Social Housing in Condominiums
Stable Rates of Home Ownership, Coupled With a Growing Population, Have Resulted in an Overall Increase in Rental Demand.
Stable Rates of Home Ownership, Coupled With a Growing Population, Have Resulted in an Overall Increase in Rental Demand.
It’s reasonable for a tenant to expect privacy with respect to the inside of their apartment, but it’s also reasonable for a landlord to sometimes want to be able to document the condition of the inside of the unit. Taking photos of the inside of the unit will be the most effective way to do so.
A recent decision of the Landlord and Tenant Board (the “Board”) has drawn some interest in the social housing community. By way of some context, some time ago, a supportive housing provider (the “SHP”) entered into a lease with an owner of an apartment building (the “Private Sector Landlord”) to rent a rental unit. The purpose of the lease, from the SHP’s perspective, was to sublet the rental unit to a tenant who participated in the SHP’s programs. This is a fairly common arrangement for social housing providers. For reasons that I do not know, and that do not matter for the purposes of this discussion, the Private Sector Landlord applied to the Board for an order to terminate the SHP’s tenancy because it, or someone it permitted in the residential complex, substantially interfered with, among other things, the reasonable enjoyment of the Private Sector Landlord.
On June 30, 2008 , with the enactment of Bill 107 , the Human Rights Code Amendment Act, the Ontario government effected changes t o O n t a r i o ’s Human Rights Code. The result of these changes was a significant revamp in the way in which human rights are protected and enforced, and how human rights complaints are received and processed. For condominium corporations, these changes are important, as they require condominium owners, directors and managers to adapt to a new way of handling human rights issues.
As many of you are aware, my practice involves both condominium law and insurance law. These two practice areas often intersect, sometimes with interesting results. In that regard, our firm was recently involved in a personal injury matter involving an elderly condominium unit owner who was attacked on the common elements by an unleashed dog. She suffered serious injuries as a result, and we brought an action on her behalf against the dog owners and the condominium corporation.
As many of you are aware, we are regularly asked to prepare case law updates for the magazine. In the course of preparing these updates, we review dozens of condominium cases. However, even if we did not prepare these updates, we would still review these cases, not just because the facts of these cases are often interesting but also because it is important for us as condominium lawyers to be up-to-date on the latest developments in the law so that we can properly advise our condominium corporation clients.
A responsible condominium community reasonably ought to have, and some would say must have, a condominium corporation that behaves responsibly in carrying out its duties. So, what are the duties of a condominium corporation? Depending on one’s mood, one might be tempted to say “to alternatively aggravate and frustrate everyone who comes into contact with it.” However, a more technically accurate (if less satisfying) answer would be “to manage the property and the assets, if any, of the corporation on behalf of the owners.” This is set out in section 17 of the Condominium Act, 1998.
As most people reading this are likely aware, ACMO has three classes of membership: Professional (property managers), Corporate (property management companies), and Associate (other professionals in the condominium industry). ACMO Associate Members include contractors, service providers, suppliers and many others who do business with condominium corporations.
It is hardly news to a board of directors or a condominium manager that condominium corporations require contributions from owners, in the way of common expenses, to be able to function. Common expenses are, in the words of Justice Lane in York Condominium Corporation #482 v. Christiansen, “the life blood of the [condominium] corporation.”
Get a free consultation