Why has the Spadina Condominium Board refused for years to allow residents to review invoices, bank records and other source documents of the Corporation? Evidence does exist that corporation funds have been used by the commercial owner to pay for improvements to their own units as well as other illegitimate expenses. It is also true that many expenditures of the Corporation have been illegitimate and conducted without the required approvals as specified in the Bylaws and Act.

Residents must be permitted access to all financial records of the Corporation.

For the many who are not familiar with financial statements, they may not recognize the absence of a Balance Sheet and Reserve Fund Report with the monthly reports disclosed. They reflect where most of our money is being spent. Why is this being concealed from residents? Unfortunately, the commercial owner owns and is in control of the management company and dictates what financial information is disclosed (and not disclosed) to residents throughout the year. The treasurer unfortunately accepts this conflict of interest. Residential Board members avoid any question of this practise and simply accept monthly reports as reported, whether by ignorance, intentional neglect, and most likely both. This year after year absence of complete financial reports must come to an end.

The Board is requested (and obligated) to provide evidence of any of the required approvals by unit owners of Reserve Fund expenditures since the heating system expenditure was completed.

Our treasurer has been questioned many times about this practise which is contrary to our Bylaws and the Condominium Property Act, but refuses to respond to the many questions regarding the incomplete and inaccurate financial reports which are in contravention of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles but nonetheless reported to residents anyway. This is in fact illicit conduct on the part of any professional accountant(s) of which we have two on our Board of Directors, who direct and approve of illicit procedures conducted by Colliers Property Management and the McClocklin Group of Companies”. Yes, residents have been directly advised to act upon instructions from the “McClocklin Group of Companies” who of course have no business in instructing any matters at Spadina Towers.

Unfortunately, many residents have little understanding of responsible and transparent accounting procedures, and as a consequence, both the Board and commercial owner feel free to conduct illicit behavior without any concern for appropriate transparency and accountability. Unfortunately as well, most Board members are not necessarily proficient in accounting or basic property management practices which certainly doesn’t help.

Over and over again, qualified accounting and property management professionals have advised that what Spadina Condominium Corporation requires is INDEPENDENT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT where such accounting and management of resident funds is managed in a credible and transparent manner. Until this is accomplished, residents cannot expect responsible management of the Corporation and particularly transparency with accounting of their funds.

It is most unfortunate that certain Board members have advised that there are too many issues to address at the annual AGM and promised that not one but several, TOWN HALL meetings would be required to allow sufficient time to hear and discuss the many issues of concern to residents. That promise was broken very quickly after it was proposed. The Board is petrified of responsible questioning from residents particularly as it relates to illicit and non transparent practices. In the meantime, Board members have refused to provide residents with any opportunity to hear their concerns. The commercial owner has clearly demanded that this position of avoidance, concealment and disrespect be adhered to by all Board members.

It is most interesting that the Board advises that delays in financial reports were due to “adjustments from the auditors after the full audit”.  What are those “after audit adjustments” made by the Auditor? Just how foolish and naïve are Board members to make any such audacious statement? It is requested of the Board to provide a complete report on these adjustments to the 2017 Audit and ensure response to any questions of residents. A good deal of information particularly within the Reserve Fund has been concealed and must be revealed upon the request of any unit owner. Full transparency must be demonstrated.

A number of chapters of the Canadian Condominium Institute are now requiring that all Board members of Condominium Associations complete a course in condominium property management which includes a major accounting component. The Spadina Board of Directors should be proactive in this regard and ensure that all directors complete such a course certified by the Institute. This would be a positive step forward for our Corporation to ensure that our Board members are well informed and help ensure that they are qualified to act in the best interests of our residents.

SPECIAL NOTE TO RESIDENTS

Some residents will continue to ask just why these expressions of concern continue to be made to the Board of Directors.

The answer is obviously very simple. The governance of our Corporation should be guided by the provisions of both our Bylaws and the Condominium Property Act. Our Board of Directors has however consistently rejected these legally required guidelines and effectively rejected and disrespected the interests of residents.

Millions of dollars have been spent in recent years by the Corporation, without the required participation and approvals of residents as is required by our Bylaws and the Act. The Board has intentionally chosen to use their own unilateral discretion on Reserve Fund expenditures and their means of funding, both of which require resident participation and approval.

