Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Heading 5
Choose your role:
Ji v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1611 - 2022 ONCAT 42 - 2022-04-29
Corporation:
JTSCC 1611
Date:
2022-04-29
Summary:
In the case of Ji v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1611, the Applicant sought incident reports related to noise complaints. The Respondent initially failed to respond to the request within the required 30 days, leading to a refusal to provide records. Subsequently, the Respondent provided some incident reports but claimed that others did not exist. The Applicant failed to establish the necessity for the creation of incident reports for specific dates. While the Respondent's staffing change was cited as an explanation for the delay, it was not deemed a reasonable excuse. The Tribunal ordered a $150 penalty and the recovery of $75 in filing fees by the Applicant.
Under:
CAT Decisions - Decision
Entitlement to Records
Fees, Costs, Penalties
Records Retention
Verdict:
In the case of Ji v. Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 1611 (2022 ONCAT 42), the tribunal ruled that the Respondent's failure to respond to a records request within the prescribed timeline constituted a refusal to provide records. Although the Respondent later provided the records, they were ordered to pay a $150 penalty for the delay. This case underscores the importance of timely responses to records requests within condominium corporations and serves as a caution against repeated delays in responding to such requests.
Takeaways:
Records Request Dispute: This case revolves around an Applicant's request for incident reports related to noise complaints made to the condominium corporation. The Applicant sought reports for specific dates, which were not initially provided by the Respondent.
Refusal to Provide Records: The Respondent failed to respond to the records request within the required 30 days, resulting in a refusal to provide the records. However, the Respondent later provided some of the requested incident reports.
Penalty Imposed: The Tribunal ordered a $150 penalty against the Respondent for refusing to provide records without a reasonable excuse. This penalty was considered appropriate, given the Respondent's history of failing to reply to records requests within the prescribed timeline.
Caution for Timely Responses: The decision emphasizes the importance of timely responses to records requests and warns the Respondent against making a habit of delayed responses.
Filing Fee Recovery: The Applicant was allowed to recover the filing fees they paid before receiving the records, totaling $75.
Recommendations:
Condominium corporations should prioritize timely responses to records requests, ensuring compliance with legal requirements. Failure to respond promptly may lead to penalties and unnecessary disputes.
Applicants seeking records from condominium corporations must clearly establish the necessity and existence of the requested records. Providing concrete evidence to support their claims can strengthen their case.
The tribunal should consider the specific circumstances of each case when determining penalties for record-related issues. While penalties may be appropriate for delays, the severity of the penalty should reflect the extent of the delay and any mitigating factors.