Semayne's Case, (1604) 77 E.R. 194

Your Home is Your Castle

So they say...

Semayne's Case, (1604) 77 E.R. 194 - Resolved that the house of every one is to him as his castle and fortress as well for his defence against injury and violence, as for his repose;

Merrium-Webster definition of castle is a retreat safe against intrusion or invasion (our home has been invaded by floods, mould, and trespass for over 10 years). Wikipedia says repose is a word meaning "rest" or "calmness" (which the strata has deprived us of for over 10 years).

************************

If buildings that collapsed from the 2010 earthquake in Chile are being treated as crime scenes due to the death toll I am afraid that the city, the strata, and certain owners may be recklessly threatening innocent lives.

The City of Coquitlam can claim that repeatedly sinking buildings on the slope can't sink, members of the strata council can try to offload responsibility for foreseeable damage from removal of trees and walls with proven to be useless indemnity agreements, and Councillor Mae Reid can sell a view as more of the few remaining trees are destroyed while the concrete pillar supporting the building we shared with her remains defective = but the law of cause and effect is inescapable - as is the risk.

Sunridge Estates has a history of repeatedly sinking. If the most likely causes are soft soil and weak concrete, I think the strata ignoring structural defects in spacious garages and allowing walls to ne  tampered with to add more open concepts unreasonably increase foreseeable risk.

 

 

************************

We bought a brand new home, we never damaged it, it was in perfect condition before it was flooded by others, we paid strata fees for insurance benefits we were deprived of while the strata delayed with false claims that repairs would be completed with the building envelope.

Our lives have been in limbo since 2003, oppression has escalated for over a decade, and since the flood the only way we could sell our home would be as a "fixer upper" because we morally opposed to cover ups and are unwilling to assume liability for creating hidden defects or the strata offloading its responsibilities.

As of January 2014, NW2671 has not completed repairs of water damage that changed the condition of Unit 409's floors, ceilings, walls, and doors after Unit 510's Crane toilet tank burst and flooded both units in 2003. From what we have been able to gather either the strata did not have insurance on the date of loss, July 23, 2003, or the underlying geotechnical history and structural defects evident in the supporting pillar in the common property garage below our strata lot created enough fear to prevent completion of the repairs.

The strata corporation has left the most expensive repairs incomplete for over 10 years, leaving Unit 409 damaged and crooked, with cracked walls, splitting wood, warped doors, sinking floors and ceilings, and occasional whiffs of mold.

When 510's toilet tank burst nobody was home in either unit. I was out of town visiting my mother in Penticton and we don't know how long the water had been running when my husband came home and reported the flood to the strata management company.

This was a major flood involving 2 units, and in Unit 409 the water came down on us from above. The flood extended from our ensuite to our living room, soaking 3 floor levels, 2 ceiling levels, and all of the floor coverings, framing, drywall, and doors in between ending in a pool of water in our garage and over a decade of unrepaired damage and withheld insurance documents.



After the flood structural changes in Unit 409 included warped doors, sinking floors and ceilings, crooked and cracked walls, none of which damage there was any evidence of before the flood. 
 

We didn't have a digital camera at the time of loss, so I have posted illustrative facsimiles from the internet followed by photos  that I took years later of the actual damage that remains unrepaired 10 years later.

A noticeable difference between my hearing and my husband's makes me believe my hearing was damaged by the loud constant pounding of industrial air movers 24 hours a day, especially after nearly a week of it.

The noise was deafening. My husband was able to get away from it when he went to work, but I had no job to escape to, and no relief from noise so loud it was painful.

Never having experienced a flood before we didn't know where the smell of mould was coming from for years. We finally discovered that the contents in our storage closets had been soaked also. We still smell whiffs of mold when we come in from the garage but have not found the source.

The bottoms of our doors were cut so they could close until they were replaced, so we were told, but then they were never replaced. It took months just for superficial cosmetic repairs, and we have been waiting 10 years for the repairs to our warped doors and sinking floors, which the strata manager referred to as "structural damage" to be completed later, so we were told.

