- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 12 years, 5 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
QUESTION: A tenant in our block has to appear before the CTTT about one of her sub-tenants parking in the visitor spaces; her unit has more car-owning occupants than parking spaces.
Why is the owner of the lot not called as a co-respondent? The lease should clearly indicate the number of car owners entitled to live there. Breach of the lease conditions should immediately revoke the lease and put the tenants on the street. – Jef, via the Flat Chat Forum (edited).
ANSWER: I think we should treat tenants as adults. Tell them that they are in breach and give them an opportunity to mend their ways.
But if they persist, you can tell the owners that their tenants are in breach of the by-laws, and therefore in breach of their lease, and ask what they plan to do about it. If they say ‘nothing’ then send them a letter telling them they are in breach of Section 117 of the strata Act (see below).
NB: I actually said send them a Notice to Comply in the print version but strictly speaking an NTC can only apply to by-laws and they haven’t breached by-laws because they aren’t the people parking where they shouldn’t.
But as for stipulating the number of car owners per lot – why would you stop one family or group of friends owning four cars and renting spaces to accommodate the extras?
What we need really are parking by-laws with teeth – including the right to clamp and tow. Read the original post in full and join the discussion on the Flat Chat Forum HERE.
While we’re on the subject, there was another heated debate about whether Executive Committees should complain directly to tenants or their landlords HERE.
Section 117 says this:
117 Owners, occupiers and other persons not to create nuisance
(1) An owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession (whether in person or not), lessee or occupier of a lot must not:
(a) use or enjoy the lot, or permit the lot to be used or enjoyed, in such a manner or for such a purpose as to cause a nuisance or hazard to the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not), or
(b) use or enjoy the common property in such a manner or for such a purpose as to interfere unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of the common property by the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the common property, or
(c) use or enjoy the common property in such a manner or for such a purpose as to interfere unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of any other lot by the occupier of the lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the lot.
The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.