› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Pets: Furry friends … or fiends? › lease vs by laws › Current Page
Ah, “unreasonably” and “occasionally”.
Words that are music to lawyers’ wallets.
First, get yourself a printed copy of the By-Laws and read them. Your landlord is obliged to provide it.
I think KEB only has three options:
1) Get rid of the dog and sue the landlord+agent for “loss of consortium” (well, same sort of concept without the sex) based on misrepresentation as evidenced by the written extra clause in the lease.
2) Move out and sue the landlord+agent for damages (moving costs) based on misrepresentation as evidenced by the written extra clause in the lease.
3) Write to the OC requesting permission to keep the dog on the lot. Assuming that the relevant By-Law for your scheme is not a “blanket ban” (you have indicated that it’s not), most By-Laws use the phrase “owner or occupier”, so tenants can apply, not just owners. The initial response will come from the EC or SM. If it is unfavourable, use the leverage of “misrepresentation” on the landlord to get her to submit a motion to the next GM (and to garner support for that to be called soon) that written permission be granted to keep the dog on the lot. It’s the OC’s permission which is required, their decision overrides the EC/SM and you may find more pet-lovers there. If that is unfavourable, you’ll have to go to the CTTT for a ruling on whether the refusal was “unreasonable”. But, by then your lease will be up.
That’s the end of the advice, now the rant.
The landlord misrepresented the situation. The leasing agent misrepresented the situation. The leasing agent breached the Act by failing to supply a copy of the By-Laws. The tenant failed due diligence by not reading the written By-Laws prior to signing the lease.
Why is sorting out this mess the OC’s job?
Particularly for tenants who may be on a 6 or 12 month lease.
Calling meetings, writing minutes, appearing at the CTTT to justify their position, appearing again at the CTTT to seek an order for removal of unauthorised pets, etc, etc.
EC members are people too! And entitled to the quiet enjoyment of their lot. I’m not referring to barking, I’m referring to other residents dumping their self-inflicted problems in their lap.
BTW, fear of noise, smell, soilage and wandering are not the only reasons some schemes ban pets. What if there are other residents with allergies? What about other owners who bought into a scheme because it was pet-free by By-Law? How do you quantify their loss?
Question – Why would anyone ban blankets anyway? Joke folks!