Condo Living-The Worst Kind of Canadian Living?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Urban SFH > urban condo > rural SFH > suburban SFH > suburban condo.

IMO of course (if we're strictly talking about ownership of a property). But point being, there's a little more nuance than just "condo bad/condo good". Even just amongst condos within a given area there can be a huge variation based on building type and other conditions (eg. heritage loft condo vs. investor-focused high rise. Well-run small building vs. ghost hotel, etc).

Out of all of those I'd label the urban FH the best. On small lots so you know your neighbours yet you're in control of your home and yard. I'd be willing to be that all the homes in this picture have at least a basement suite (or are divided up into suites). As such, they provide truly affordable housing options that market newbuilds can never match.

[IMG]houses by bcborn, on Flickr[/IMG]

my photo

[casper]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Isn't that a product of all the mismanaged condo properties from the 1970s? Special assessments are killers for homeowner and property values alike.

There's quite a few Toronto residential condominiums with 5 or less units in the list I have. Property and construction costs are far too high to expect new triplexes to resolving the missing middle. The unit price will be nearly as much as the original single family home.

I use to own a strata (townhouse) in Saskatoon about 15 years ago. Purchased when under construction and was the second owner to move in. So ended up on the board.

At the time Saskatchewan required every strata to engage an engineering firm to do a study that defined the maintenance plan with an estimate of what would be required in the reserve fund. I don't remember the interval but the study would need to be periodically updated. During the first few years most repairs were warranty items with the builder. We did have to make significant increases to the strata fees to build up a reserve fund.

My impression was the study was conservative. For example a 25 year roof was expected to replaced every 25 years. In practice it may not last to long beyond that but you may get a few extra years.

I was surprised when moving back to BC. Looking at some of the strata units in Victoria. The requirement for the engineering study was a new thing being phased into BC. Some of the units I looked at had a lot of maintenance issues and a fairly small reserve fund.

I went for a 70s building but stayed away from anything that did not have a good reserve fund and lacked a track record or keeping things in good repair.

BC had the entire leaky Condo phase where the remediation to remove mold and redo the building envelope caused a lot of special assessments. There are a few building like that around that are disasters.

[hipster duck]

Originally Posted by samne

My first home that I bought was a condo townhouse. Was great, some exterior building elements along with common areas nicely maintained. Not really any facilities to maintain so fees were pretty low(under $300/mo.)

I was on the condo board, which was an experience dealing with the property managers and owners trying to scam extra repairs and renovations. Can see how this can get abused.

When I lived in a condo, I wasn't part of the board but I saw some things in the minutes that raised my eyebrows a bit.

We lived in relatively small (<100 unit) reinforced concrete building in Vancouver. One of the owners was a contractor, and he volunteered to do repairs to common areas and fix minor issues. I don't know what kind of deal he got but, after he left, the board had to raise our strata fee to cover a paid replacement, and they admitted that they had never budgeted for this possibility before. Or, at least that's the reason they told us for raising the fees.

Condo boards are a lesson that small democracies are often a bad way of running things.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by hipster duck

When I lived in a condo, I wasn't part of the board but I saw some things in the minutes that raised my eyebrows a bit.

We lived in relatively small (<100 unit) reinforced concrete building in Vancouver. One of the owners was a contractor, and he volunteered to do repairs to common areas and fix minor issues. I don't know what kind of deal he got but, after he left, the board had to raise our strata fee to cover a paid replacement, and they admitted that they had never budgeted for this possibility before. Or, at least that's the reason they told us for raising the fees.

Condo boards are a lesson that small democracies are often a bad way of running things.

The flip side of that is who would want to get stuck running a large strata when you get paid nothing and it is a thankless job?

And turning that task completely over to "professionals" would send strata fees through the roof.

[whatnext]

Case (literally) in point:

B.C. strata ordered to conduct secret probe to catch renegade smoker
Two complainants of second-hand smoke seeping into their unit had claim largely dismissed. However, their strata council has to do more to catch whoever is smoking, causing nuisance, said CRT adjudicator
Graeme Wood
about an hour ago

The strata of a large corporation has been ordered to conduct a secret investigation and testing of second-hand smoke that resulted in a small claim at the Civil Resolution Tribunal.

Tribunal adjudicator Garth Cambrey told the unnamed strata council to attend the eighth-floor unit of complainants Daryl Foster and Tanya Foster to conduct testing for a two-week period.

Cambrey further ordered the testing to be done without informing any other residents, in order to potentially catch the source of smoke.

The order stems from a complaint lodged by the Fosters against neighbour Kristine Clark, who lives on the third floor of the condominium tower. But Cambrey found the Fosters did not prove Clark was the source of smoke, from her balcony.

Clark denied violating the strata’s nuisance bylaw and told the tribunal the Fosters refused to deal with her directly, according to Cambrey’s Dec.11 ruling. Cambrey called the Fosters’ claim “circumstantial and speculative at best.”....