Our home was torn apart for months for just partial repairs, and the strata told us that the outstanding repairs of the "structural damage" to our strata lot would be completed when the construction workers were on site for the building envelope project.

When the time came the repairs to our strata lot were not completed. The strata switched from catastrophizing the damage to trivializing it and started claiming the responsibility for repairs is ours. Whether trivial or catastrophic, whether water damage or structural, the law says the responsibility to repair the damage to our strata lot rests with the strata. It is not ours, and neither is the responsibility for years of delay.

Since then its been a stalemate, leaving us in limbo for over 10 years.

Notwithstanding anything that the law says, most court judgments find ways to defer to strata corporations, and this fact, along with the prohibitive costs for legal fees make it fairly clear for all to see that in reality very few individual owners are likely to have the means to access justice. This has quite naturally spawned generally accepted practices through the strata agency industry and other professions that are inconsistent with the word of law. We find this alarming and believe that this kind of systemic corruption brings the administration of law into disrepute.

We paid strata fees and relied on law for benefits not received. This flood changed our history from 15 years with no unresolved problems in our strata lot to over 10 years of expensive damage, oppression and chronic stress.

The strata left our place in a mess. Two years later, the building envelope project was complete, but the flood repairs to Unit 409 were not. Ten years later we are still waiting despite the fact that the strata's engineer wrote a report confirming that the damage to our strata lot is consistent with water damage.

I have complained constantly and endlessly about the damage to our strata lot. For years I requested copies of strata records which I was persistently denied access to, most particularly concerning water damage, common property, correspondence, finance, and most importantly, the insurance policy.

No insurance investigator attended at the time of loss, the strata has persistently refused to provide a copy of the insurance, the carriers and deductibles for water damage changed from $1,000 to $5,000 on an unknown date during 2003, a $26,000 claim for a less extensive flood from a broken toilet tank in another unit was made less than 2 weeks later, and our comparatively bizarre repair experience in Unit 409 makes us wonder if the strata might not have been insured on July 23, 2003.

Even though the amount of the deductible on the exact date of loss is still an unsolved mystery due to the strata insurance being in a state of flux at the time, the persistent failure to provide us with access to requested strata records and insurance policies, and the strata management company inexplicably quitting after 15 years, the cost of replacement value repairs to 510 and 409 would clearly exceed either of the known deductibles for the beginning, or the end, of that year.

When an insured loss one strata lot is the responsibility of the owner of another strata lot, the strata corporation could seek to recover the deductible from the responsible owner. In this case, the responsible owner was also the person in charge of the strata's insurance.

We paid strata fees to insure in good faith, and the strata's failure to file an insurance claim or even to have an insurance investigator or member of council examine the damage at the time of loss does not to my knowledge relieve the strata corporation of it's obligation to complete the repairs to our strata lot that it started in 2003. So long as the damage exists the strata has an ongoing obligation to repair under our bylaws also, but it persistently fails to do so.

We have more than one problem with that:

1. First, we paid strata fees to insure the fixtures in our strata lot for water damage and the strata failed to make a claim; the same way that we paid for a warranty to cover defects in material, labour, and design and the strata failed to make a claim when the pipes to our taps were not extended to accommodate the rain screen assembly.
2. Second, the strata started the repairs and told us we had to wait for them to be completed, imposed contrived delays and then effectively reneged.
3. Third, the strata's argument that responsibility for repairing the damage is now ours is bogus:
1. we did not in any way cause or contribute to the damage;
2. the cost to repair water damage from a less extensive flood in Unit 227 was about $26,000;
3. our bylaws say it is the strata's duty to not only insure the fixtures, but also to repair the structure of our strata lot and the fences and railings around our patio;
4. the cost to repair the structure of Unit 407 next door to us was about $27,000;
5. as an average owner we understand the structure of a strata lot to mean floors, ceilings, walls, doors, framing and cladding, inside and out; 
6. the Interpretation Act and plain language prevail over the strata's claim that the meaning of structure is restricted to serious and immediate dangers from an engineering or load bearing perspective;
7. hiding structural damage under large quantities of flooring compound is a health hazard;
8. proof that contradictory opinions of the construction and engineering industries lack credibility lies in the leaky condo crisis, disciplinary actions for professional misconduct,  and that it has been impossible to screw our hose onto our taps since repairs in 2005; 
9. the strata has repeatedly provided repairs to other units of less extensive or expressly excluded damage;
10. the strata has a history of significantly unfair responses to our complaints.

