Vancouver, Pendrell Place: Mr. Monk tells the court why he bought a leaky rotten condo at Pendrell Place

 


 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

RE: PENDRELL PLACE, STRATA PLAN VR 1008 

JULY 27, 2005

BEFORE: MADAME JUSTICE K. GILL

TRANSCRIPT EXCERPT

 

 

 Mr. Monk tells the court why he bought a leaky rotten condo at Pendrell Place, 1819 Pendrell St., Vancouver, BC

 

 

 

 

45     MR. MONK:  Just to give you a little bit of a

        46          perspective about what happened to me, this

        47          problem with Mr. Oldaker has been in existence


 

 

 

               10

 

 

 

         1          since 1998.  I purchased my condo in year 2000.  I

         2          bought it in November of 2000.  A few weeks prior

         3          to the closing of my sale, Mr. Oldaker had engaged

         4          some engineers to have a look at his suite, and

         5          the recommendation that was given by Levelton

         6          Engineering was that the building was in need of a

         7          building envelope assessment.  And I later joined

         8          council and found a lot of the work that had been

         9          done on the building previously and virtually all

        10          of it had been non-code compliant and no permits

        11          had been issued by the city to do this work.

        12               The closing of the sale for my unit was on

        13          November 2000, the 1st of November.  Mr. Oldaker

        14          advised Mr. Hamilton -- sent him a letter

        15          informing him that his engineers had given him a

        16          report stating that the building was in need of a

        17          building envelope assessment.  The manner in which

        18          Mr. Hamilton responded to Mr. Oldaker was by

        19          sending him a gag order letter on October 27th,

        20          three days before closing of my -- the sale of my

        21          unit, telling him that it was not a leaky condo

        22          and that what he was saying was absurd, and

        23          consequently I bought into a condominium.  I also

        24          received a Form B certificate which certified

        25          certain things about the health of the condo, the

        26          money in the reserve funds, the legal status of

        27          the condominium as well, and virtually everything

        28          stated on my Form B was inaccurate.  So

        29          essentially I even -- I bought my condo.  I had to

        30          settle lawsuits that were already ongoing that

        31          I -- had not been disclosed to me before I

        32          purchased.  And ever since then, up until I -- I

        33          sold out about a few years -- a year and a half

        34          ago, and during the whole time that I got involved

        35          in litigation as an owner, Mr. Hamilton has

        36          represented the individuals which I've sued.  He's

        37          also acted as a strata lawyer.  He's also become

        38          involved in S012351.  The strata corporation was

        39          not even down as a defendant and he showed up

        40          using common funds, and we're now in the appeal,

        41          and he's -- basically during my whole time of

        42          ownership in that condominium I've had to

        43          subsidize the defence of my lawsuits as well.

        44               And I also have a personal lawsuit for my

        45          personal damages, which I would like to have

        46          introduced into the case management as well.

        47               Thank you.

 
 END OF EXCERPT

www.myleakycondo.com

* Leaks, Rot, Mould and Fraud *

 


 

Vancouver, Pendrell Place: Strata Council wants to gag Oldaker and Balderson

 

 

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

 CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

RE: PENDRELL PLACE, STRATA PLAN VR 1008 

JULY 27, 2005

BEFORE: MADAME JUSTICE K. GILL

 

TRANSCRIPT EXCERPT 

 

 

 

 

         1                                  July 27, 2005

         2                                  Vancouver, B.C.

         3

         4          (PROCEEDINGS COMMENCED)

         5

         6     THE REGISTRAR:  In the Supreme Court of British

         7          Columbia at Vancouver, in chambers, this

         8          27th day of July, 2005, My Lady, in the matter of

         9          Oldaker and Owners, Strata Plan VR1008 and others.

        10     MR. R. HAMILTON:  My Lady, my name is Richard Hamilton.

        11          I'm counsel for the petitioners in one action, or

        12          one proceeding, L011861.  And before I sit down

        13          and allow the rest of counsel to introduce

        14          themselves, one of the litigants, a plaintiff in

        15          one of the many actions, is a Mr. Christopher

        16          Monk.

        17     THE COURT:  Yes?

        18     MR. R. HAMILTON:  He is unrepresented.  He is here in

        19          the court, and he's asked if I could request that

        20          he be allowed to sit at counsel table.

