impossible for the average Condo Owners or Condo Buyer to grasp the whole situation because it is way too complicated. Rather than hiring the Public Policy Forum to meet with over 90% condo service trades, the Ministry of Consumer Services, should have implemented a full campaign for public awareness. It is 2014, technology and social media could have made the Condo Act Review, Declarations, By-Laws etc. a household name for every Ontarian. Knowledge is the key to working together to ignite better condominium communities.
The whole process as identified in the Ontario Government Newsroom announcement to "Build a Better Condo Act" needs to have another statement added to read "in favour of Who?" There has been no transparency on the cost of this review and although it was announced on June 2012; on April 2014 other than the Ministry announcing Property Management licensing, other announcements are non existent. Ontarians need to give though to: "How many Condo Owners have lost money during this wait because of improper governance and accountability in their condominiums whether it be through their Board of Directors or Property Management.
How many overpriced contracted service trades as a result a Boards choice after securing only 1 tender have been approved and paid. It's been almost 2 years, how many condominiums and Condo Owners experienced unnecessary overpriced expenditures to the operating budget or possibly the reserve fund during process. In Stage 1 of the Condo Act Review, The Condo Owners Association suggested their version as "An Independent Agency or Organization to Work with the Community" however by Stage 3 of the Review the Public Policy Forum eliminated any further discussions when they did not invite either the Condo Owners Association nor the Canadian Alliance for Condo Owners Rights on the Expert Panel. It was an absolute shame and certainly harmful to all Condo Owners and Condo Buyers. Page 24 of Stage I Condo Act Review http://www.ppforum.ca/sites/default/files/Full_Condominium%20Act_EN_0.pdf
New Construction Condominiums
Another side to this review has been completely ignored. The new condo market is known to sell their units on a price per square foot basis with additional premiums on the floor of the building. There is also added costs for lockers and parking. Buyers hope that the value of the unit at the time of purchase is expected to rise by the time the building is completed approx. 2-3 years later and following occupancy and registration stages. Sometimes the increase hasn't shown enough profit to cover the costs of reselling the unit after registration of the building considering a double Land Transfer Tax (if the unit is in Toronto), the legal and closing costs plus the real estate commissions and HST for services.
In these cases; many Buyers may buy time by renting their unit until the value increases enough to cover the costs and provide them with a profit. However, if it is an investor they have to pay the full cost of HST on the purchase price at the time of final closing and if the occupancy period was 5 months, it is highly possible there may not have been any income received and the unit was vacant during this period. While you add all of these costs, the window for profits tighten. On the other side of the resale market condominium; it is common to see a lower price per square foot. There is also a large influence on unit value depending on the maintenance fee.
There are many condominiums where 1200 sq feet units sell for only $200,000 however their maintenance fee is $850.00 per month. In these cases, the value of the building has taken a drop in price because the maintenance fee has increased too much. Another negative impact would be the reserve fund. Some buildings are sitting tight with over a million dollars in reserve funds yet others have depleted reserve fund and/or extremely low with potential special assessment on all unit owners. Real Estate is suppose to be a sound investment and a long term shelter for Ontarians to have equity as they pay down their mortgages and hope to realize more value in their property.
The fact that this Condo Act has taken 14 years to materialize and another 2 years for discussions is costing Taxpayers not just Condo Owners an estimated millions/millions of dollars in lost value. The Condominium Act is supposed to provide a transparent, good governance, accountability and certainly best business practice as a form of protection for Condo Owners and Condo Buyers. The Condo Owners Association believes it has failed.
The Condominium Act needs to be a mandated Act with impending fines for those Board of Directors who do not adhere to the Act. It cannot be self-governed; the proof is staring all Ontarians and Politicians in the face because this Condo Act Review has identified severe problems to include abuse, proxy forgery, power struggles, unaccountability of Board Members, issues of Non-Licensed Property Management Firms and Property Managers, the list goes on. There were concerns on implementing more Consumer Protection on new condominiums. The Minister's Public Information Sessions and online submissions were filled with stories of mangers, Board Members, Owners and Buyers not understanding the Condominium Act, Declaration, By Laws or Rules and Regulations. Multi-Million dollar Corporations are left unattended with an enormous platform for potential of abuse.
Standardized Declaration is Important
A standardized declaration in easy language is a must. We have a Country of Multiculturalism; plus almost every condominium in the Province has a different declaration. The reason: they are prepared by the builders lawyers on new construction and there could have been insertions and/or deletions over time as well. Plus, the Condominium Act is way too complicated; even Lawyers and/or Judges have been found to question interpretations. The Condominium Act is supposed to provide a transparent, good governance, sound business with best practices and a form of protection for the Corporation who are the Condo Owners and Condo Buyers. The Condo Owners Association believes it has failed and will continue to do after this costly review.
The Ministry of Consumer Services have entertained a Condo Office to handle dispute resolution through mediation and arbitration at an estimated cost ($3 per month) which will HIT CONDO OWNERS with over $25 Million Dollars in expenses.
Condo Owners have to be their own voice through the Condo Owners Association (COA) http://www.coaontario.com/condo-office.html The Condo Office is not the office, it is simply a CASH GRAB. All Ontarians need to take time and let their MPP's know they oppose the Condo Office and they are concerned about the process of the review.
All Condo Owners and Condo Buyers need to register with the Condo Owners Association.
Public Policy Forum Lead Condo Act Review
The Condo Owners Association has submitted their concerns to the Ministry of Consumer Services advising them of the very poor representation provided by the Public Policy Forum. Ontario’s Ministry of Consumer Services has provided funding to Canada’s Public Policy Forum to lead a public engagement to inform the review of the Condominium Act.
The Public Policy Forum have based their reports on input from more than over 80% participants of condo service related trades. They excluded numerous non profit Association who could have offered invaluable input to help Condo Owners. There are over 1.3 million condo owners yet less than 1% involvement from Condo Owners. The Condo Act Review is "flawed" and Condo Owners must review the list of participants and submit their complaint to the Ministry as soon as possible.
Poor Condo Owners Forced to Pay $25 Million Dollars on new Condo Office
COA believes the proposed "Condo Office" is a provincial government "cash grab". The Condo Office is a new umbrella organization which would be set up with four ain functions. See Page 7 of this Report
Condo Corporations already pay millions of dollars for services and contracts which include a Property Management contract. Why would they have to pay for the licensing of the trade for condo managers. The Ministry's attempt at education and awareness is to create website with information and also to consider mandating new Board members on an education program yet what about the thousands of existing Board Members who have never had any proper training.
The Condo Act Review already substantiated that dispute resolution is a problem because of a number of factors. In general most condo owners don't want to ostracize themselves in their home by creating an open fight with their Board of Directors. There may only be a select few that are willing to take on that challenge plus the extensive cost factor to the Condo Owner who potentially may have to repay the condominium corporation costs if the dispute is ruled in favour of the Corporation is a huge problem. The Condo Act needs to have regulatory fining process in place for those who do not abide by the Condo Act, it cannot be self govern and then expect Condo Owners to spend over $25 Million Dollars per year to have another extension to repair the damage that a self governed Condo Act creates.
Although COA was involved with the "Consumer Protection Working Group, there was a majority vote with Participants from condo service related trades and the final report is made on a majority opinion.
Stage One Findings Report of Ontario's Condominium Act Review
Please click on the links below for more details:
COA is not in favour of some of these recommendations on this report.
See Consumers Protection Report
Condo Owners ask "Who is the Public Policy Forum (PPF)
COA Endorses these changes
- Home Warranty Act needs a complete revision.
- Provincial Government consider a Condo Reserve Fund Bond to pay 1 to 1 ¼ % higher than Ontario Savings bond
- Reserve fund studies need to conform to proper financial numbers. Interest rates and inflation rates must be set by the Government.