The fundamental issue may not be just avoiding responsibility for covering up structural damage and turning it into hidden defects; the most basic fundamental issue seems to be misrepresentations and nondisclosure of inconvenient truths that allow the strata corporation to covertly transfer its rightful obligations onto individual owners, and in this case the innocent victim rather than negligent parties. We hate to think about foreseeable consequences of the unrepaired damage in an earthquake or fire, whether the damage arose out of flooding, settlement, or faulty construction. In any event, the actual and known consequences to us are significantly unfair.

The replacement value repairs that we paid strata fees for were provided to the Pedersen's in unit 227 for their own negligence instead of properly repairing the more extensive damage to 409 caused by the negligence of others.

Pedersen's toilet tank in 227 burst a few days after 510 flooded 409, and the strata promptly provided replacement value repairs to Pedersen's, although the damage to 227 was contained within their own unit and was not nearly as extensive as the damage to 409 coming from the unit above.

Comparing the quantum of damages -  1) the broken toilet tank in 227 flooded one unit only, while the flood in 510 flooded two units, 2) the flood in 227 was from water flowing down to below while the flood in 409 came from water flowing into our strata lot from above, all through our ceilings and down through our walls and doors and floors to the garage two floors below for nobody knows how long, and 3) it took a matter of days to complete replacement repairs in 227 and a matter of months just for cosmetic repairs in 409. Although Pedersen's flood was treated as a greater emergency than 409's, with all things considered I have to conclude on a balance of probabilities that the damage to 409 was FAR more extensive than the damage to 227.

Comparing liability - the flood in 227 was Pedersen's own fault, while the flood in 409 was 510's fault. 

Eleanor Pedersen personally refused my request to address this issue when she was on council and because of that I posted a chronological summary on this blog in 2008 to ensure that management, council, and owners know the facts.

After the AGM in March 2010, when the strata management quit and warned the strata corporation about Al MacLeod I was finally given an opportunity to review what was left of the strata records after Mr. Macleod had hijacked them in 2006 following one of his routine severances from council.

Material that should have been in the strata records was missing, but one of the things I discovered in the accounting records was an expenditure of over $26,000 for repairs to Pedersen's unit for 2003 water damage. As Pedersen's were warned in advance of risk and it was their own toilet tank in their own unit that burst due to their own negligence, the strata should be reimbursed and 409 should be repaired with that money - unless there is a better remedy with a more reasonable, plausible explanation. 

While 409 pays strata fees we are bypassed for insured repairs to our strata lot, bypassed for an equitable patio extension, bypassed for specified pipe extensions to our taps, and bypassed for repairs to gouged siding around our kitchen window. Meanwhile our strata fees were diverted to pay for an extravagant new fireplace for Al Macleod and replacement value repairs for the Pedersen's for damage they themselves are responsible for. 

If Ms. Pedersen or any other owner, on council or off, honestly thinks that persistently delaying completion of the repairs to 409 is reasonably justified and not significantly unfair please provide an explanation to me and sign your name to it. Since the court says we're "all in this together", if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem - and if you are not proud of the role that you are playing, please do something about it and make a motion to complete the repairs to unit 409 without further delay so your motion and the vote on it are in the minutes.

Pretending there is no problem and ignoring the damage does not make it go away, but it does interfere with our lives, devalues our unit, spoils relationships, and leaves scars. If reporting on the situation perpetuates the stigma and notorious reputation of Sunridge Estates which arose when the common property was destroyed and left looking like a war zone for years, then the strata corporation should do something to make it right.

Rant

Hopefully this blog will provide new owners and members of council with the facts they need to make informed decisions - as repair and maintenance obligations of the strata have been avoided by council members and strata agents contrary to the best interests of Owners for years, and we would like this to change. 