        21     THE COURT:  Yes, of course.

        22     MR. R. HAMILTON:  Thank you, My Lady.

        23     MR. BURNS:  May it please the court, my name is Burns,

        24          initials D.E.  I appear for the plaintiff Richard

        25          Oldaker in action L021782.

        26     MR. G.S. HAMILTON:  My Lady, my name is Hamilton,

        27          initials G.S., and I appear as counsel for the

        28          strata corporation in all of the proceedings.

        29     MR. LITHWICK:  My Lady, Lithwick, L-i-t-h-w-i-c-k,

        30          initial M.  I'm representing two groups of

        31          defendants:  one group of defendants in action

        32          number L021782, and that would be all the

        33          individual defendants other than one at this time

        34          who is -- we haven't been able to locate, and that

        35          would be Carrier; and in another action we're not

        36          on the record but we're about to go on the record,

        37          and that's in action number L032653.  We have been

        38          retained to represent the defendants in that

        39          action.

        40     MR. MONK:  Good morning, My Lady.  My name is Chris

        41          Monk, and I'm representing myself in all actions.

        42     MR. CREIGHTON:  My Lady, Derek Creighton.  I'm

        43          appearing as counsel for Mr. Oldaker in S012351

        44          and S0332653 [sic] and for Mr. Gonzalez in

        45          S040132.

        46     MR. MOSHONAS:  My Lady, my name is Moshonas, spelled

        47          M-o-s-h-o-n-a-s, initial J., and I appear for


 

 

 

               2

 

 

 

         1          Ascent Real Estate Management Corp. and Michael

         2          Roach in each of the actions in which they have

         3          been named as defendants.

         4     THE COURT:  Would somebody like to tell me why we are

         5          gathering today?  Anybody?

         6     MR. BURNS:  My Lady, this arises -- or these various

         7          proceedings arise out of some difficulties, which

         8          is an understatement, that have been experienced

         9          with the building envelope at a condominium in the

        10          West End known as Pendrell Place.

        11     THE COURT:  Yes.  I did receive from Judge Ballance the

        12          bits and pieces that are sitting here.  There is

        13          an old case management summary of the actions and

        14          pleadings in the various actions, and I've tried

        15          to go through and figure out what has happened to

        16          them all, but it's a little bit confusing.

        17     MR. BURNS:  There is a tangled scheme that's --

        18     THE COURT:  Yes, it's tangled.

        19     MR. BURNS:  "Tangled" would be the operative adjective.

        20     THE COURT:  Yes.

        21     MR. BURNS:  But if I might simplify things.  For

        22          several years this condominium complex has

        23          experienced problems with water ingress into and

        24          through the building envelope.  One of the owners

        25          is a Mr. Richard Oldaker, who has a unit in the

        26          apartment, and despite some efforts to remediate

        27          the building envelope, he continues at this time

        28          to experience problems with water ingress at his

        29          particular unit on the fifth floor.  There have in

        30          the past been an administrator appointed of the

        31          strata corporation.  There has been some work done

        32          on the building envelope, but it appears none on

        33          the east wall, which is the wall that affects

        34          Mr. Oldaker's unit most particularly.

        35               More recently -- let me just take you to the

        36          last conference that we had with Madam Justice

        37          Ballance, which, if memory serves me correct, was

        38          about May 19th, 2004.  At that time I was new to

        39          this case and had some optimism that I might be

        40          able to bring people to a table with a mediator to

        41          try to find some solution to these building

        42          problems.  Efforts were made in that direction

        43          over the balance of the spring and summer of 2004,

        44          but ultimately I was unable to achieve a situation

        45          where I could get all interested parties in front

        46          of a mediator.

        47               Work was being done over 2004 to the building


 

 

 

               3

 

 

 

         1          envelope.  On September 2nd, 2004, there was a

         2          meeting among the strata council of various

         3          affected parties, and I had some optimism at that

         4          time that we might have some progress on actually

         5          seeing the building envelope problem addressed in

         6          Mr. Oldaker's particular case.  Unfortunately at

         7          that time monies were released by Mr. Oldaker by

         8          the strata corporation, and there was a belief

         9          that the building envelope repairs might have been

        10          achieved.  It turned out that that wasn't the

        11          case, and so we now have a situation where the

        12          strata corporation is of the view that I believe

        13          it's not going to do any further -- or any repairs

        14          to the east wall, and Mr. Oldaker is of the view

        15          that that's an important thing to be done.