- Improved Reserve funds interest rates with new Reserve Fund Bond
- MPAC should consider deficiencies in the Reserve Fund
- MPAC should consider different guidelines for property tax
- Arrange restrictions for Smoking Cigarettes and Marijuana in condo buildings
- Status Certificate - 10 banking days is too long of a period and jeopardizes sale
- Meetings with extensive costs considered should be part of status certificate
Did you know these condo facts?
- Over 1.6 Million Condo Owners in Ontario
- Over 580,000 Condo Units
- Over 6,750 Condo Corporations
- 1,000's Commercial Condos
Do you realize the importance of changing the following?
- Electronic Proxy system is required. Presently proxies are being forged to control votes
- Condo Lawyers should be appointed by Corporation, not hired by the Board
- By Laws should not allow customization Director qualifications or disqualifications
- By-Laws should not be allowed if the change is in contravention to the Condo Act
- All Boards and Condo Owner should be aware of the AODA
- Board Members should not manipulate the Condo Act forms for personal intentions
Let's work together for important changes to Condo Act
Concerns on Condo Act Review
These are some questions the COA had during the review process:Click to view Condo Owners Association (COA) Stage Two Feedback
- Why is the Condo Act self governed with no fines for non compliance and illegal contravention of the act yet other acts offer protection with fines, ie Traffic Act, Health & Safety Act, AODA Accessibility Act etc.
- Expert Panel has over 95% of the Panel with representatives of Condo Service Trades and no representation for Condo Owners
- Initial suggestions/recommendations adopted by the Ministry based on input from OWNERS versus SERVICE PROVIDERS in their initial report
- The Condo Office is a Provincial Government CASH GRAB from Condo Owners and is completely unfair and unreasonable!
- The proposal to charge all condo owners by implementing a Condo Office at a monthly fee will cost huge dollars ( based on the number of Condos in the Province)
- Why are Condo Owners expected to pay for Property Managers licensing when they are employees of Property Management Firms
- Why are Condo Owners targeted to pay more money from a Condo Act review when this review is supposed to be about protecting and creating a better condo act
- Condo Owners need a standardized declaration in plain language, adopting multi-culturism so everyone can read and understand, the new Condo Act is more confusing!
- The Provincial Government should be working with the Condo Owners Association to open communication between Condo Owner
- New Condo Act continues to be be self-regulated yet evidence proves 14 years of present acts provides NO Protection for condo owners
- Owners and Board of Directors shows a disconnect between the two (2) parties
- The condo act report has confirmed proxy forgery but there is no 3rd party holder of proxies to prevent tampering by Board Members or Property Managers who may be involved with the same to ensue their contracts
- Like the auditor, the Legal Counsel for the Condo should be elected/appointed by the owners and NOT the Board. Therefore, the lawyer works for the Owners and the Board will then need to hire its own lawyer. There have been too many problems for owners trying to get satisfaction from the Board
- The review process is taking far too much time. Presently, the Ministry knows the 20% of the issues that are causing 80% of the problems. Therefore apply the 80/20 rule and implement some changes now versus a year from now
- Why did the government not involved MPAC on the review and analyse how MPAC evaluates Condos on their present structure for property tax assessment and adjust to consider reserve funds, refurbishments and upgrades.
- Why is there no ability for condo owners to find out about MPAC assessments online to compare their tax assessments as there is with single family homes
- Why was there no discussion in the condo act review on why there is COA Board member on Tarion or at least someone to represent Condo Owners ?
- Why did the panel not recommend less time for Status certificates considering 10 days is too long of a period of time for condo owners to wait
- Why is the fee for status certificates not paid to the Condo Corporation but instead to the Property Management Firms yet the documents belong to the Condo Corporation.
- Why did the review not address the need for Status Certificates to be broader and provide more info to a prospective owner/buyer. Also a history of maintenance fees for at least 3 years needs to be included.
- How come Board members can have meetings and delay approval for costly recommendations yet do not have to inform the Condo Owners at the beginning of discussion so they are prepared and alerted
- The developer needs to guarantee the maintenance fees for the first 3 years to prevent excessive maintenance fee increases after the 1st year
- Why has the Government not taken the Condo Owners Association advice to create a Reserve Fund Bond for Condominiums that pays an interest rate at last 1% or 1.5% higher than the Ontario Savings Bond
- As part of the Directors and Officers insurance, and to ensure that the Condo Board acts reasonably, there could be premium incentives for Boards who operate with and implement proper governance principles and policies
- Why does the Board of Directors have the ability to accumulate excessive surpluses and also are not mandated to obtain 3 quotes for any or all services
- Why would the Government limit courses to new Board Members when there is substantial proof that many Board Members have a lack of condominium knowledge
- The Government should be utilizing and help support Canadian Colleges and Universities to provide courses for Property Managers and Property Management Firms
- The Government should be utilizing and help support Canadian Colleges and Universities to provide courses for all Condominium Board members
The Condo Owners Association provides Government with reports and recommendations to protect Condo Owners. We receive confidential complaints from condo owners daily. While we do not have the resources to answer each complaint, we record and track the complaints. We provide expert advice on countless Panels relating to the condo act review, consumer protection, intensification, property assessment & taxation, building codes, carbon monoxide detectors, atmospheric issues, storm water sewer systems, green energy, environmental issues, affordable housing, reusable energy and development discussion Groups.
Condominiums play an important role in the real estate market. We need strong condominium communities with long term sustainability.
HOW CAN WE MAKE CONDOMINIUMS BETTER
- Condo Information Power Point from COA
- Reserve Fund Bond Power Point from COA
- COA presents real estate values
- COA reports Condo Values vs by Maintenance Fees
- COA input on Property Management Licensing
COA POWER POINT PRESENTATIONS
- COA Volunteers and Divisions Help Condo Owners
- COA Explains Impact of Condo Act at Carson Dunlop Condo Event
- COA Presentation at the Toronto Home Show - Exhibition Place
COA PARTICIPATES ON VARIOUS STAKEHOLDER GROUPS
- Property Management Study - Home Owners Protection Centre
- Carbon Monoxide Detectors - Fire Protection - Fire Marshal Ontario
- Residential Intensification Study - View Panel - Consumers Council of Canada
- Stormwater Sewer Systems and Waste disposal - City of Mississauga
CONDO OWNERS ASSOCIATION PROVIDES PUBLIC AWARENESS
Property Management License
Ministry of Government and Consumer Services
Announces Mandatory Qualifications for Condominium Managers
The Ontario government has announced mandatory qualifications and licensing for Condominium Managers and Management firms. Many condominium owners and residents may be more familiar with the terminology "property managers" and "property management office" in their condominium complex. These managers are not mandated to have training or an understanding of the Provincial Condo Act, condo declarations, rules and regulations of a condo, by-law and or other important information relating to the finances, building maintenance, operations etc. of a condo corporation. COA is thrilled to see changes however condominium managers and management companies need to have a government licensing structure. See COA in Wikipedia
Facts on the contracted Property Management Services
COA receives numerous questions about the role of Property Management and Property Managers
- Board of Directors for the Condo Corporation calls a Property Management Firm to obtain a quote for Property Management services.
- Property Management Firm provides a quote to include Managing the building and possibly handling the accounting for Accounts Payable, Receivable and Reserve Fund
- If the Property Management Firm is successful in securing the contract, they then provide an employee to the building who is called the Property Manager
- All Liabilities of the Property Management contract are with the Property Management Firm and the Condo Corporation
- The Property Management Firm assigns a Property Manager to the Condo Building and that Property Manager takes direction from the Property Management Firm and also has to abide by the requests of the Board of Directors to make sure they don't jeopardize the Property Management Firm contract
- If work order quotes are required many Property Managers ask their Property Management Firms for guidance and/or recommendations.
