top of page
White Columns
< Back

Kulik v. York Region Condominium Corporation No. 772 - 2020 ONCAT 27 - 2020-08-11

Corporation:

KYRCC 772

Date:

2020-08-11

Under:

CAT Decisions - Decision
Fees, Costs, Penalties

Summary:

The case of "Kulik v York Region Condominium Corporation No.772" was brought to the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) because the Respondent refused to provide the Applicant with requested records, including core and non-core records. The Board requested payment for preparing and producing the core records before releasing them, which was inconsistent with the Condominium Act, 1998 and its regulations. Despite the Board's error being unintentional, the CAT ruled that the request for payment was effectively a refusal to provide the records. The CAT ordered the Respondent to pay a $300 penalty and $200 in costs to the Applicant.

The case highlights the importance of proper handling of requests for records by condominium boards, as well as the need for a good-faith effort to comply with the Condominium Act and its regulations. It also emphasizes the role of the CAT in ensuring compliance with the Act and protecting the rights of unit owners.

Verdict:

the quick verdict/lesson from the case "Kulik v York Region Condominium Corporation No. 772" is that the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) imposed a penalty on the respondent for refusing to provide requested records to the unit owner. The lesson here is that condominium boards must promptly provide records as requested by unit owners, and refusal to do so could result in penalties.

Takeaways:

Refusal to Provide Records: The case highlights the importance of condominium boards promptly providing requested records to unit owners. The board's request for payment before releasing core records was deemed a refusal to provide the records, which is not in compliance with the Condominium Act, 1998.

Penalty and Costs: The Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT) imposed a penalty of $300 and costs of $200 on the respondent (York Region Condominium Corporation No. 772). This underscores the consequences of non-compliance and the role of the CAT in ensuring accountability.

Reasonable Excuse for Refusal: The respondent argued that the failure to provide the records promptly was an unintentional error and that they had an honest intention to comply with the Act. However, the CAT ruled that the delay and the request for payment constituted a refusal, regardless of intent.

Recommendations: 

Timely and Compliant Record Provision: Condominium boards should ensure they promptly provide requested records to unit owners in compliance with the Condominium Act, 1998. It is important to understand the legal requirements regarding access to records and not place unnecessary barriers or request payment before releasing core records.

Training and Education for Condominium Boards: It is crucial for condominium boards to receive proper training and education on their responsibilities under the Condominium Act. This includes understanding the rights of unit owners to access records without fees in certain circumstances. By being informed about the legislation, boards can avoid unintentional errors and ensure compliance with the Act.

Good Faith Communication and Avoiding Obstruction: Condominium boards should strive to maintain good faith communication with unit owners and promptly address any concerns or requests. Unintentional errors or delays in providing requested records may be viewed as obstruction. Boards should exercise diligence in their processes and avoid unnecessary delays or misplacement of documentation.

bottom of page