Don Cayo
Sun
B.C.’s Strata Property Act is 10 years old — young by the standards of often-mouldy old laws — but it’s due, or overdue, for revision.
A quarter of all homes in B.C. — half in some cities — are strata units, and the strata councils that administer them can wield immense power over the owners’ lives. The councils are a de facto fourth level of government that may decide details as personal as the number, type and size of your pets — even if you can keep your home and have kids. Not to mention a host of factors that affect the value of the largest investment many of us ever make.
While it’s true that many of us strata-unit dwellers enjoy our homes and live in harmony with our neighbours, there are myriad tales of strata corporations — and strata communities — that become mired in disputes and dysfunction. Neighbours turn nasty, lawsuits grow acrimonious and expensive, and dreams are shattered and property values wither as some owners spar or stall over needed repairs.
The Vancouver Island Strata Owners Association has long been lobbying for a public review of the laws governing strata ownership and occupancy — something promised by then minister of finance Gary Collins back in 2003, but never acted on. So the association has produced a report, based on a series of meetings with and written submissions from various strata-owners groups.
Although the association’s focus is Vancouver Island, the issues at the report’s core will resonate across the province. And while some will take issue with specific recommendations, they’re all prime topics for debate and discussion.
Among the things it wants new legislation to address are:
– Governance issues such as clear rules on what information strata councils must provide, better and cheaper dispute resolution, penalties for non-compliance, and better ways to ensure buildings are kept in good repair.
– Clearer rules for licensed strata managers, including standards of care, provisions to deal with conflict of interest, and simpler mechanisms to cancel a strata management contract.
– Financial reporting matters including reporting standards, audit provisions, tougher requirements for contingency funds, and access to strata meetings and minutes.
– Several related measures to redefine the relationship between developers and the people who buy into early phases of a development. The aim is to shift the balance from a perceived advantage for developers, and to protect buyers from everything ranging from fraudulent misrepresentation to getting stuck with the full cost of amenities that are later shared by subsequent buyers.
– A provision to protect strata buyers from paying twice when a strata corporation contracts out for services such as garbage collection, yet the municipality taxes the owners at the full rate.
– An end to a requirement for unanimous consent to change how fees or assessments are shared among owners, in order to better reflect the cost of amenities or problems that affect some strata homes more than others in the same development.
I don’t imagine this list to be the be-all and end-all. I suspect, for example, that many developers would want to weigh in with a different perspective on how the law should deal with the relationship between the people who buy strata units and those who build them. And lots of other people might have different issues or different views.
But that’s exactly the kind of back-and-forth that a public process invites. And I see this report as a good starting point for a full and healthy discussion.
I don’t know why this issue fell off the provincial government’s agenda — possibly because it was Collins’s project and he resigned from government before it made it to the top of his priority pile. But, whatever the reason, it’s time for a new champion to take it up again.
© The Vancouver Sun 2008