- Our Provincial Government has mandated licensing for both Property Managers and Management companies See CMRAO Licensing
Condo Owners Association advocates changes to Condo Act
The Condo Owners Association has been standing behind Condo Owners rights since March 2010. In June 2012 the McGuinty Government announced a Condo Act Review and in January 24, 2013 the Condo Act Review commenced. Premier Kathleen Wynne continued these review following her elected in 2014 and announced a series of changes to the Condo Act in July 25, 2017. The COA has been a strong advocate participating in all reviews having worked with our Government and the various Ministers of the Government and Consumers Services since 2010. Building a Better Condo Act Condo Owners Association on Wikipedia
- Minister Soffia Angelenitis
- Minister John Gerretsen
- Minister Margaret Best
- Minister Tracy MacCharles
- Minister David Orazietti
- Minister Tracy MacCharles (present 2018)
January 24, 2013 - Canada’s Public Policy Forum begins the Condominium Act Review as a three-stage collaborative, public engagement process to build a better Condo Act by modernizing it to better protect Condo Owners. There was a series of public information seminars, Roundtable discussions, Residents' Panel and Expert Panel. The COA was a Stakeholder in the review. Building a Better Condo Act - see bottom of page
COA Special Information for the Ministry of Government and Consumer Services
- COA Power Point for suggestions of a Provincial Reserve Fund Bond for Condos
- COA Power Point on Condo Values vs Maintenance Fees
- COA references concerns on Status Certificates
COA Recommendations on Condo Act Review
- COA engagement in Condo Act Review to Public Policy Forum
- COA Feedback of Stage 1 of Condo Act Review
- COA recommendations to Build a Better Condo Act
- COA Stage Two Solutions Report
- COA input on Consumer Protection Working Group
- COA reports opinion on Stage 2 Condo Act Review
- Condo Review Stage 2 Chart
- COA illustrates opinion on Stage 2 Chart
- Stage 2 Participant List Over 95% Condo Trade Input
- COA reports concerns on Stage 2 Structure
- COA and Stage 3 - the Expert Panel
- Condo Owners Association COA on Wikipedia
COA Divisions and Volunteers
The New Condominium Law Changes
The Province's Condo Act receives first overhaul in over 16 years and Bill 106.
Condo Act Review results and the 3 Stage Process
The Condo Owners Association has made a huge impact providing expert opinion, recommendations and solutions on various "Stakeholder Groups" on behalf of residential and commercial Condo Owners and Condo Corporations We offer our sincerest appreciation to those listed below and all of the other Governmental Agencies, Non Profit Agency and Private Corporations who have reached out to invite the COA to participate:
- Ministry of Government and Consumers Services
- Consumers Council of Canada
- Ministry of Finance
- Homeowner Protection Centre
- Fire Marshal Office
- Ministry of Community Safety & Correctional Services
- Canada's Public Policy Forum
- City of Toronto
- City of Mississauga
STAKEHOLDER - Reports are links below:
Consumers Council of Canada Residential Housing Intensification Study
Fire Marshall Safety for Ontarians Advisory Committee
Carbon Monoxide Safety for Ontarians
Homeowner Protection Centre Condominium Property Management Regulation
City of Mississauga Stormwater System Review Page 78
Ontario's Condominium Act Review Stakeholder Roundtable
Ontario's Condominium Act Review Stage One Findings Report
Ontario's Condominium Act Stage Growing Up Ontario Condo Communities
Condo Act Residents Report - COA presents Page 59
COA Ontario Reports/Power Points links below:
How Condo Owners Association Helps Condo Owners
COA Explains Impact of Condo Act at Carson Dunlop Condo Event
COA Makes an Impact for Condo Owners at Toronto Home Show - Exhibition Place
COA recommends a Provincial Reserve Fund Bond for Condos
COA letter to Premier Wynne regarding problems with Status Certificates
COA Ontario submits Reports to Ministry of Government and Consumers Services
- COA recommendations to Ministry to Build Better Condo Act
- COA Feedback of Stage 1 of Condo Act Review
- Supporting Letter to Public Policy Forum
- COA reports Concerns on Condo Values affected by Maintenance Fees
- COA input on Consumer Protection Working Group
- COA reports Flaws on Stage 2 Condo Act Review
- COA illustrates Flaws on Stage 2 Chart
- Condo Review Stage 2 Chart
- 2013 Nov 8 - Stage 2 Participant List Over 95% Condo Trade Input
- 2013 Nov 08 - COA reports No Representation for Condo Owners on Stage 2 Structure
COA submits Letters to Hon Premier Kathleen Wynne
Stage 1
Does the Condo Act Review help or hurt?
These are initiatives of the COA during the review process:
The Condo Owners Association has submitted concerns on Stages 1 and 2 of the Condo Act Review to enforce Consumer Protection for Condo Owners.
COA Feedback of Report (PDF Click Here)
COA has again reviewed Stage 1 Stakeholder Roundtables as presented by the Public Policy Forum. An overview of our notes as presented to the Forum elaborating additional information is listed below. The overall experience for Stage 1 of the process was very beneficial. Our participation in the Residents Review panel confirm our mutual concerns with Condo Owners but how many were adopted and where do we stand today.
Dispute Resolution
COA is extremely concerned about the position of Property Managers and Property Management firms. The Property Management firm is the contracted provider of property management services which is administered by their employee (known as the Property Manager) Many times Condo Owners are blaming the Property Managers and not the Boards because they do not understand the command of control. Board of Directors often hide behind the Property Managers so they can shift the blame. Property Managers and their respective Property Management firms have a direct relationship with the Board of Directors and are at arms length with Condo Owners. They depend on this relationship to ensure their substantial service contracts (in excess of $150,000+). The Board of Directors have a fiduciary duty to represent the Owners and the Condo Corporation. Owners must be well informed that all of their problems are a result of the Board.
The inefficiencies in the Act’s current mediation and arbitration approach is not effective because Board of Directors are often working with Property Managers to create maneuvers against Owners with falsifying documents, proxies to cover their tracks. They may also work together to prevent Owners from receiving records of the Corporation therefore so Owners go into a mediation and arbitration without written facts and proof to substantiate their complaints. Board of Directors are too quick to involved corporation solicitors because they use them as an intimidation factor against Condo Owners.
Priority Issues
- Condo Owners are uninformed about their rights and responsibilities, as well as specific rules and regulations
- Condo Directors and Property Managers are in a direct position to abuse their rights and responsibilities, as well as specific rules and regulations
- Corporation Solicitors use a “precedence of previous rulings” to maneuver the ambiguity of the Condominiums Act to prevent owners from exercising their rights to documents of the corporation, view proxy’s in their original form etc and they depend on other Provincial Acts (ie. Privacy Act) to prevent Condo Owners from obtaining information
- Corporation Solicitors, Directors and Property Managers have and use their power of election and contractual services to intimidate owners.
Potential Solutions
- Develop a form of insurance protection for Condominium Owners as part and parcel of Director & Officers (D&O) insurance
- Condo Corporation is responsible to pay the mediation expenses and a reimbursement from the Condo Owner will be mandated in the event that the Mediator deems in favour of the Corporation because this is as Consumer Protection Act
- Reporting system similar to the Better Business Bureau for Owners to report Board of Directors in non compliance to the Condo Act.
- We have concerns on the mechanics and potential conflicts of interests relating to Dispute Resolution because of internal controls of Board of Directors; it will be very difficult to have an impartial body
Areas of Further Discussion
- Change the rules on forcing the Board to call a Special Meetings on any grounds is very important to balance fairness in the Condominium. A minimum of 5 Owners should have the ability to request a meeting with the Board within a 14 day period or at the regular Board meeting if it is soon; to present an outline of their complaint in writing. In the event that the 5 Owners have not received a satisfactory response; they then have the option to request the Board to call a Special Meeting. This will force more Board governance and prevent extensive mediation and arbitration costs.