This is important. The strata is shirking and offloading more and more of its responsibilities onto vulnerable owners. It has reached the point that it has become normalized, as it is cheaper, faster, and easier to take care of it yourself than to sue the strata corporation. That is why we pay strata fees to cover maintenance and repairs that are the strata's responsibilities and end up paying for those things ourselves, effectively paying twice. The strata acts negligently, or corruptly, causes foreseeable damage, and unfairly offloads the predictable costs and devastation onto us. It is costing tens of thousands of dollars for Unit 409, and it is costing me my health and welfare.

Defective Crane toilet tanks

Defective building structure and tub installation

 

Defective electrical installation

 

 Destruction of landscaping

Destruction of trees and landscaping 

Flood damage to water soluble concrete

Water damage to building substrate
 

Destruction of common property

 

Destruction of trees

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Geotechnical damage 

 

 

Geotechnical damage

Material defects

Voided warranties

 

Destruction of trees 

I am not talking about our own conduct or our own repair and maintenance responsibilities. The maintenance of common property and repairs of strata insured losses or defective building materials or labour that the developer, strata, or other owners are responsible for, or that the strata covers for units other than 409, fall under legislated protections and responsibilities, not the least of which is the duty to act honestly, in good faith, and in the best interests of Owners.

Legislation requires owners to pay strata fees - and in return requires the strata corporation to provide repairs and maintenance of buildings and common property and insurance against major perils such as water escape at full replacement value. We are continually paying strata fees for 25 years and the strata corporation is continually failing to provide the corresponding benefits to us. The strata has been repeatedly diverting strata funds to special interests, many corrupt and destructive, while we keep living with warped doors, damaged walls, and sinking floors. We are persistently subjected to retaliation and harassment for complaining about the damages caused to us by others, negligently, or maliciously.

The bylaws of Sunridge Estates require owners to pay strata fees - and in return requires the strata corporation to repair and maintain the common property - and the structure of the strata lot. We pay strata fees for benefits we are continually deprived of by significantly unfair actions of the strata corporation - including failure to provide insurance coverage or file an insurance claim before the time to do so expired, failure to complete repairs to damaged structures in our strata lot, failure to reinstate trees we paid a special levy to reinstate, failure to reinstate the function of our strata plan patio, and failure to treat us fairly. Council has been breaching duties specified in our bylaws for more than 10 years.

For more than 25 years we paid in good faith for benefits which we are deprived of by the strata corporation's unfair allocation of funds and failure to honour its legal obligations. Our lives should not be made miserable while the use and enjoyment of our property is spoiled for years while we wait for structural problems to create an immediate danger to safety or life before problems are remediated. It is council's duty to order replacement value repairs to the structural areas of our strata lot. Take away our sinking floors, and cracked walls that are the structure of our strata lot and unit 510 would fall straight into our garage.

The unrepaired damage to unit 409 remains. Such repairs are under the sole control of the strata corporation, which forbids individual owners from making repairs on their own. The strata's obligation is a LEGAL one, which is ongoing and unmet, creating over 10 years of disruption in our lives.

*******************************

We wanted to replace our carpets with laminate to relieve my allergies, but couldn't do it until the substrate was repaired. It is still not repaired.

I used to load our patio with plants and flowers every summer, lock the doors to our bedrooms and get a neighbour to come in to water, while we went away on vacation, but we were unable to do that because our warped doors would not stay latched while we waited for the strata for 10 years. We are still waiting, in a living nightmare that never ends.

We can't even screw our hose onto our taps anymore despite paying exorbitant premiums for the Willis warranty on the building envelope. We pay strata fees for insurance but do not get the benefits.

*******************************

The water damage in our unit was caused by the negligence of our former neighbours in Unit 510 above us, and we face the risk of further damage by the negligence of another former neighbour in Unit 411 next to us who eliminated the water shut off access from that strata lot. Although this may not worry anyone else, we would like the strata to provide confirmation that the original water shut off in that strata lot is restored before there is an accident.