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/h...smoker-7956511

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Case (literally) in point:

B.C. strata ordered to conduct secret probe to catch renegade smoker
Two complainants of second-hand smoke seeping into their unit had claim largely dismissed. However, their strata council has to do more to catch whoever is smoking, causing nuisance, said CRT adjudicator
Graeme Wood
about an hour ago

The strata of a large corporation has been ordered to conduct a secret investigation and testing of second-hand smoke that resulted in a small claim at the Civil Resolution Tribunal.

Tribunal adjudicator Garth Cambrey told the unnamed strata council to attend the eighth-floor unit of complainants Daryl Foster and Tanya Foster to conduct testing for a two-week period.

Cambrey further ordered the testing to be done without informing any other residents, in order to potentially catch the source of smoke.

The order stems from a complaint lodged by the Fosters against neighbour Kristine Clark, who lives on the third floor of the condominium tower. But Cambrey found the Fosters did not prove Clark was the source of smoke, from her balcony.

Clark denied violating the strata’s nuisance bylaw and told the tribunal the Fosters refused to deal with her directly, according to Cambrey’s Dec.11 ruling. Cambrey called the Fosters’ claim “circumstantial and speculative at best.”....

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/h...smoker-7956511

Cigarette smoke from five storeys down?

Living in a condo can mean neighbours who break rules or are simply nuts.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by kwoldtimer

Living in a condo can mean neighbours who break rules or are simply nuts.

You don't say... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...suit-1.7025394

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

You don't say... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...suit-1.7025394

That female lawyer (Arbabi) sounds like a real piece of work.

....An affidavit of service filed by McLelland says when a process server knocked on Arbabi's door to serve her with McLelland's response to the claim, the woman who answered said she was not Naomi Arbabi.

The process server writes in the affidavit that she found Arbabi's photo online, and confirmed it was the person she'd just met, so she emailed Arbabi to ask for an explanation.

Arbabi responded: "When you ask i if i am Naomi Arbabi the answer is always no as Naomi Arbabi is an incorporated name and does not refer to a living breathing woman."

According to the affidavit, Arbabi expanded on her theory in another email later the same day, explaining that Naomi Arbabi was a "dead entity corporation" created by her birth certificate.

"I, a woman, am not Naomi Arbabi, but Naomi Arbabi is the name i am called. There is a subtle but crucial difference between the two. Unfortunately, this is not common knowledge yet," she wrote...

[someone123]

My neighbours from hell upped their game and seem to have added a second barkier dog now (they also scream at each other sometimes and slam things at all hours). When I made a noise complaint the lady said she was the true victim as I was causing her stress by complaining.

Almost everybody is reasonable and most neighbours cause 0 issues but depending on the setup you can have a lot of adjacent units and it only takes one to cause headaches. Townhouses are a lot better for this. We had another flophouse from hell a few years ago with too many tenants who were smoking pot and playing music for about 18 hours a day while their apartment became overrun with mice. I am surprised we haven't seen more of that.

[casper]

Originally Posted by whatnext

"I, a woman, am not Naomi Arbabi, but Naomi Arbabi is the name i am called. There is a subtle but crucial difference between the two. Unfortunately, this is not common knowledge yet," she wrote...[/I]

You are brining back memory of Philosophy of Language class many years ago in university.

I still remember the class well. There were perhaps 15 of us in the class. There was a priest. There was a fellow that went on to be a call-in radio show host. Several who were destined to go on to law school. A few of us from a computer science background that had an interest in natural language processing. I for one was happy to never study that subject again.

[whatnext]

So many condo-living friends have water leak horror stories. Here's a very Vancouver one:

B.C. strata owner to pay for leaky wine cooler water damage
Owner agreed leak came from cooler but objected to strata going ahead with work to fix issue.
Jeremy Hainsworth

A Vancouver homeowner whose unit had a leak in a wine cooler won’t be getting any cash back from her strata, B.C.’s Civil Resolution Tribunal has ruled.

Fei Ying Zhang took her strata to the tribunal after it charged her $2,575 for an invoice from a contractor hired to look into the leak.

Recommended reads for you:
B.C. mom collecting $17K in benefits seeks support from 'ultra-high net worth' ex-husband
Drought conditions force BC Hydro to rely on power purchases
In June 2022, water leaked in Zhang’s strata lot, tribunal member Micah Carmody said in a Dec. 18 decision.

Carmody said the contractors determined the leak came from a wine cooler.

Zhang said she should not have to pay the chargeback for various reasons; primarily, she said, because the contractors did unnecessary work because they failed to realize the leak came from the cooler....

....Zhang was not living in the unit June 4, 2022, when her property manager, Coloumb Wang, discovered water pooling on the living room floor.

Wang mopped the water up, but a small amount of water continued to seep out from the kitchen island toward the living room.