- Owners have the right to claim against the Directors & Officer Insurance in the event that the Directors are found to be in non compliance of the condo Act.
- It is difficult to have an internal DRO (Dispute Resolution Office) for each Condo Corporation because of the power of manipulation by the Board of Directors and Property Managers
- Board of Directors who ignore the Condo Act must be held responsible for legal fees and dispute resolutions fees and these costs must be covered by the Directors and Officers Insurance
Condominium Governance
- Concerns about Superior court rulings setting precedence and overriding present Condominium Act
- Standardize Declaration for New and Existing Condominiums
- Fining (a regulatory complain process for Owners Protection) for Board of Directors in non compliance to the Condo Act
- Fining process (a regulatory complaint process for Owners Protection) for Property Managers and Property Management Firms in non compliance to the Condo Act
- Fining process (a regulatory complaint process for Owners Protection) for Solicitors of the Corporation for not abiding by fair business practice reflecting the Condo Act
- Solicitors must be appointed by the Condo Owners similar to the Auditor appointment to ensure that the Lawyers represent the Owners
- Board of Directors are refusing to provide updated owners lists (with email addresses) to Owners. They must be accountable to provide the list within a 2 week period of the request
- Board of Directors threaten and abuse Owners who are trying to obtain signatures for requisition meetings
- Owners who have dishonerable intentions to remove the Board resort to unethical, slanderous accusations and dishonest tactics to promote signatures for requisition meetings
- Board Members against other Board Member resorts to the same behaviour mentioned above
- Proxies must be held by 3rd party and/or online voting systems and not available for viewing by the Property Manager or any member of the Board of Directors.
- Scrutinees should be elected at the Annual General Meeting by the Condo Owners and not appointed by the Board of Directors. The Auditor should oversee the scrutineers
- Boards are changing qualifications to restrict off site owners from standing for election on the Board – they use forged proxies for the voting process
- There needs to be a better mechanism between Boards of Directors on shared facilities for multiple condo corporations. There also has to be a different allowance for buildings including commercial units and live-work units.
- Special legislation must be set out for live-work residential units so Condo Owners do not abuse these units by operating full scale commercial businesses in live-work residential units to avoid commercial taxes and to purchase units at less value than a commercial condo unit.
- Restrictive measures must be implemented to prevent Board of Directors from obtaining loans at high interest rates for energy retrofitting and green technologies.
Priority Issues
- Property Managers on behalf of Board of Directors requests are stamping Annual General Meeting packages with dates (20 days prior to meeting) but withholding the mail out so Owners are not receiving the packages until a few days or potential after the meetings
- Board of Directors ignore Owners requests to the records of the Corporation; if the Owner continues to request the records; the Board enlists the assistance of the Corporation Solictor who also refuses the Owner access stating draft minutes are not records of the Corporation etc.
- Excessive costs applied by Board of Directors relating to price per page for requested records of the Corporation
- Board of Directors tampering with Board Meeting Minutes, AGM Minutes and records of the Corporation
- Need to address abuse of Live-Work units and their avoidance on MPAC (Municipal Property Assessment Corporation) tax issues while using residential units for commercial purposes.
Potential Solutions
- Standardized Declaration Most building are universal in standard guidelines. As prepared in accordance with the Condo Act
- New Construction Standardized Declaration As prepared in accordance with the Condo Act
- ByLaws specific to each Condominium building
- Qualifications and Disqualifications as set out in Condominium Act 1998 cannot be altered
- Define Records of the Corporation ie does it include draft minutes, special requisition meetings etc.
- Licensed Property Managers should sign off on all Minutes if they are present at the meeting within 15 days of the Meeting
- Board of Director monthly approved minutes must be made available to Owners upon their request
- All minutes of all meetings (including Special meetings) must be signed off and approved on a monthly basis by the Board of Directors and made available to Owners upon their request
- Annual General Meeting Minutes in Draft form must be sent to the Condo Owners within 1 month of the Annual General Meeting to keep Owners informed
- There has to be a mechanism for Condo Owners to register complaints on minutes of the Corporation that are incorrect or have been tampered
Areas for Further Discussion
- Establish education for Condo Owners (could be an on-line interactive course) so they recognize the importance of good governance with Board of Directors and cost savings on maintenance fees
- Develop a cost chart relating to building expenditures so Boards can use as a guide to understand proper pricing
Condominium Management (COA disputes this name)
- The terminology of condominium management DOES NOT exist in the present condominium structure – they are known as Property Managers and Property Management Firms
- The confusion to change the name is Governance (board) Versus Management (Property Management)
Please Note:
- ACMO is publicly announcing an approval from the Ministry of Consumers Services that they are the licensing entity for all Condominium Managers – COA finds this extremely detrimental to this Review process and a direct conflict of interest in ensuring that Condo Owners have Consumer protection under the new Condominium Act.
Priority Issues
- Property Managers represent the Board of Directors and do not represent the Owners
- Property Management firms must be held responsible for their Property Managers under employee relationship of employment
- Property Managers quote Bill 168 unreasonably against Condo Owners
- Property Managers are not mandated to abide by the Condo Act
- Property Managers have knowledge and skills to manipulate the Condo Act to create a strong business relationship with Board and ensure their employer – Property Management Companies continued contract with that Condo Corporation
Potential Solutions
- Develop a Provincial - RECO (Real Estate Council of Ontario) style of licensing for Property Managers
- Mandate their profession through a specific Act geared to their profession (similar to the REBBA (Real Estate Business Brokers Act)
- Mandate an errors and ommissions insurance to protect condo corporations on misinformation
- Mandates in the Act to prevent interaction ie. Property Managers cannot be Directors or owners in the Corporation
- Property Management firms must disclose referral fees or remunerations received from service providers they have recommended to their contracted Condo Corporations.
Areas for Further Discussions
- See new Potential Solutions Above
- Manager fees are not directly related to the Corporation. The Property Management Company negotiates a contract for services of property management for the Condominium. This would include a Property Manager (employee) and sometimes an administrator (employee) The employees income is NOT negotiated by the Board of Directors nor should it be
- Services provided by the Property Management company also include accounts payable and banking of the Corporation. These firms also recommend service providers and they do receive referral fees for the recommendations. These referral fees are not and should MUST be disclosed to the Condo Corporation.
Financial Management
- A limited amount of the operating expenses relate to repairs and maintenance
- The majority of the budget relates to reserve fund, utilities and service contracts ie. Property Management company, security and cleaning contracts.
- Stringent guidelines must be in place for green technologies so older condos do not find themselves in financial ruin spending to save and Owners not being able to afford their maintenance fees
Priority Issues
- Builders accountability for deficit of 1 year is insufficient
- Province to provide higher interest rate deposits/bonds on reserve funds and include an inflationary blanket recognizing that the performance audit does not reflect market times
- It inappropriate to allow coverage from the reserve fund for new green technology initiatives. Restrictive measures must be implemented to prevent Board of Directors from obtaining loans at high interest rates for energy retrofitting and green technologies
- Insurance issues between Corporation and Owners re: corporation policy and owner policy
- Board of Directors and insurance companies changing standard unit bylaws without notifying owners. Lack of coverage on flooring and betterment problems will exist
- Fan coils and special filters are not being changed regularly if left in the hands of the owners and take into account off site owners therefore compromising potential insurance claims and water issues
- Warranty concerns because of insufficient coverage by Tarion under the New Home Warranty Act. Unfortunately Tarion DOES NOT represent owners and there are far too many examples of problems resulting after the 2 year coverage and there are limitations to what is deemed as structural.