For many years now, required Reserve Fund Budgets have not been presented to unit owners at a General Meeting. The Board and commercial owner has simply proceeded on their own with the deceptive tactic that they can proceed without residential approval and avoid the required:

1. UNIT OWNER APPROVAL OF PROPOSED EXPENDITURES WITHIN A REQUIRED RESERVE FUND BUDGET

2. UNIT OWNER APPROVAL OF THE MEANS OF FUNDING

Instead, the Board has chosen to circumvent these legal requirements and declare Reserve Fund expenditures to be approved solely at their discretion. Further, they illegally declare CASH CALLS to be used as a primary funding mechanism which is in total contravention of our Bylaws.

Legal and responsible management of Reserve Fund expenditures requires regular Reserve Fund contributions within monthly condo fees APPROVED BY THE OWNERS, in order to meet future Reserve Fund expenditures. Residents, who participate in both approval of expenditures and the amount of Reserve Fund contributions, then have some sense of security in knowing what their future financial obligations are.

Cash calls on the other hand are NOT to be used as a primary means of funding. Their illicit and unpredictable use, have caused serious implications upon residents in recent years where they have no idea of what or when a demand for cash will be insisted of them. This well known practise by our Board has become well known within the real estate community and has resulted in severely depressed resale prices at Spadina Towers.  If residents don’t stand up for themselves, this illegal conduct will only continue.

Would residents prefer that these many concerns relevant to all, be simply kept in silence at their expense? Any responsible resident would obviously say no and welcome a supporting voice in support of their interests. The above comments are clearly supported by both our Bylaws and the Condominium Property Act. Those who disagree with these comments, must be prepared to demonstrate support of their position with reference to these governing legal documents as well.

Beckman Letter 2018-03-09 Lock Door

HALLWAY FLOOR SHAMPOOING

Why would cleaning of hallway carpets be conducted in early March, the sloppiest month of the year? After waiting many months for long overdue shampooing, surely it would be more reasonable to wait until the worst month of the year has past before doing so.

The hallway carpets have for a number of years been constantly filthy and neglected. It is apparent that management’s and the Board’s standard of cleanliness is far less than that of most residents. Many residents are justifiably embarrassed, constantly reminded by their visitors. Prior to current management, these carpets were shampood quarterly by the caretaker using equipment of the Corporation. The caretaker has now been relieved of this duty at the expense of residents. For those unit owners who are not ashamed of the filthy state of our carpets, they should be reminded that their standards are no better than those of the Board.

The selection of carpets several years ago was a grave mistake. Professional carpet suppliers and cleaners providing services in our building ever since, have questioned why such a carpet was ever chosen. No further expenditures on our hallways should even be considered until the carpets have been replaced with a more suitable carpet.

PARKADE FLOOR CLEANING

Again, acceptance by Board members of the filthy and neglected parkade floor is unacceptable and does not respect the living standards of those residents who have respect for their property. Prior to current management, the parkade floor was washed AT LEAST quarterly by the caretaker. The current caretaker has been further relieved of this duty as well and unnecessary contractor costs are incurred at the expense of residents. Residents live in this building with the parkade as part of their home and their standards are obviously much greater than those of the commercial owner who has once again convinced the Board to minimize appropriate cleaning at the expense of residents. Residents deserve much more respect than this and should not have to bare the unnecessary costs imposed upon them by the commercial owner’s directive shamefully supported by residential Board members.

SNOW REMOVAL

It is somewhat embarrassing for residents to witness on numerous occassions, the snow removal contractor remove snow one evening and then return the next evening to spend several hours again scraping the ground when there is no snow to remove. This has happened many times over the past several winters. The video of such conduct is somewhat entertaining. Why is no one monitoring this activity?

WINDOW CLEANING & ROOF ANCHORS

Occupational Health & Safety has advised that any person or entity advising residents that windows can not be cleaned until roof anchors are installed, are simply attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of residents. They further advise that this matter is totally within their jurisdiction and all legal regulations and requirements are clearly outlined in the Act. Spadina Towers has for more than 35 years had windows cleaned by contractors with certified portable roof anchors that have worked just fine and with no safety infractions. They have been prepared to clean for the past five years even though the building refuses to have this work done. The Board must simply abide by the Occupational Health & Safety Act and continue to contract a qualified contractor. Why would the Board pay thousands of dollars for unnecessary roof anchors. Any attempted decision to make such a purchase must be presented to unit owners and receive approval at a General Meeting.

