As you probably know by now, the government intends to release draft regulations to go along with the amendments to the Act. The purpose of releasing the draft regulations is to allow for public comment. The first draft regulation, which was released in December, addressed the mandatory licensing of managers.For the first draft regulation, the deadline for comments has passed.
The second draft regulation, which was released this week, is aimed at common condominium issues: communications from condominiums to owners and mortgagees; mandatory disclosures and training for directors; meetings and voting; and record retention and access to records. The government posted the full draft regulation and a reader-friendly version on its website. The deadline for public comments for the second draft regulation is March 30th, 2017. In the next few posts, I’ll describe some of the key features of the second draft regulation.
Condominium communities are small democracies with their own set of unique challenges. Like many democracies, the board of directors is often criticized by the owners for the decisions made, or not made, but are rarely praised for their hard work. Given the wide range of values, interests, and characteristics of condominium inhabitants, it not surprising that governance issues account for a large proportion of the disputes that arise in condominiums.
Given the importance of proper governance to the financial health and stability of condominiums, the working group made several recommendations to improve the governance of condominiums. The recommendations were in five key areas:
- Access to Records & Information
- Directors and Officers
- Owners’ & Directors’ Rights & Responsibilities.
The Superior Court of Justice recently heard what appears to be the first reported decision under section 152(6) of the Condominium Act, 1998. Section 152(6) permits a declarant of a phased condominium to request a meeting of owners so it may elect a new board where it owns a majority of the units as a result of the registration of amendments to the declaration and description creating a phase.
In Middlesex Standard Condominium Corporation No. 643 v. Prosperity Homes Limited  ONSC 1193 the declarant brought a motion for an order requiring the condominium to call a meeting of owners so it could elect a new board. The condominium refused the declarant’s request arguing that the declarant was out of time to make the request as he became the majority owner over 2 years prior and was aware of his right to request the meeting since the beginning. The condominium also claimed it was further oppressive conduct as the declarant admitted that it wanted the meeting so it could elect a new board that would discontinue another action (where the condominium claimed damages from the declarant for construction deficiencies in the amount of $750,000.00). The court found that it was not further oppressive conduct or otherwise limited at law and ordered the condominium to call the meeting. Continue reading
As a lawyer, I rarely get to experience the good meetings in condominiums. Ordinarily, if I am at a meeting it is because there is a contentious issue on the agenda, such as a special assessment, unexpected repair, or requisition. Yelling, interrupting, name-calling, foul language, security guards, and even chair-throwing are not unheard of at meetings. However, in the past few weeks I was fortunate enough to experience two meetings that went off without a hitch. Although I’d love to take credit for the way these meetings went, the real heroes were the property managers and directors.
Although many factors contributed to the success of the meetings, there were three that stood out in my mind. First, the property managers and directors were organized. They had pre-meetings to discuss each of their roles, prepare a presentation to the owners, and discuss anticipated questions. This ensured that there were no awkward pauses or blank stares when responding to questions from the owners. Continue reading