- New buildings do not have enough security cameras and security keys so they increase the expenditures of the Corporation substantially within the first year
- The reserve funds of the Corporation may be handled through recommended financial service providers by the Property Management firms; is there a referral fee involved – disclosures must be mandated
- The reserve fund is handled by a financial company that the Board of Directors has chosen; is there a referral fee involved – disclosures must be mandated
- Since there is not one financial source for Reserve Funds; there is a higher risk of misappropriation of funding and lower interest rates
- Pooling of reserve funds may compromises the corporations unless it is Government administered. Property Management firms obtaining referral fees must disclose full particuaalrs in writing.
- Even though this is hard to legislate, green technology companies may provide overpriced quotes to Board of Directors and/or loan options
- Concerns on overinflated costs pertaining to condominium refurbishment. Designers and contractors for simple wall paper, painting and floor coverings ie. Porcelain tiles are compromising financial stability of reserve funds and corporations (ie. 11 floors $745,000.00) and potential depleting reserve funds for cosmetic issues.
Potential Solutions
- Builders must be held accountable for the first 3 years not 1 year
- Property Management cannot be associated with the Builder during the full warranty period; conflict of interest concerns and full warranty periods to include structural must be extended.
- Create a Reserve Fund Bond (similar to a Government Savings Bond) exclusively for Condo Corporations at higher interest rates (this is an excellent benefit for additional Government funding)
- Mandate mechanical performance inspection prior to common element design expenditures from reserve funds
Areas for Further Discussion
- Explore Government Reserve Fund Bond to provide better protection of investment and stronger interest rates
- Ensure accountability for Reserve Funds to avoid Board of Director and Property Manager abuse and kick backs (reserve funds need to be audited)
Consumer Protection
- New construction contracts prepared to represent the best interest of the builders is not protecting the rights of the Buyers
- Proper disclosures of representation are not mandated so Buyers are unaware who is representing their interest in the buying process therefore they enter into the agreement with a strong lack of information relating to occupancy, interest rates to determine occupancy costs, structure of taxes and maintenance fees embodied in occupancy costs; length of time for extensions, rules pertaining to leasing and/or selling under assignments, turnover meetings and what is included in their purchase relating to responsibilities outside of their standard unit..ie balcony, windows etc.
- The price per square foot relating to maintenance fees at the point of sale creates a huge problem because with delays on closing and inflation these fees have a substantial increase in the first year creating an affordability problem for Owners. The Builder must include an inflationary protection for 3 years after registration.
- 10 banking days for Status Certificates compromises sale transactions and Property Managers abuse the time period and 95% of the time wait the entire time before they provide it meanwhile the declarations and bylaw are already preprinted and held in property management. The only hold up is the Status Certificate which is signed by a Directors however many times Directors turn over signing authority to their Property Manager. Financial institutions to secure hundreds of thousands of dollars in mortgages require 5 banking days; therefore Status Certificates should be the same period of time – 5 banking days. In reality Status Certificates can and have been prepared in less than a day.
- Standardized declaration with key points exclusively at the front of the declaration to ensure full understanding by the consumer on standard points of most condominiums will protect and educate the consumer.
- The present method of builders lawyers preparing different declarations for each condominium and all resale condos all having different declarations compromises the security and protection of the consumer. By-laws can be geared to each specific condominium but the overall decaration in plain English must be prepared considering the importance of 1.3 million condo owners understanding their rights and their ownership of their unit
- Short term rentals are increasing throughout the province identifying a hotel concept of 3 days – 8 days.. with no limitations on short term. It is an ideal circumstance for builders when selling their units as they promote these benefits to out of country investors but it becomes a safety and security concern of Condo Owners. It also increases wear and tear on common elements ie. Moving elevators, hallways and unit doors/door frames etc.
- Real Estate lockbox and/or keys – Property Management and Board of Directors are compromising the safety and security of their buildings depending on the rules they are implementing relating to lockboxes and keys. Some are taking Realtors Drivers Licenses / ID’s as a deposit for keys; lockboxes are place in unlit areas of the complex opening the Corporation for potential law suits in case of physical harm claims, keys are identified with unit numbers on them and held at security in unlocked areas; many condos do not keep a register of Realtors showing and so on.
- Registered Sales agents under RECO and REBBA already have full disclosure mandates; the concern is unregistered sales personnel of Builder. Keys or Lockbox should be readily available and physically onsite
Priority Issues
- It is impossible for buyers to read their condo purchase and sale documents on new construction because they are confusing, prepared by the builders lawyers and protective to the builder. Disclosure of representation must be confirmed and key issues of the contract must be at the front of the agreement.
- Low price per square foot on maintenance fees at point of sale for new construction compromise Owners affordability
- Property Managers are not cooperative with Status Certificates many times and do not require 10 banking days
- Standards rules to protect the Corporation relating to lockboxes and keys recognizing the personal safety and security of the Realtors and the Corporation
Potential Solutions
- Standardized declaration with By-Laws relating to specific differences of the Corporation
- Builder has to guarantee an inflation % rate for maintenance fees increases and make up the difference on new construction to cover additional costs over a 3 year period
- Minimum term on short term rentals and defined rules and regulations
- Immediately implement up to 5 banking days on status certificate
- Guidelines relating to keys/lockbox recognizing safe standards practices
- Keys or Lockbox should be readily available and physically onsite. The best practice to ensure safety is for Security to hold both key or lockbox or to install lockbox in the staircases closest to the unit.
Areas for Further Discussion
- Sales Agents Staff of Builder must be licensed to trade in Real Estate under RECO and REBBA regulation
- Full disclosure for representation must be mandated and affect Builders and Sales Agents Staff on site
- 95% of Status Certificates are prepared by the Property Management office and does not require solicitor intervention. Please see above notes. The Certificate only requires 1 signature from the Board of Directors (or Property Management) banking days is more than sufficient.
- Status certificate must include discussions on special assessments because too many boards hold off on the decision process especially if they or a friend in the building is selling. Buyers have a right to know what they can expect to include legal proceedings and fees to date. Also, mediation and arbitration cases involving the Corporation should be noted. Status Certificate to guarantee no special assessment for a certain time period.
Next Steps
- The main concern of the Condo Owners Association is to ensure that Condo Owners are protected in this process. We believe that the present forum has a higher contribution from service related trades who may be party to a conflict of interest on their recommendations. We realize that the Ministry must embrace their professional experience and related suggestions but we also caution the Ministry when evaluating the final outcome of the review. Many of the existing problems in Condominiums result from uninformed and uneducated Board of Directors, Property Managers and their Property Management firms and Corporation Solicitors.
- Although there are problems with Condo Owners as well; many become a problem as a result of their loss of rights, lack of protection for their unit; distasteful slanderous actions by the Board and the cold hard fact that they believe they have no where to turn
- In reality, there is substantial FEAR in the Condominium communities experienced by a number of condo owners. We believe the apathy amongst owners is caused by fear as well; sometimes if you know less you have no reasons to be upset. Turning a blind eye is much easier for many especially if they already know they cannot do anything
- We truly believe that once Property Management Firms and Property Managers are licensed under a delegated authority under the Safety and Consumer Statues Administration Act as a result of our Government working with the Ministry of Consumer Services and the Condo Act to protect Condo Owners Province wide; will ensure professionalism in the industry to create more consumer and Corporation protection
- It is the responsibility of our Provincial Government in this Condo Review Process must ensure proper due diligence and lack of conflict of interest are identified as we move forward to ensure consumer protection for all Condo Owners
- It is necessary for the Government of Ontario to have a regulated Consumer Protection Tribunal Process to protect Condo Owners
More...
COA Recommendations
COA PRESENTATION
INFORMATION ON BOARD OF DIRECTORS
IMPLEMENTATION OF FINES FOR DIRECTORS
Recommendations – implement a fine structure for Directors who operate the Affairs of the Corporation in compliance to the Condo Act
Reasons - the only way that our Ministry can build a better condo act is to make Board of Directors accountable for their actions and decisions when they are in non-compliance of the declaration. At the present time hundreds of Directors have ruled their Corporations by ignoring their Owners and making their own rules. There is no governance of practice so they have no repercussions on their decisions. Owners are powerless in the face of unscrupulous Board of Directors.
