A former resident of White Rock's Miramar Village has lost a claim for $74,800 against the strata, after complaining the corporation failed to properly investigate vibrations that were disrupting his sleep.
In a decision released July 10, the Civil Resolution Tribunal ruled that while the strata's actions in regard to providing Christopher Konrad with the correct time for a meeting regarding the complaint were "significantly unfair," it did make "reasonable attempts" to investigate his vibrations concerns.
According to the decision, Konrad lived in the building 鈥� located in uptown White Rock 鈥� from September 2021 to August 2023. He said he started to feel vibrations which woke him up, sometimes several times per night, beginning in May 2022, and reported his concerns to his landlord's agent, the strata's concierge and the strata's building manager.
The landlord's agent, after asking questions of the commercial property manager, advised Konrad that they felt it was a strata matter, or perhaps a customer-service matter for property developer Bosa.
In June 2022, the building manager advised Konrad that the strata's irrigation system would be turned off for two days in an effort to determine if that was the source of the vibrations. Konrad, the decision notes, reported that he did not notice any difference.
That same month, the strata's HVAC contractor concluded the most likely source was HVAC equipment in a nearby strata lot, and recommended the strata survey neighbouring lots or have an HVAC technician check the neighbouring units, the decision continues.
Evidence considered by the CRT included that no neighbouring residents reported feeling similar vibrations.
Konrad was then encouraged to report the vibration issue to Bosa online, in case the cause could be addressed under a warranty, the decision continues. However, Konrad declined, claiming the step was not warranted as equipment in his unit had not failed.
"He said that the strata was responsible for enforcing its nuisance and repair and maintenance bylaws, and Bosa had nothing to do with this enforcement," the decision states.
Konrad continued to submit complaints regarding the vibrations to the strata, detailing dates and times, and requesting investigation.
The CRT decision notes Konrad's landlord was then told that they had to file a warranty claim regarding their HVAC system with Bosa. That letter, sent Aug. 4, 2022, also advised that the strata "will not take any other step to investigate the reported unit vibration issue until the Strata Corporation is receiving a report in this matter from Bosa Customer Care Representative.鈥�
Bosa's contractor reported to Bosa on Oct. 6, 2022 that multiple attempts to contact Konrad were unsuccessful, the decision states.
Konrad continued to submit complaints to the strata until April 8, 2023. He told the CRT that he stayed exclusively with relatives after that date, due to the vibrations. He officially moved out of the building on Aug. 31 last year.
Konrad, in his submissions to the tribunal, described the strata's investigation into his complaints as "woefully inadequate," and that their insistence that he file a warranty claim with Bosa was "significantly unfair."
The CRT decision notes the strata's communication with Konrad was "flawed in some ways." Despite this, the group "made reasonable efforts to investigate the vibrations' source," it states.
Konrad, meanwhile, "repeatedly demonstrated his unwillingness" to communicate with Bosa in connection with arranging an inspection of his unit, the decision continues. However, Konrad asserted that only the strata could make that request.
The CRT found Konrad did not establish that the strata acted significantly unfairly or in a procedurally unfair manner in response to his bylaw complaints, and dismissed his claim for $72,000 for loss-of-use and enjoyment damages.
A further claim for $1,000 in aggravated damages, or alternatively, significant unfairness, was also dismissed.
The CRT did find that Konrad was entitled to $500 (plus interest) of $1,800 claimed in damages for unfairness, in connection with the strata's actions in failing to provide him with the correct time of a meeting that had been scheduled to discuss his complaint. The decision details confusion around the location of an initial meeting, followed by miscommunication around the time set for a rescheduled meeting.
The CRT found no evidence that the strata "acted in a malicious, vindictive, or reprehensible manner."
While the strata had argued that Konrad forfeited his claim by moving out, the CRT found he was entitled to pursue it, given the complaint concerned the strata's conduct during his tenancy.