        16               My learned friend Mr. Stephen Hamilton wrote

        17          a letter to the registry some weeks ago

        18          complaining about Mr. Oldaker interfering with the

        19          governance of the strata corporation and

        20          threatening an injunction application.  And other

        21          counsel have different involvements in this case,

        22          but at its root it all turns on a failure of the

        23          building envelope at this apartment complex in the

        24          West End.  And there hasn't been, to my knowledge,

        25          any extensive discussion before this conference

        26          this morning about what next directions are to be

        27          taken in these various cases.  I suspect that's

        28          probably one of the goals that should be

        29          addressed, is what is the menu or shopping list of

        30          things that need to be done in the future.

        31               I can say from Mr. Oldaker's point of view

        32          what I see there needs to be done and what I

        33          expect will have to be done in the immediate

        34          future.  It may be necessary to appoint for a

        35          second time an administrator of the strata

        36          corporation.  It may be necessary that there will

        37          have to be a further litigation on the question of

        38          the duty to repair on the strata corporation as it

        39          pertains to Mr. Oldaker's unit.  Those are the two

        40          items that I noted particularly for my own

        41          client's sake as being points to bring up at this

        42          application.  And other counsel may well have

        43          other points.

        44               As I say, what prompted this particular

        45          conference was a letter from my learned friend

        46          Mr. Hamilton.  I don't know that he has any

        47          authority at this stage to bring an action or an


 

 

 

               4

 

 

 

         1          application for an injunction against Mr. Oldaker.

         2          I'm unaware of any such strata owners meeting

         3          being convened for that purpose, but no doubt

         4          he'll enlighten us as to what his intentions are

         5          or his client's intentions are in that regard.

         6     MR. G.S. HAMILTON:  My Lady, the purpose of my letter

         7          was to bring this matter back before the court as

         8          soon as possible, because the governance of the

         9          strata corporation was deteriorating due to the

        10          strata corp. council's perception and certainly

        11          the strata agent's perception that Mr. Oldaker and

        12          one of his representatives, a Mr. -- Dr.

        13          Balderson, who purports to be a leaky condo

        14          advocate, were harassing their engineers and

        15          contractors and strata council members,

        16          threatening litigation, interfering with the

        17          construction, corresponding endlessly with the

        18          strata agent, and the strata agent simply said, we

        19          can no longer be involved; it's taking too much to

        20          deal with Mr. Oldaker and Dr. Balderson.

        21          Mr. Oldaker sued the strata agent for some alleged

        22          wrongdoing.  Dr. Balderson similarly has

        23          threatened legal action, and at the end of the day

        24          the strata agent just was not prepared to

        25          participate.

        26               The strata council subsequently looked for

        27          other strata agents to assist in the management of

        28          this building, and unfortunately for Pendrell

        29          Place it has become notorious in relation to the

        30          type of litigation that is ongoing, the problems

        31          they've had, Mr. Oldaker's involvement with the

        32          building.  He's been on the news.  He's been in

        33          the newspaper.  And of course Dr. Balderson, who

        34          is also very well known in the business as being

        35          involved in these type of buildings.

        36               The -- one application that I've been

        37          instructed to bring was to advise the court of

        38          what has been going on over the last six to ten

        39          months with respect to Dr. Balderson and

        40          Mr. Oldaker to attempt to bring some control to

        41          the governance of the strata corporation by

        42          controlling the way in which they choose to

        43          communicate with the strata agent, with the strata

        44          council generally, so that this building can

        45          continue to function without the appointment of

        46          the administrator.

        47               Unlike my friends, I've been involved from


 

 

 

               5

 

 

 

         1          day one with the strata corporation, and these

         2          proceedings started back in 2000.  And at that

         3          point an administrator did -- or was appointed,

         4          and it cost thousands of dollars.  I think the

         5          bill at the end of the day for the administrator

         6          and legal costs amounted to $100,000 or more.  And

         7          this ownership is a small complex.  They do not

         8          want to go down that road again, and they see the

         9          only way to avoid that is to get control of the

        10          people that reside in that complex.

        11               The other issues that are outstanding are of

        12          course the damages action and other actions that

        13          Mr. Oldaker has brought along the way, and they've

        14          gone nowhere, and yet they sit out there like a

        15          black cloud over this building where owners are

        16          required to disclose the nature of this action,

        17          the fact that it's pending.  It affects their

        18          market value.  It affects their ability to sell

        19          their property at fair market value because people

        20          don't want to buy into a headache.  They want

        21          closure.  They want this action brought to a

        22          conclusion.  Whether that requires a trial or not

        23          remains to be seen.