OWNER-OCCUPIED POSITION
Recommendation: The owner occupied position should be held by an owner occupied unit owner and voting for this position should be allowed by all owners
Reasons: There is confusion with the owner-occupied position. Condo Owners, Board of Directors and sometimes even Property Managers are not aware that this position can be held by anyone as long as they qualify under the qualifications of the Condo Act. There is also disharmony between owner occupied unit owners and off site unit owners recognizing that the off site unit owners have no say on this voting process. The position is for representation of on-site unit owners so the best representation would come from an on-site unit owner who can interact with the other on site unit owners.
NUMBER OF DIRECTORS ON THE BOARD
Recommendation – There should be a mandated 5 Board of Directors for all Condominiums
Reasons: This allows proper discussion and decision making process without too much control. It protects the Condo Corporation and Owners because there is less chance of dictatorship and non compliance to the act since it ensures better governance of responsibilities.
IMMEDIATE REMOVAL OF DIRECTOR
Recommendation - If a Director is found to be in non compliance to the Condo Act, Declaration and By Laws of the Corporation there must be an immediate removal of that Director.
Reasons – Self explanatory, a Director has a fiduciary duty to the Corporation and must adhere to all requirements of the above
EDUCATIONAL CONDOMINIUM OPERATIONS COURSE
Recommendation – the Ministry of Consumer Services should be implement a course structure (just like RECO with their REBBA requirements) . They should work with COA, Condo Owners Association to implement these courses. COA is the only reg. non profit Association representing Condo Owners. We do not represent Condo service related trades.
Reasons - to ensure that Directors have some understanding of the operations, declaration and bylaw structure of a Condo Corporation. Corporation Insurance policies, Directors Insurance and fines etc. relating to different situations should also be part of the course. We would suggest segments I, II and III provides proper certification and better knowledge.
LICENSING OF PROPERTY MANAGEMENT FIRMS/COMPANIES
Recommendation – Property Management firms should be licensed and have regulatory policies as prepared by the Ministry of Consumers Services or Better Business Bureau
Reason: Property Management Firms/Companies are responsible for the actions of the Property Managers they have employed to work at their contracted Condominiums. It is not necessary and inappropriate to mandate that Property Managers are licensed when they are only employees of the Property Management company. It is the company who has the contract as approved by the Board of Directors and accepts full responsibilities of the management operations of the condominium Corporation. Also as noted in the Reserve Fund section; many of these Property Management firms offer direction or have their accounting staff provide recommendations for placement of reserve funds; licensing these firms will protect that situation as well as many other relating to contractual arrangements with other service providers and potential of conflict of interest between the Management firm and other service providers.
ALL CONDOMINIUMS - STANDARDIZED DECLARATION
Recommendation - To create a standardized declaration to protect the interest of the Corporation and written in every day language for Condo Owners to understand
Reason: All condominiums should have a standardized declaration written in every language for the general public to read. This would prevent the Boards from changing the declaration at will. Although the condo act stipulates requirements to change a declaration; it is self-governing and in complete control of the Board of Directors. Proxies could be altered to achieve the votes required for the change considering that proxies are not monitored or held by a third party. A standardized declaration would prevent this from happening and allows Condo Owners, Lawyers and the general public the ability to familiarize themselves with the declaration in effect for all Condominiums across the province without confusion.
CORPORATION DOCUMENTATION requests from Owners
Recommendation – implement specific guidelines for Board of Directors to follow when an Owner is requesting Corporation documentation
Reasons – The Board of Directors has full control of the Corporation Documentation and can withhold the same from Owners although they have requested a copy of the same. The Owners has no options to obtain these documents other than to hire a lawyer for representation costing them unnecessary expenses
COMPLIANCE TO DECLARATION
Recommendation - non-compliance to the declaration relating to renovations, alterations, key lock changes and installations and having this work done without the Board of Directors consent
Reasons:. There are problematic issues which are not being recognized by the Courts and Condo Corporations have to spend unaccounted for Corporation funds to hire lawyers, go to court and still risk winning the case because the Declarations are ambiguous and the Courts may not rule in favour of the Corporation. Case studies in favour of the Corporations sometimes assist the final judgement, but the Corporations should not be subject to the time, energy and cost associated with trying to enforce their declaration.
Recommendation – full costs for legal fees and court proceedings should be enforced on the declaration to prevent the above non compliance issues and the Corporation can lien the unit in the event that these costs are not paid.
Reasons: Condo Owners will be reluctant to participate in non compliance issues if they are held responsible for full payment of costs relating to enforcement of the declaration.
SHORT TERM RENTALS AS NOTED IN MANY DECLARATIONS
Recommendation: a standardized declaration would enforce the minimum time period for short term rentals and prevent the Builders lawyers and Directors from shortening the period
Reason: There is no governance or mandate on the time limits for short term rentals noted on the declarations. This affects the Corporation creating a transient community resulting in potential more security and safety concerns. It also affects our tourism and hotel industry because investors are purchasing these units and advertising 2-3 day stays across the internet to attract tourists. The Pan Am games is going to have a tremendous effect on this situation and the end result after the games may be a true hardship for owners.
BALCONIES - ENSURE RESPONSIBILITY WITH CORPORATION
Recommendation – to ensure that balconies are noted on a standard declaration as part of the exterior building of the Corporation and not the responsibility of the owner
Reason: There are some buildings where the responsibility of repair etc. to a balcony rests on the shoulders of the owners as stated in their declaration. New owners buying into these building will have the reserve fund and status review by their lawyers their reserve funds study is based on requirements and responsibilities as per the declarations and the excessive costs of balcony repairs/replacements is extensive for condo owners. They must always be part of the Corporation expense so reserve funds can be used if they require repair/refurbishment etc.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Recommendation – to establish a dispute resolution for Condo Owners having difficulty with their Board of Directors
Reasons - We have a catch 22 situation when it comes to Board of Directors and Property Managers or Property Management Firms. There is a huge misunderstanding within the Condo Community. Owners who have a dispute with Property Management must then go to their Board of Directors because the Property Managers are only employees of the Property Management Firm who is on contract by the Board of Directors for the Corporation. If there is a dispute the Board of Directors are responsible to address the dispute but if they like the Property Manager or Property Management Firm they side with them and ignore the Condo Owner. On another note: unfortunately many Board of Directors depend on the Property Managers advice and recommendations because they may not be informed or educated to the requirements/operations of a Condominium Corporation so they leave too much power in the hands of the Property Managers and or Property Management Firms.
NEW CONSTRUCTION - CHANGES
Note: this is applicable to Phase Condominium Complex – changes to the ACT
RESERVE FUND STUDY:
Recommendation: Requirement to match year end dates with existing when there is a second phase of construction
Reason: New condominiums must have their study done within the first year and every three years after that on their building. There is an interesting time with shared facilities and reciprocal agreements on newly phased in condominiums because the existing condominiums reserve funds will have a different component life cycle on the common elements reserve funds since it is already in place when the new condo is phased in. Owners of the new condominium will not have up-to-date information on the shared facilities reserve fund study unless by chance it is scheduled for an update at the same time.
DECLARATION – NEW CONSTRUCTION
Recommendation: - Standardized Declaration
Reasons: the Builders Lawyer prepares the declarations to protect the builder’s interest and to assist the sale of the units therefore they include allowances which may be more beneficial to the prospective purchaser than to the Corporation.
