Re: Perplexed by pergolas

Thanks Whale

First of all the key issue is the last phrase of your first paragraph. Secondly, should your second para end by saying “….. that item nonetheless remains Lot property.”? If so, I will go on ….

Briefly the background is that many pergolas in the complex are owned* (accordingly to the registered strata plan and confirmed by a registered surveyor) by the Lot owner. They have been maintained to date by the EC which thought that they belonged to the OC just like other pergolas in the complex but which do belong to the OC. Now that the question of ownership has been established by a surveyor the OC, by a majority at a GM, decided that it would continue its past practices by the making of a by-law. The rub is that the by-law makes no provision for the Lot owners of the pergolas in question to pay the OC for work done – which includes maintenance, painting or replacement of components when necessary.

I iterate that not all owners supported the resolution making the by-law especially those who do not even have a pergola!

Unless the by-law is repealed we will have the situation where all owners are being levied to pay for maintenance and replacement work of the private property of many Lot owners, but not all.

I believe that such a by-law of the Management Act is subordinate to the provisions of the Development Act and therefore cannot impose on the OC responsibility for maintenance unless done so on a fee for service basis. Section 63 of the Management Act refers?

* very small parts of these pergolas are common property but at this stage I would prefer not to further complicate the issue in this forum.