As demonstrated in this Postmedia article - age restrictions are legal in the great province of Alberta (the only province where this is permitted).  As such, if your life circumstances change, be it from pregnancy or your 20 yr old deadbeat son returns - sorry, the condo board has legal standing to ask you to leave.

The CondoSensei's take?  Don't look at age restricted buildings for a whole host of reasons - most of which revolve around it limiting the value of your condo:
​

• CMHC will likely deny coverage to you the buyer on age restricted buildings - limiting certain buyers from being able to buy your unit
• Age restrictions severely reduce the ability to rent your unit
• If you choose to sell your unit one day, the number of people able to buy your unit will be limited, thereby reducing the price you can get for the unit.
• In the case of 21 and over buildings - I'd happily take an infant over a 22 yr old who's discover the bass knob on his new 5,000 watt home theatre setup.

~CondoSensei

For many years, I've read complaints from condo owners alleging that their Condo Board, Property Managers, Contractors, the Illuminati, and maybe even the doorman were in some sort of grand conspiracy to defraud them all...

Turns out, some of them might have been right.  A Globe and Mail article today (click here) reveals that the Competition Bureau of Canada is looking to these allegations.  This is a pay article, so in case you can't read it, here's a short summary:

• The Competition Bureau is looking into allegations that Contractors have engaged in bid rigging and collusion to artificially inflate the cost of services and quotes provided to Condo Board and Property Managers.  These are criminal charges under the Competition Act.
• The Bureau is targeting 144 condos in the GTA only at present (listed in the Globe article)
• Details are still confidential, but legal experts seem to think the Bureau is targeting the Contractors only, *NOT* Condo Board members or Property Managers.
• Condo Boards and their Property Managers get the joy of producing 10 years of records for the Competition (in my mind this would include records of all quotes and bids received, invoices for the winning bid, cancelled cheques, and Board minutes)

The CondoSensei's take on this.

• Wow.  For those "Truthers" in condo buildings that have been accusing their Boards / Property Managers of this for years - this is going to be like finding an Obama birth certificate from Kenya...   Boards / Property Managers should expect a lot of questions on this from owners.
• While I do believe that the majority of Property Managers, and Board Members act in good faith and are not "dirty", I have a feeling that as the Bureau continues to investigate, we may see a few crooked Property Managers and Board Members implicated as well.  
• Just an Ontario and a GTA problem?  I'm guessing as the Bureau investigates, probably not.
• Property Managers are supposed to keep all of the above mentioned records on behalf of the Board.  Some Property Managers are meticulous about this but from my experience..... a lot are not.  Especially if they have switched Property Managers in those 10 years at all.  I suspect the Bureau is going to find a whole lot of nothing in terms of records they actually receive.

I have a feeling this is only the tip of the iceberg....stay tuned...

A good article (link to article) referencing some good thoughts from the excellent condo lawyer Robert Noce of Miller Thomson on VRBO and Condos / Strata and the problems they cause .  Noise, security issues, parties - all can potentially (not all VRBO / AirBNB users are bad) increase with short term rentals that leave condos more like hotels than residences.

I'll agree with the article's conclusion - effective enforcement of up to date bylaws is your solution.  To do this your bylaws will have to be constantly updated for new technologies and trends.  If your condo / strata is trundling along with some from 1967 - you will have little or not means to deal with your problem.

See our related articles on updating your bylaws (link) and what to look for in a set of bylaws when you buy a condo (here)

​
~CondoSensei

 1) CBC Story Link 2) Metro Story Link

This was a small new story that wasn't commonly picked up by most media sources.  Co-operators, (one of the large insurers in Canada) has decided to drop coverage of condos.  Back in March Aviva, another big insurer also backed away from insuring condos (link to Financial Post article) in Quebec.  


However - if you know condos, and you know insurance, then you know this is very big deal.  This is because it impacts the ability of Condo Boards to get condo insurance at all, let alone get reasonable rates for their buildings.  Put simply, there's one less company out there willing to take on the risk of your condo - and there weren't that many to begin with.  And with less competition, premiums paid by condos are likely to rise, and insurers may be even pickier.

Why have insurance companies started running from covering condos?  Bottom line, the anticipated payouts for claims are exceeding the anticipated premiums to be collected by an unacceptable amount.  They're losing too much on claims, or at least they think they will be.  This violates a basic principle of the insurance industry: the premiums of the many - should pay for the claims of the few.

Is it, as the Financial Post article suggests, due to a wave of "shoddily built" condos?  It's fair to say it's a contributing factors, though perhaps not quite as sensationalistic as the FP article might make it seem.  Water penetration issues and the resultant mold issues have the potential to cause great and costly damage to condos, as detailed many times here on StrataSense.  I can certainly agree that stricter building codes and inspection during construction by municipal authorities (and other regulatory bodies) would certainly help the issue of poorly built condos.  Improvements to the Provincial Condo / Strata Acts to mandate better levels of funding for Reserve Funds, or establishment of them should be a good first start.

What can Condo Boards do about this?  Not a lot other than make you have a good insurance broker working for you, that's always working to ensure you have the best coverage for the lowest rates.  Good brokers will go that extra mile and explain unique things that you as a Board may be doing to reduce claims (if that is what you're doing).  However one thing that all Boards should be doing is avoiding small claims against insurance, particularly for water damage.  Several small claime may lead to you getting dumped by your insurer.   I would even consider small special assessments if necessary to avoid water claims wherever possible.  Save insurance for the truly big cases. 

Boards should also consider setting aside funds to self insure against smaller claims, and increasing deductibles.  Saves the Board money in the long run, but you'll have to resist the temptation to raid the "saved funds" for other uses....

~CondoSensei

OK, we've all seen it either in TV or movies.... someone (usually in New York) has to....interview to be able to buy an apartment?!?  Generally that's a very foreign concept to us in Canada - so where does it come from?  

The answer is that those desirable glam places you see on TV are referring to co-op buildings, vs the more familar condominium property in Canada.  What's the difference?  See the below link to a great article on both.

Link to article

From the perspective of the existing owner or Board member, Co-ops have a tremendous advantage over condos in that the Board gets to select who gets to live in the building. Keep in mind these are often in older, more desirable and well located buildings - so people are willing to submit themselves to this process. There are horror stories about the interview process to be selected - you don't just roll up and buy a unit like you do with a condomimium.  Typically the Board is screening for financially sound, like minded people that will fit in with the existing resident base.  

Hardly egalitarian, and a horror for buyers, but for current residents and the Board this (and the desire of residents not to get thrown out of the co-op) generally leads to a higher acceptance of living in close quarters under a common set of rules.

~CondoSensei

A very unusual story where a BC Couple was forced to sell their condo by the courts.  All this over not liking your parking spot?

Click here for link






A Port Coquitlam, B.C., husband and wife are losing their condo following a six-year court battle involving 50 appearances before 28 different judges in dozens of courts — all over their apartment's parking spot.

In a 14-page ruling, B.C. Supreme Court Justice Christopher Grauer says the problems began in August 2006 when a dispute over parking at the condo complex at 2378 Rindall Ave. led the strata council to declare the parking area common property and assign specific parking spots to units.