TURN OVER MEETING - PERFORMANCE AUDIT PRIOR TO TURNOVER MEETING
Recommendation: Performance audit should be done prior to the turnover to clear as many issues as possible before the Corporation Directors have to exercise their warranties on behalf of the Corporation.
Reasons: Condo Owners and Corporations should receive a notice of Performance Audit to see exactly what they purchased and what needs to be corrected prior to the turnover meeting. This enables them to ask questions of the builder’s representative at the meeting and to document any concerns they have with respect to the building. Also it assists the newly elected Board of
Directors to be aware of large areas of concerns. At the present time; turnover meetings only elect Board of Directors and there is a room full of Condo Owners who have not been provided any information on the performance audit of their Corporation.
PROXIES FOR TURNOVER MEETING
Recommendation: All proxies for the turnover meeting should be given to a third party not related to the Builder or Property Management. It has been noted that there is substantial forgery of proxies by Board of Directors compromising the voting process for their personal interest.
Reasons: It is to be noted that at the time of the turnover; the Property Management Company represents the Builder and not the Corporation. They are on contract with the Builder and until such time after the elections if and when their contracts have been ratified by the Board of Directors. There is a gray area of their fiduciary duties and responsibilities during the occupancy period until after the ratification of their contracts. There should be a third unbiased party to accept Proxies from Condo Owners to ensure proxies are recorded as given and not altered. The obvious; a new Directorship has the ability to either ratify the Property Management contract and maintain the same Company or choose to tender the contract for another company. These proxies could potentially be compromised to align with any particular candidate for board position because at the time of the turnover there is a direct conflict of interest.
FIRST YEAR DEFICIT – CONDO CORPORATION OPERATING BUDGET
Recommendation: Builders must be mandated to reimburse the first 4 years of deficits relating to the Condo Corporation Operating Budget.
Reasons: Maintenance fees prices per square foot are determined at least 3 years and possible 4 years prior to occupancy and do not have any inflationary regulations. New Condo construction is introduced to the public to make the maintenance fees appear low in comparison to the fees in existing condo buildings. Mortgages are determined based on these fees at registration only to find a huge increase in the 2nd year because only the first years deficit of insufficient maintenance fees is covered by the builder. This situation starts an imbalance of increases in the 2nd year for the Condo Owners which become impossible to recover over the next few years so the building suffers on the market value and the maintenance fees continue to increase beyond the normal. If this building then has major deficiencies past the Tarion 1-2 year building coverage; the financial viability of the building is already challenged and the Condo Owners are not protected.
YEAR END BUDGET
Recommendation: Year end dates must be matched because inconsistency on value relating to maintenance fee increases when the year ends are different dates between the buildings and the shared facilities
Reason: There is an inconsistency on value relating to maintenance fee increases when the year ends are different dates between the buildings and the shared facilities
TARION – NEW HOME WARRANTY PROGRAM – NEW CONSTRUCTION
Recommendations: Builders must be required to provide minimum 4 year Tarion Warranty coverage on the interior aspects of the building (having an estimated value of $80,000,000). They also need to increase coverage on the exterior of the building and structural needs to be broadened to include various underground surface floor topping.
Reasons: The warranty is not sufficient for the Condo building because a 1-2 year coverage is equivalent to a single family home. Many of the deficiencies are not recognized till the 3-4th year and by then the warranty coverage is over and the Condo Corporations are left with extensive expenses in their operating budgets. They cannot access the reserve funds and these extensive costs are increasing the operating budgets and skyrocketing the maintenance fees.
The unit coverage of 1-2 years is sufficient but not the building coverage. Also there needs to be better security and safety protection as noted independently on this report.
Case Study - when a new Condo site is built within ¾ of a metre from an existing foundation wall of an existing Condo building, there is no protection for the foundations of the existing building. The builders are not mandated to provide a liability insurance and/or any degree of compensation in the event of present or future damage to these walls as a result of their excavation and construction. Tarion will not cover anything that is not a result of nature causes so therefore the existing buildings are at a substantial risk of foundation problems. The City does not mandate any type of protection when building permits are requested and the existing condominium Unit Owners could potential have substantial damage and resulting costs relating to this problem.
Ie. The situation happened at 20 Blue Jays Way, with Fly condos building within ¾ of a metre from their foundations – 2010/11.
SAFETY AND SECURITY
Recommendation: Include specific mandates and requirements relating to safety and security to include a strong position for the Corporation to deal with illegal acts.
Reason: Illegal acts are becoming more prevalent and without proper safety measures of cameras, restrictive unit keys and restrictive elevator access with fab entry for each floor is required to ensure the safety of the owners. The declaration has to be superior court specific so that in the event that an issue arises in a condominium relating to Illegal Acts there is no confusion
Hoarders – cases have had to go as far as a full court process with excessive legal expenses. During this period “all condo owners and residents” are subjected to unsafe and hazardous living environment which could be potentially dangerous should something happen ie. Fire; chemical reactions; etc. The practice with Fire Marshalls and requirements for certificates of disposal of hoarder contents is a lengthy and costly process with limited available restrictions to assist.
Meth Labs – The standard declaration should allow an in –suite inspection twice a year accompanied by Security to ensure that there is no meth labs and/or hoarder situation. At present there is only a fire inspection whereby things could be missed. Sometimes Boards provide a fan coil maintenance of the units however many times they just have the owners do their own replacements.
FAN COIL INSPECTIONS
Recommendation – all Corporations should conduct Fan coil inspections through Property Management and the cost as part of the yearly financials and operating budget
Reason: The safety aspect for internal water problems can be avoided if the Corporation takes responsibility for a fan coil inspection and at the same time they can check the units as a safety measure for illegal acts. Fan coils can cause fire and water damage if not maintained properly. It should not be left in the hands of individual owners and or tenants (with off site owners).
RESTRICTIVE KEYS
Recommendation – all condominiums should have specialized keys which cannot be duplicated through standard key outlets. They must be ordered and documented by property management
Reasons: this measure protects the condo owners/residents in the building from having too many keys duplicated with no registration of additional occupants of units
RESTRICTIVE ELEVATOR ACCESS WITH FAB ENTRY
Recommendation - all elevators should have a fab entry access which only allows each unit owner to access their own floor of the building
Reasons: creates a safer and secure environment with more control for Security to do their job . It records the fab user when it is used and allows security a record of entry.
ELEVATOR CAMERAS - IN ALL ELEVATORS
Recommendation – all condo buildings should have cameras in all elevators (new construction needs to be mandated for all elevators, access and entries throughout the building)
Reasons: cameras create a safe environment and allows security the ability to monitor the safety of the building and provides them and Police Dept with proper camera footage in the event of an incident. It also deters incidents and ensures that visitors, condo owners and residents conduct themselves properly.
EXISTING BUILDINGS - RESERVE FUND STUDIES - 3 year requirement confirmation report
Recommendation: All Condominium must be required to send in a confirmation of compliance of completion of every 3 year reserve fund study
Reasons: This can be done through the engineering firms who complete the study as a requirement or directly to the Ministry to ensure that the boards are not deferring the study because of the cost. Many times Boards ignore the time line because of cost and they also only do a type 3 without a site visit which is cheaper than a type 2 having a site visit.
RESERVE FUND BOND
Recommendations: A government bond strictly for Condo Corporation Reserve Funds should be established.
Reasons: Minister of Finances can review benefits such as the saving of monies because no commissions would be payable on bonds to financial institutions. Bond interest rates could be higher benefitting the Corporations and strengthening their position. Many Reserve Fund Studies are showing that Reserve Funds are under water because of incorrect interest and inflation rate assumptions.
RESERVE FUND CONSIDERATIONS
Recommendation – mandated reserve fund inflation rate and long term interest rates assumption
Recommendation – clearer definition of “Reserve Fund Expenditures”
Recommendation – Ministry must address energy saving initiatives and create a process and regulatory guidelines to ensure Condo corporations do not take on excessive financing and loans to retrofit throughout the building. Possible provide government endorse initiatives with a loan structure of repayment.