Wang informed Zhang about the leak and called the strata emergency line. The strata manager called a contractor which sent a plumber the same day....

https://www.vancouverisawesome.com/h...damage-8005742

[lio45]

That’s one of the downsides of condos: you’re not alone in charge. The argument that the board can and should step in and fix YOUR leak ASAP and send you the bill, is a valid one. Conversely, in a privately owned building, you can actually decide to control the leak or even endure some water damage, until it can be fixed for free, rather than immediately summoning an expensive plumbing company.

[yaletown_fella]

The condo fees for units in Village by the Grange , which was topped out in 1978 seem quite reasonable compared to most buildings in Toronto. They also include everything except for hydro & internet (I can't recall if some kind of a cable package is still included)

I'm considering purchasing a unit in this building as a hedge against potential rising rents in Toronto proper.

What are peoples experiences with Del properties management ?

My main concern is the possibility of special assessments and roaches. (I checked under the sink of the unit, and in the hinges of cabinets during the open house and couldnt see any signs of bug activity)

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

The condo fees for units in Village by the Grange , which was topped out in 1978 seem quite reasonable compared to most buildings in Toronto. They also include everything except for hydro & internet (I can't recall if some kind of a cable package is still included)

I'm considering purchasing a unit in this building as a hedge against potential rising rents in Toronto proper.

What are peoples experiences with Del properties management ?

My main concern is the possibility of special assessments and roaches. (I checked under the sink of the unit, and in the hinges of cabinets during the open house and couldnt see any signs of bug activity)

Interesting, roaches are a big concern in Toronto? I hadn’t heard of that in Vancouver, silverfish maybe.

[GeneralLeeTPHLS]

Yeah, roaches and bed bugs are big concerns for apartment or condo living in Toronto.

Even mice to a lesser degree.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by casper

You are brining back memory of Philosophy of Language class many years ago in university.

I still remember the class well. There were perhaps 15 of us in the class. There was a priest. There was a fellow that went on to be a call-in radio show host. Several who were destined to go on to law school. A few of us from a computer science background that had an interest in natural language processing. I for one was happy to never study that subject again.

Looks like the lawyer Arbabi was even too much for lawyers to tolerate:

Vancouver lawyer suspended after accusations of pseudolegal 'paper terrorism' over neighbour's deck
Naomi Arbabi's suspension 'necessary to protect the public,' Law Society of B.C. says
Rhianna Schmunk · CBC News · Posted: Jan 02, 2024

A Vancouver lawyer accused of filing a groundless pseudolegal lawsuit against her neighbour over a glass deck divider has been banned from practising law in British Columbia while the province's law society investigates a complaint.

Naomi Arbabi was temporarily suspended on Dec. 28 after the board of the Law Society of B.C. "determined that extraordinary action was necessary to protect the public," according to an email sent to CBC News on Tuesday.

"The suspension will last until the order is rescinded or varied," the email read.

The temporary ban is the latest development in a legal back-and-forth between Arbabi and her neighbour, Colleen McLelland, which began with accusations of trespassing on roof space and developed into what McLelland describes as a fight based on debunked, pseudolegal arguments....

...For her part, Arbabi claimed that Canadian judges who have ruled on OPCA litigants don't really grasp the concepts of "natural law" and "trespass" that she bases her lawsuit on.

"Many courts, including the claimant, have trouble understanding what is often referred to as natural law. ... Natural law — or as i call it, just law — is that which is so obvious that it is not required to be written down into an act or statute," Arbabi said....

...In November, Arbabi agreed to meet with a CBC reporter to discuss her lawsuit, but upon arrival, declined to answer any questions. Instead, she read out a notice warning of consequences if a story were to be published without her consent.

"As such harm is a very grievous trespass, i, shall claim remedy in the amount of $500,000 for such trespass plus $5,000 a day for as long as the trespass continues," the notice read.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...suit-1.7072762

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by casper

I use to own a strata (townhouse) in Saskatoon about 15 years ago. Purchased when under construction and was the second owner to move in. So ended up on the board.

At the time Saskatchewan required every strata to engage an engineering firm to do a study that defined the maintenance plan with an estimate of what would be required in the reserve fund. I don't remember the interval but the study would need to be periodically updated. During the first few years most repairs were warranty items with the builder. We did have to make significant increases to the strata fees to build up a reserve fund.

My impression was the study was conservative. For example a 25 year roof was expected to replaced every 25 years. In practice it may not last to long beyond that but you may get a few extra years.

I was surprised when moving back to BC. Looking at some of the strata units in Victoria. The requirement for the engineering study was a new thing being phased into BC. Some of the units I looked at had a lot of maintenance issues and a fairly small reserve fund.

I went for a 70s building but stayed away from anything that did not have a good reserve fund and lacked a track record or keeping things in good repair.

BC had the entire leaky Condo phase where the remediation to remove mold and redo the building envelope caused a lot of special assessments. There are a few building like that around that are disasters.

The Engineering study requirement is peak Canada. We spend $5k every few years to find out if we need to save $200k or $250k a year well now $205k or $255k. In the end it's still just a prediction and thousands are spent on studies that add no value.