*******************************

Repairs that the strata started in 2003 for water damage to our unit from an accident in unit 510 have not been completed; leaving our strata lot with warped doors, cracked walls, and sinking floors for more than 10 years. I have never been able to access to a copy of the relevant strata insurance or the information contained in it; so as usual I'm working as well as I can while wearing a blind fold, without access to material factual data.

I have no way of knowing whether the repair benefits of the insurance policy in effect at the time were incident-based or claim-based; and since the insurance policy was changed at some point in 2003, I don't even know for sure how much the deductible was on July 23, or even if there was strata insurance; however, I do know with certainty that:

• no insurance investigator ever inspected the water damage to the interior of our strata lot;
• strata management allowed the time period for making a claim for this accident to expire;
• access to information I was legally entitled to was denied continually without legitimate reason;
• the 2003 cost of the water damage to unit 227 was approximately $28,000, and
• repairs of similar or greater damage to unit 409 are still not completed.

We would like these repairs completed. PLEASE. We would also like a reasonable explanation for the unfair allocation of funds to repair unit 227 and not unit 409; including the roles of Al MacLeod as a real estate professional and member of council, Gloria McGee as a commercial insurance sales professional and owner of unit 510, and their relationship with each other in the subsequent sale of unit 510 to city councillor and realtor, Mae Reid, who acted in a conflict of interest and diverted strata funds to demolish and reconstruct extra decks, which were added illegally to the common property, but are now cemented in concrete just as Unit 409 is glued in oppression.

Instead of filing the insurance claim strata management made us wait, alleging that the structural portion of the damage to our strata lot's walls, doors, and floors (damage which showed up suddenly just after, and right below, the accident) might be related to settlement and could be part of the building envelope and better included with that project if there was no immediate danger.

*******************************

This proved to be an unreasonable delay tactic and false diversion; the damage was obviously triggered by the accident - but for the accident none of our walls, doors, and floors in that area were cracked or warped or sinking. In 2003 our strata lot had not had a problem with settlement for 15 years - settlement did not become a problem again until about 2006 when the whole complex seemed to start settling after half the trees and most of the plants, all of which had all been planted pursuant to geotechnical restrictive covenants that run with the land, were removed and not replaced.

In any event geotechnical problems provide no protection or remedy for damage known to occur from water. We waited for repairs of the rest of the water damage - but the interior of our strata lot is not part of the building envelope - the water damage repairs to our unit were not completed with that project - or at all.

*******************************

I am unaware of any evidence in the minutes, or otherwise, that members of council ever voted to provide full replacement repairs to unit 227, unit 510, or unit 409 - either when we reported the loss, in the year after, or at any time at all. Council members inexplicably claim to know "nothing about it", and as stated so clearly by the councillor who owns unit 227, "don't want to know" anything about it, in spite of my prompt and repeated reports of damage and ongoing requests for repairs.

 The disparity here fits more into a noticeable pattern of arbitrary strata management, including misrepresentations, unfair allocation of funds, and a history of punitive and oppressive actions against the owners of unit 409.

 

*******************************

 

Property managers enabled by members of strata councils did not abide by the Strata Property Act and penalized Unit 409 for trying to expose their conduct.

Even though the minutes reported on the delays and the strata engineer reported in writing that the unrepaired damage in Unit 409 is consistent with water damage, councils are presumably fueled Unit 409's history of sinking and fear arising out of over $50,000 for repairs over a decade ago to Unit 407 for structural damage and to Unit 227 for water damage, and no evidence of strata insurance on July 23, 2003.

Persistent failure to provide insurance records and generally accepted practices in trades and professions with intent to control discount the word of law. Worst of all, strata lawyers abusing strata legislation and defending unfair treatment and libelous character assignation provides continual support in a chain of abuse that we have never been able to control.

Despite professionals through the strata agency, insurance, construction, and legal industries holding out interpretations of convenience that conflict with the Strata Property Act and Interpretation Act, the word of law is not a guideline, it is LAW, and if it is not true, it is at least 

 

 SUPPOSED TO BE THE LAW!