        24               My friend is right; we did attempt to discuss

        25          settlement, but frankly, with all due respect to

        26          my friend, we could not get a proposal of any kind

        27          from Mr. Oldaker despite our requests.

        28               So the strata corporation has come to the

        29          conclusion that court intervention is necessary to

        30          move this along, to bring it to closure, to reach

        31          a conclusion so that they can move forward with

        32          their building and their properties.  There are a

        33          number of motions that the strata corporation

        34          would like to bring on as soon as possible dealing

        35          with of course the conduct of Dr. Balderson and

        36          Mr. Oldaker dealing with some of the actions that

        37          are outstanding.  For example, Mr. Monk purports

        38          to be a party to the proceedings, which the strata

        39          corporation says he is not, and we'd like to move

        40          to dismiss his participation in the proceedings.

        41          Mr. Oldaker has commenced a proceeding against the

        42          strata agent which the strata corporation says he

        43          has no standing.  We would be seeking ultimately

        44          to have that struck, because the strata agent of

        45          course will be seeking indemnity against the

        46          strata corporation if it has to participate in

        47          that lawsuit.


 

 

 

               6

 

 

 

         1               So there are some, quote, procedural motions

         2          to be dealt with, and of course the motion to

         3          control the governance of the strata corporation.

 

 

     

 (More)

Case Studies, Pendrell Place: Litigation - Case Management and transcript for July 27, 2005.

Due to the ongoing and protracted litigation involving the owners and the Strata Corporation of Pendrell Place, it was decided to place all the outstanding lawsuits under Case Management. This is a process whereby all the separate cases are managed as a group with a Case Management judge being appointed to assist the litigants in moving the cases to resolution as quickly as possible.



July 27, 2005

The court action reference number for this transcript is L003498.

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Plaintiff)
And: The Owners, Strata Plan VR1008 (Defendants)


Case Management 27 July 2005 Part 1.htm

MR. BURNS: There is a tangled scheme that's --
THE COURT:Yes, it's tangled.
MR. BURNS:"Tangled" would be the operative adjective.
THE COURT:Yes.

Case Management 27 July 2005 Part 2.htm

MR. BURNS: The facts/information appear to be that nil work was done on the east wall with a view to remediation, and the facts appear to be that if you were in the interior of Mr. Oldaker's suite today, if you were standing in it, you can at points see outside into the world through the wall.


[Note: Dr. Balderson addresses Mr. G. Stephen Hamilton's statements made at this Case Management conference about him in this letter of August 3, 2005.]



September 6, 2005

The court action reference numbers for this transcript are:

L003498

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Petitioner)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondent)

L011861

Between: Jamie Gonzales; Denise Maureen Hamilton; Christopher Robert Monk, Richard Bedford Oldaker; Nevena and Nikica Nojic (Petitioners)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondent)

L021782

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Plaintiff)
And: Ascent Real Estate Management Corp.; Sullivan Construction Ltd.; Gregory E. Ball; Daphne Bramham; Maximo Campos; Susan Carrier; Ilpo R. Halva; Martin I. Lewis and Beverly Lewis; Owners Strata Plan VR 1008 (Defendants)


Case Management 6 Sept 2005.htm

"Mr. Hamilton and I...have discussed a way forward that we think might give us one last-ditch chance to resolve this matter without the necessity of the court making orders and having what will undoubtedly be a rancorous and long application. And this would be in the context of Mr. Oldaker bringing a petition to compel the corporation -- the strata corporation to comply with its repair duty, and also based on substantial unfairness to him in their not having done so to this point."



