Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Gagnon v. Carleton Condominium Corporation No. 331 - 2021 ONCAT 56 - 2021-06-25
Corporation:
GCCC 331
Date:
2021-06-25
Summary:
the case of Gagnon v Carleton Condominium Corporation No 331 involved an application who claimed that the Respondent failed to provide requested records to her and had altered records related to board meeting minutes. The applicant alleged that the Respondent also proposed unreasonable fees for non-core records and requested for a penalty to be assessed against the Respondent. The tribunal found that the Respondent provided all records to the Applicant, but failed to keep adequate records of the Periodic Information Certificate (PIC). Furthermore, the tribunal ruled that the Respondent proposed an unreasonable fee and ordered the fee to be amended. The Applicant was awarded costs, but no penalty was assessed. The case falls under the dispute types of access to records, adequacy of records, entitlement to records, fees, costs and penalties and Law Order under section 144 of the Condominium Act 1998.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Decision
Access to Records
Adequacy of Records
Entitlement to Records
Fees, Costs, Penalties
Verdict:
in the case Gagnon v Carleton Condominium Corporation No 331, the Condominium Authority Tribunal found that the respondent did not refuse to provide the requested records to the applicant, but the respondent failed to keep adequate records and proposed an unreasonable fee. The tribunal ordered the fee to be amended, awarded costs to the applicant, and did not assess a penalty. This case highlights the importance of maintaining accurate records and responding promptly to requests for records in condominium management.
Takeaways:
The case involved an application against Carleton Condominium Corporation No 331 regarding the Respondent's alleged failure to provide requested records and alteration of board meeting minutes.
The tribunal found that the Respondent did provide all the requested records to the Applicant, but it was revealed that they had not kept adequate records of the Periodic Information Certificate (PIC).
The Respondent was found to have proposed an unreasonable fee for non-core records, and as a result, the tribunal ordered that the fee be amended.
No penalty was assessed against the Respondent, but the Applicant was awarded costs.
The case falls under the dispute types of access to records, adequacy of records, entitlement to records, fees, costs, and penalties under section 144 of the Condominium Act 1998.
Recommendations:
Improve Record-Keeping Practices: In order to comply with the Condominium Act and avoid potential disputes or penalties, it is crucial for condominium corporations to maintain accurate and adequate records. This includes promptly responding to record requests, ensuring all core records are properly stored and accessible, and addressing any errors or discrepancies in important documents such as the Periodic Information Certificate (PIC).
Reasonable Fee Assessment: When responding to record requests, it is important for condominium corporations to propose reasonable fees for the production of non-core records. This will help maintain transparency and avoid disputes with owners or applicants. It is advisable to review and assess the cost of providing the requested records based on the Condominium Act and any applicable regulations.
Timely Communication and Transparency: To ensure a smooth process and avoid any perceived refusals, communication with applicants or owners requesting records should be prompt and transparent. Timely responses should be provided within the required timeframe stipulated by the Condominium Act. If there are any delays or issues in providing the records, clear and detailed explanations should be provided to the requesting party to maintain trust and avoid potential conflicts.