SPECIAL NOTE: COA WORKING WITH BMO NESBITT BURNS
COA has established a relationship with BMO Nesbitt Burns and they have created a specific Reserve Fund Portfolio under the guidelines of the requirements of investing as noted in the present Condo Act.
Reasons: Many Board of Directors are using various institutions and investment advisors who may not be very business savy to draw the best interest rate situation. There is also mismanagement of funds ie $20 Million fraud case with Property Management Firm. Many Property Management Firms are taking active roles in recommending certain investment advisors and or investments. Board of Directors do not at any given time have any record of their portfolio. BMO Nesbitt Burns has developed a specific web site to provide active information at any time to the Board of Directors for the Condo Corporations they now are working with by a log in process. It is a win win situation for all.
INSURANCE POLICIES - CONDO UNIT INSURANCE POLICIES
Recommendations: Mandate that all condo unit owners require their own insurance policy
Reasons: Condo owners are not aware that the Building condo insurance included in their maintenance fee does not cover their unit and betterment/improvements they have made to their unit. Also in the event that the Board of Directors changes the insurance policy to save on deductibles the standard unit could now not include floor coverings. Board of Directors need to be mandated to either obtain approval from owners on this change or at least mandated to inform the unit owners in writing so they are protected within their unit. Condo unit policies are very confusing and there are stringent guidelines on what is covered and what is not. There is no mechanism in place to protect the condo owners. A standard declaration with condo unit owner insurance coverage would help the situation and also enforce guidelines for Board of Directors to follow on changes to the policies.
CONDO CORPORATION INSURANCE POLICIES
Recommendations: A complete review of coverage must be implemented. Condo Owners, Board of Directors and many Property Managers have no idea on the guidelines of the coverage. Better protection of coverage for Board of Director Liability Insurance, the Condo Corporation and Condo Owners is required
Reasons: Insurance Companies split their insurance policies… ie Intact Financial Corporation is a well known Condo Insurance provider for Condominiums. Their coverage contains 50% of building under Intact and the other 50% of building under Novex. The Board of Director liability coverage, flooding and building liability is 100% under Intact. Specifics on the actual coverage between the building and the unit is not readily available and the above parties are unaware of their protection. As mentioned above (unit owner insurance) the Board of Directors can and do make changes to the building policy to keep deductibles lower without notification to the Condo Owners.
INSURANCE POLICIES AFFECTED BY NON COMPLIANCE ISSUES
Recommendation: Board of Directors are responsible to ensure complete enforcement of the Declaration under the guidelines of the Condo Act. Penalties and fines must be implemented in the event that the Board of Directors do not.
Reasons: the insurance policies can be at risk in the event that Board of Directors and/or Condo Owners are not in compliance to their declaration, condo act which also tends to include non compliance to fire codes and the insurance policies. If the Board of Directors are aware of a non compliance issue with an owner or a fellow Board member and they do not take proper action there must be some measures of accountability and responsibility for their negligence.
DIRECTORS LIABILITY INSURANCE
Recommendation: a distinct process must be established and available for Directors to register a complaint and or exercise their option for Directors Liability Insurance
Reasons: Directors liability insurance is the best kept secret of Insurance Companies. The Board of Directors, Property Management and even the Insurance Company cannot provide a direct quote of coverage with full facts and process of how a Director can exercise their rights and what is covered.
Case Study: We contacted Atrens Counsel, Insurance Brokerage for Intact Insurance which provides Condo Building Insurance and found out that there has to be a majority vote of Directors for a Director to claim coverage of the Directors Liability Insurance which would include a majority decision with only 3 Board Members. If the 3 Directors are unscrupulous and do not adhere to the Condo Act or Declaration then the other Board Members are left unprotected. The 3 Directors can manipulate and control the operations while the other 2 Board members have absolutely no recourse available to them. It opens the door for the 3 Directors to create slanderous and damaging rumours about the other 2 Directors hoping to force their resignation. All Directors should have specific Directors Liability to protect their personal & human rights and reputation should they be subjected to lies, deceitful manoeuvers and prejudices by other Directors, Property Managers and Condo Owners. At the present time, these Directors just resign leaving the Corporation in the hands of unscrupulous Board Members.
Note: COA receives substantial complaints pertaining to the above.
THIS SECTION DEALS WITH LIVE-WORK UNITS
The Ministry of Consumer Services must include specific regulations pertaining to these units because they are being abused and Condo Corporations and unit owners are left unprotected.
NON COMPLIANCE OPERATIONS OF LIVE-WORK UNITS
Recommendation: the Condo Act needs specifics for the usage of live-work units as a residential unit and outline restrictions with fines for non compliance.
Reasons: The live-work units place these Condo Corporations at risk for non compliance of the declaration, rules and regulations, by-laws, insurance liability coverage, zoning & building codes, fire codes and signage offering no protection to the Condo Owners.
Condo owners with live-works units generally have a main street and a common element entrance inside the building corridor. They are residential units with residential taxes, zoning and fire codes. They were built to allow an owner or tenant to live and work in the unit with specific guidelines for usage on the Condo Declaration. Condo Owners are not adhering to the Declaration and are operating full scale commercial businesses. In some situations the live-work unit owner is on the Board of Directors to ensure he can operate his live-work unit as a full scale commercial unit and not even living in the building. MPAC is now taxing these units with commercial taxes when they investigate and determine strong percentage of commercial activity yet they are a residential unit and should not be allowed to operate commercially.
Case Study: A unit owner is on the Board of Directors (for the past 10 years) and operates a commercial business with full admin staff, sales persons whereby the unit is 100% business operations and he does not live in the building. MPAC is now taxing his unit as a commercial and not residential unit. He was a Director when the Board of Directors changed their Condo Declaration qualification guidelines for Directors. The new qualifications as per their declaration are in non-compliance to the Condo Act. This Corporation has restricted off site owner from being on the Board of Directors but does allow an Off Site owner to sit on the Board of Directors if they own a unit on the 1st floor (live-work unit) for the past 7 years plus. It was changed to benefit this owner/director. His term is expiring later this year however he will seek re-election to protect his position and jeopardize the Corporation and all Condo Owners. The Board of Directors are aware of the non-compliance to the Condo Act and the above however will do absolutely nothing about it.
Case Study: Live Work Units – many are in non compliance to renovations, improvements etc because they have a direct access to street level; they can evade security and property management. There is a case study where a live work unit owner split his unit into 2 sides, 1 side having no fire life safety systems and he was collecting 2 rents. The security only found out about it because 1 of the tenants operating a commercial business wanted parking for his client. Property management inspected the unit; the Board of Directors spent over a year dealing with the issue with a substantial legal fee of over $100,000. Superior court finally ruled the owner to take down the walls and return the unit to a single unit at his expense however only part of the legal fees were his responsibility to reimburse to the Corporation yet the Corporations declaration stated that all legal fees born by the Corporation resulting from a unit owner in non-compliance are the responsibility of the unit owner and shall be reimbursed to the Corporation. The judge overruled the declaration and the Corporation lost over $35,000 only to enforce their declaration and create a safe environment for other Owners.
CONDO INFORMATION
The Condo Owners Association has provide these recommendations as a starting point of discussions recognizing their extensive knowledge regarding the operations and pitfalls of the present Condo Act, operations of the Condo Corporations and the Board of Directors.
This report has been prepared without prejudice and only to report facts and recommendations for the protection of all Condo Owners.
ABOUT CONDO ACT
COA REPORTS ON REVIEW
CONDO INFORMATION
BUYING A CONDO
RENTAL AND NEW BUILD
CONDO RADIO SHOW
IMPORTANT LINKS
COA ACCEPTS DONATIONS