October 28, 2005

The court action reference numbers for this transcript are:

L003498

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Petitioner)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondent)

L011861

Between: Jamie Gonzales; Denise Maureen Hamilton; Christopher Robert Monk; Richard Bedford Oldaker; Nevena and Nikica Nojic (Petitioners)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondent)

L021782

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Plaintiff)
And: Ascent Real Estate Management Corp.; Sullivan Construction Ltd.; Gregory E. Ball; Daphne Bramham; Maximo Campos; Susan Carrier; Ilpo R. Halva; Martin I. Lewis and Beverly Lewis; Owners Strata Plan VR1008 (Defendants)

L032653

Between: Christopher R. Monk, Richard B. Oldaker, Nevena Vojic, Nikica Vojic (Plaintiffs)
And: Barbara M. Coleman, Timothy Dudra, Merrill Fearon, Rizwan Hirjee, William Katernchuk, Hilary Mason, Gordon Owens (Defendants)

S012351

Between: Denise M. Hamilton, Christopher Robert Monk, Richard Bedford Oldaker, Nevena Vojic, Nikica Vojic (Plaintiffs)
And: Gregory E. Ball, Daphne E. Bramham, Maximo Campos, Susan Carriere, Barbara M. Coleman, Susan V. Erdman, Ilpo R. Halva, Martin I. Lewis, Beverly L. Lewis (Defendants)

S78059

Between: Strata Plan VR1008 (Plaintiff)
And: Richard Bedford Oldaker, Bank of Montreal (Defendants)

S040182

Between: Jaime Gonzalez, Lynn Gonzalez, Charles Gonzalez (Plaintiffs)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 and Martin Lewis (Defendants)

L052371

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Petitioner)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondant)


Case Managment 28 Oct 2005 Part 1.htm

THE COURT: Sorry, I don't really understand that. How could it be that somebody couldn't tell you the work that needed doing?

Case Management 28 Oct 2005 Part 2.htm

"This is a strata corporation that is highly dysfunctional, extremely polarized between a majority and a minority group of owners. The majority group of owners who have controlled the strata corporation for years -- and they do not include Mr. Oldaker obviously -- they instruct Mr. Stephen Hamilton to appear. I am not aware of any resolution before the owners, put before the owners, to authorize the expenditure of his fees and time to be in court on this case management conference."



November 4, 2005

The court action reference number for this transcript is L021782.

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Plaintiff)
And: Ascent Real Estate Management Corp.; Sullivan Construction Ltd.; Gregory E. Ball; Daphne Bramham; Maximo Campos; Susan Carrier; Ilpo R. Halva; Martin I. Lewis and Beverly Lewis; Owners Strata Plan VR1008 (Defendants)


Case Management 4 Nov 2005.htm

"And it is a situation where this work that was postponed, it was postponed relating to Mr. Oldaker's suite only, and he is the only person who has had no use of his condominium for almost five and a half years. It is a situation where I think my concern that there is continuing, unfair actions on the part of the strata council, which is dominated by people who have no affection or concern for him whatsoever, indeed it's hostile..."



November 10, 2005

The court action reference number for this transcript is L021782.

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Plaintiff)
And: Ascent Real Estate Management Corp.; Sullivan Construction Ltd.; Gregory E. Ball; Daphne Bramham; Maximo Campos; Susan Carrier; Ilpo R. Halva; Martin I. Lewis and Beverly Lewis; Owners Strata Plan VR1008 (Defendants)


NOTE: for unknown reasons, the transcriber was unable to identify some of the speakers correctly. In addition, the transcriber seems to have confused the two lawyers who both have "Hamilton" as their last name (Richard P. and G. Steven). We are attempting to rectify these issues.


Case Management Transcript 10 Nov 2005 Part 1.htm

"In my respective submission, it's important for the owners to know that the character that Mr. Oldaker is portrayed in the materials of the strata corporation as an obstinate, obstructionist person who prefers the courts to compromise is just not fair. It's not accurate."

Case Management Transcript 10 Nov 2005 Part 2.htm

"My Lady, fortunately I've had the pleasure of being at some of these meetings and the minority faction do not get a voice, are not allowed to raise things. As a general proposition they're cut short, if it's not on the agenda, if it's not distributed in advance they don't get a full hearing."