VESTIBULE SECURITY

We have a caretaker whose duties include inspections of common areas at night. For some 40 years, should someone be found present but not welcome, they are simply asked to leave and if necessary, a simple call to police is made. That is a duty of the caretaker. To require a fob on the exterior door is certainly a major inconvenience for residents. What resident is expected to run all the way down to the entrance to allow entry to guests arriving later in the evening or even be able to allow an emergency ambulance entry. Yes, the Corporation could be seriously liable. This requires consultation with residents at a General Meeting, and not something for the Board to decide on the own. Is the Board attempting to eliminate the duties of the caretaker entirely?

Conclusion:  The Board, management and caretaker, must respectfully and responsibly act with respect for residents. The commercial owner and management should not be permitted to continue their obvious ongoing neglect of residential interests and residential Board members must start to represent the interests of their fellow residents rather than simply saying “yes” and bowing to the commercial owner’s demands.

YET ONCE AGAIN, the commercial owners have with inappropriate and illicit support of the Board of Directors, contravened the Bylaws of the Corporation and the Condominium Property Act, by proceeding with a CAPITAL EXPENDITURE without consulting all unit owners via a General Meeting and seeking both approval of a major capital expenditure project and its means of funding. No such resolutions were sought as are legally required, and therefore this project is obviously against the law. An exact contravention recently took place in another Condo Corporation and the Court found the Board of Directors liable for damages.

What is very further very troubling, at the October 2013 AGM, unit owners overwhelmingly supported a motion to install SIGNAGE AT THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING TO IDENTIFY THE BUILDING AS SPADINA TOWERS. The motion was FALSELY REPORTED AS A FAILED MOTION WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY MOST INAPPROPRIATE AND CERTAINLY ILLEGAL CONDUCT ON THE PART OF THE BOARD. We now have 100% of our front signage exclusively commercial! CONFIRMATION OF THE SUPPORT FOR SPADINA TOWERS SIGNAGE, WAS AUDIO RECORDED AND IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST TO UNIT OWNERS.

This further illicit conduct will form a part of the legal objection to the Board’s conduct within the illicit landscaping project.

This case is as follows:

Boily upholds condo owners rights

Boily v. Carleton Condominium Corporation 145, 2014 ONCA 574 (CanLII)

by By Lisa Laredo — AdvocateDaily.com

The case of Boily v. Carleton Condominium Corporation 145, 2014 ONCA 574 (CanLII) involves a disagreement between the directors of a condominium corporation and the condominium residents. As a result of repair work done to a parking garage, the landscaping around the condominium was damaged. The directors proposed to make changes to the landscaping upon repairs, but the residents wished to have the work restored to the original design.

The Condominium Act, 1998 sets out the requirements of the board of directors to acquire a majority rule to make any “substantial changes” to common areas. Following a ruling of a motion judge that the alterations constituted substantial change, and a meeting in which the new landscaping plan failed to get the required assent of 66 per cent, the directors hired a company to start on the landscaping work regardless.

After a second appearance in court – where the directors were again ordered to restore the original landscaping design, were held in contempt of the previous court order, and received personal financial sanctions – the work continued to progress with substantial deviations from the original design. On appeal, the court upheld that the directors were in contempt of court for continuing with the changes to the landscape, but it did reduce the personal fines for the directors.

What can a person learn from this case? When living in a condominium, it is vital to understand the rules in place that guide the operation and day-to-day life in the building. What is a resident allowed to do, what decisions can the board of directors make, and what control does a resident have over decisions being made? In this case, it was only thanks to the understanding of the residents that they knew changes to the landscaping required their approval. Boily upholds condo owners rights

Boily v. Carleton Condominium Corporation 145, 2014 ONCA 574 (CanLII)

It would be very shameful if residents once again, simply accepted such illicit conduct by our Board of Directors and the undue influence upon them by the commercial owner. ALL RESIDENTS MUST INFORM THEMSELVES OF THE PROTECTIONS THEY HAVE WITHIN OUR BYLAWS AND THE CONDOMINIUM PROPERTY ACT. There is no excuse for resident naivety or neglect. Shamefully, this has resulted in SPADINA TOWERS being the only property on Spadina Crescent within the business district to have no green lawn. This of course, in contravention of the lush greenary theme of properties (particularly residential) on the Crescent. Resident silence is nothing other than shameful. Fortunately, yes, the matter will be legally challenged regardless of the commercial owner and Board’s blatant obstruction of justice via their attempt to prevent democratic objection from residents.