November 28, 2005

The court action reference numbers for this transcript are:

L003498

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Petitioner)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondent)

L011861

Between: Jamie Gonzales, Denise Maureen Hamilton, Christopher Robert Monk, Richard Bedford Oldaker, Nevena and Nikica Nojic (Petitioners)
And: Strata Plan VR1008 (Respondent)

L021782

Between: Richard Bedford Oldaker (Plaintiff)
And: Ascent Real Estate Management Corp., Sullivan Construction Ltd., Gregory E. Ball, Daphne Bramham, Maximo Campos, Susan Carrier, Ilpo R. Halva, Martin I. Lewis and Beverly Lewis, Owners Strata Plan VR 1008 (Defendants)

L032653

Between: Christopher R. Monk, Richard B. Oldaker, Nevan Vojic, Nikica Vojic (Plaintiffs)
And: Barbara M. Coleman, Timothy Dudra, Merrill Fearon, Rizwan Hirjee, William Katernchuk, Hilary Mason, Gordon Owens (Defendants)

S012351

Between: Denise M. Hamilton, Christopher Robert Monk, Richard Bedford Oldaker, Nevan Vojic, Nikica Vojic (Plaintiffs)
And: Gregory E. Ball, Daphne E. Bramham, Maximo Campos, Susan Carriere, Barbara M. Coleman, Susan V. Erdman, Ilpo R. Halva, Martin I. Lewis, Beverly L. Lewis (Defendants)

S78059

Between: The Owners, Strata Plan VR 1008 (Petitioner)
And: Richard Bedford Oldaker, Bank of Montreal (Respondents)


Case Management Transcript 28 Nov 2005 Pt 1.htm

"Having said that, I would point out now that the engineering evidence has developed into a consensus position that repair to that east wall fifth and sixth levels is necessary and ought to be done. What surprises me now is that we have not the strata corporation coming to the court and saying, we are now prepared to consent to an order that there be a repair to the fifth and sixth floors, but we are going to defend this petition in light of the evidence of their own engineers. It seems almost too hard -- it's hard for me to understand."

Case Management Transcript 28 Nov 2005 Pt 2.htm

"...I'll tell you one thing I will not agree to: their promises. Their promises have been given many times, as the evidence is clear, and a promise is not going to do it."

Case Studies, Pendrell Place: Civil and criminal matters

July 08, 2005

TO: THE OWNERS, STRATA PLAN VR 1008 & OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES

Re: Leaks and Rot at Pendrell Place: Proposed Civil and Criminal Remedies

I have studied the “Minutes of the Strata Council, Strata Plan VR 1008, Pendrell Place, Held [off-site] on Monday, June 13, at 5pm in Suite 204 – 1949 Beach Avenue, Vancouver, B.C.”

In particular, I refer to paragraph 3 of the section of the Minutes headed “Strata Lot 22 – Interior Repairs” in which it is stated:

The President [Joy Dixon] reported that the meeting [held at Vancouver City Hall, May 20, 2005] had been encouraging to her, and appeared to hold the potential to resolve outstanding concerns and allow the owner of strata lot 22 [Richard B. Oldaker] to proceed with his interior repairs. Unfortunately, since that time various communications had been received from the owner of strata lot 22 which made it clear that he now rejected virtually all of the agreements reached at the meeting. Ms. Dixon indicated that she saw no evidence that the owner of strata lot 22 was willing to accept any reasonable and economically responsible compromise. The President indicated that management [J.P. Daem, Strataco Management Ltd.] had made arrangements for Council to meet with the Strata Corporation’s legal counsel [G. Stephen Hamilton] and the consulting engineer [David Evans, P.Eng., Levelton] on June 20th, 2005 so as to review the most recent events and to bring forward an early application before Madam Justice Balance, and to obtain some assistance and direction from the Court in the resolution of this ongoing dispute.


Leaks, Rot, Facts, and Law at Pendrell Place: An historical outline

(1) Suite 504, Strata Lot 22, Strata Plan VR 1008, located at 1819 Pendrell Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, is a leaky rotten condo (Levelton Report, Alex McGowan, P.Eng., August, 2000) and has been uninhabitable for five years.

(2) Levelton refused to specify the repairs to Strata Lot 22 and withdrew its services because the Strata Council refused to accept Levelton’s recommendations as they related to the requirements of the City of Vancouver (January 2001).

(3) Pendrell Place, i.e., Strata Lots 1 – 22 inclusive, was found to be a leaky rotten condo complex (Levelton Report, June 2002).

(4) The Strata Corporation, Strata Plan VR 1008, is required to repair and maintain the common property (The Strata Property Act).

(5) The exterior cladding and the air barrier component of the building envelope system of Pendrell Place is common property.

(6) The City of Vancouver has legal requirements for building envelope failure evidenced by leaks, rot, mould, unintended water ingress and penetration of rainwater, as found by Levelton at Pendrell Place (Vancouver Building By-law, since 1996).

(7) The Province of British Columbia has legal requirements for leaky rotten condos (Homeowner Protection Act and Regulations and Building Envelope Renovation Regulations, since 1998 and 1999).

(8) The east wall portion of the building envelope of Pendrell Place has not been repaired or renovated, whereas other portions of the building envelope have been repaired and renovated.

(9) The Strata Council knowingly chose to leave the defects in the building envelope of the east wall unfixed, thus leaving the interior of Strata Lot 22 unfixable and uninhabitable.

(10) The Strata Council members knew or ought to have known, and Levelton knew or ought to have known, and the Strata Property Manager from Strataco knew or ought to have known, that the interior of Strata Lot 22 could not and can not be re-built until the exterior common property portion of the east wall is compliant with the laws of Vancouver and the Province of British Columbia (Requirements confirmed by Dave Jackson, P.Eng., Chief Building Official, City of Vancouver, May 4 & May 6, 2005).

(11) It was and remains impossible for Mr. Oldaker, or any other leaky condo owner in a similar situation, to “compromise” with the Strata Council without knowingly agreeing to contravene City and Provincial laws and regulations.

(12) The full and complete responsibility for the proper and timely repair and renovation of the east-wall building envelope has always rested with the Strata Corporation led by the Strata Council of Pendrell Place, not with Mr. Oldaker (Confirmed by multiple leaky condo court decisions).

(13) The full and proper repair of Pendrell Place is not dependent on Mr. Oldaker accepting “any reasonable and economically responsible compromise” as stated in the Strata Council Minutes.

(14) The Minutes of the Strata Council Meeting held June 13, 2005, clearly show that the Strata Council is in error with respect to the facts and the law at Pendrell Place.

(15) The present Strata Council, as evidenced by these and other Minutes, appears to be continuing a campaign to vilify Mr. Oldaker, the Owner of Strata Lot 22, which remains an uninhabitable leaky rotten condo with a defective building envelope and with holes in the east wall.

(16) The Strata Council has refused to bring the immediate and urgent repair and renovation of the east wall to the owners for a decision regarding the funding and timing of the work, despite Mr. Oldaker’s request that they do so.

(17) Several civil legal actions remain unresolved.


Two avenues of action remain to be tested at Pendrell Place.

The first avenue involves Section 165 of the Strata Property Act.

The second avenue involves Sections 428, 429 and 430 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

I recommend that leaky condo owners who find themselves in situations such as Mr. Oldaker finds himself in at Pendrell Place consult with their lawyers with a view to utilizing The Strata Property Act and the Criminal Code simultaneously.

Dr. James Balderson, Ph.D., Q.S.
COLCO: The Coalition of Leaky Condo Owners
www.myleakycondo.com
E JamesBalderson@myleakycondo.com

Case Studies, Pendrell Place: Electrical Work Without Permit

July 4, 2005

Re: Leaky Rotten Condo Complex
Strata Lot 22, Unit/Suite #504
Strata Plan VR 1008, a/k/a, Pendrell Place,
1819 Pendrell Street, Vancouver, B.C., Canada

ELECTRICAL WORK WITHOUT PERMIT - REAR SECURITY LIGHTING, 1819 PENDRELL, VR 1008

The overdue Minutes of the Strata Council Meeting held June 13, 2005 were received today July 04, 2005, in an envelope metered June 30, 2005, following my request for same dated June 29, 2005.

The following statement can be found on page 7 of the Minutes:

The Manager [J.P. Daem, President, Strataco Management, 604-294-4141] reported that the following had been completed since the last Council meeting: installation of security lights at rear of building; ....
A call to the City of Vancouver Inquiry Centre, 604-873-7611, revealed that a permit for this electrical work had not been issued.

Once again it seems that more work has been conducted at Pendrell Place without a proper permit, thus putting the owners at risk.

A copy of this note has been forwarded to The City of Vancouver for their attention and action.

The Minutes also reported:
... Mr. Andrews noted that a complaint had been received with regards to the [new] security lights from an adjacent building, and suggested that deflectors be installed so as to minimize the impact of the lights on adjacent residences.
The owners had been forewarned of the likelihood of such complaints in my earlier memo regarding "Proposed illuminated garbage shack", dated April 26, 2005.

Dr. James Balderson, Ph.D., Q.S.

COLCO: The Coalition of Leaky Condo Owners
www.myleakycondo.com
E JamesBalderson@myleakycondo.com