Q + A: What People Ask Me

People ask me, "What do you WANT?"

The answer is I want members of council to perform their statutory obligation to enforce the bylaws, particularly Bylaw 4,  to remedy exclusive use of common property in damaging ways that are illegal and cause unfair nuisance and unreasonable interference with my rights to use and enjoy my own property. 

This means I want a trellis planter platform to restore exclusive use and enjoyment of my limited common property, misrepresentations made by the strata management team to be corrected, and significantly unfair treatment to stop.

All it would take to make us happy is to be able to rely on the law as it is written.

I want peace, order, good government, and equal protection under the law. This means I want compensation for the unjust enrichment of others at my expense; I want water damage and faulty construction repaired, trees and landscaping reinstated, and, last but not least, I want motions and votes on issues decided and statutory access to strata records.

I would like the strata management team to stop acting in conflict, contrary to the Act, manufacturing delays and limitation periods to offload and shirk duties that are the strata corporation's ongoing statutory obligations.
What I will settle for or what I can get a court to order is unknown, but what I want has always been well documented. I want very little, if anything, more than for members of council to avoid conflict, act in good faith, and comply with the law to remedy and avoid corruption and significant unfairness.

People ask me, "Why don't you just MOVE?"

It's a common response proven profitable to realtors, particularly Al MacLeod.

The answer is we don't move because this is the home we chose and invested in, if we sell it nothing equivalent exists to replace the design or location, it would cost us about $20,000 in fees and expenses to move down in life and that would make us happy, our only practical escape from industry wide strata corruption is a single detached house priced well beyond our reach, and most importantly, I don't want to flee in the face of injustice, even when one of the very difficult challenges is to not lose hope, because I know from the loss of my pension, my health, and my security that fleeing is not a remedy - to the contrary, it creates poverty and encourages institutional oppression.  

The home we bought was beautiful. We LOVED it - and STILL do - because Unit 409 is uniquely suited to our needs, and there is NOTHING else like it in Coquitlam! 

Our unit is the ONLY unit spoiled by construction defects, water damage, building settlement, loss of patio space, and decades of unique oppression contrary to the Act. We want our home to be right again.

People ask me, "Why don't you SUE?"

The answer is because I can't function well enough to manage mountains of evidence or represent myself effectively in court, or at all; litigation makes peace and enjoyment between neighbours less likely; it costs about $40,000 to go to trial, it pits one unit against 67 others very unreasonably, it is exceptionally high risk because courts tend to defer to strata corporations and deter dissenting owners, the misconduct is continual, one thing after another, in endless overwhelming slices, none of it worth the crushing costs, litigation is unbearably sickening to me, and what we want is peace and security.  I want to be happy again.

People ask me, "How can you keep up the FIGHT?"

The answer is I can keep fighting as long as my faith in truth, justice, and other people holds a spark of life because I assume responsibility for my own conduct only; I rarely if ever do anything that I regret, and I value peace, order, and good government. Continuing to seek reasonable remedies from the strata corporation is the most practical option within my means. Fighting a marathon sucks away my time and makes me sick and tired, but giving in willingly to known corruption would haunt me as the thing I should be most ashamed of for the rest of my life.

People ask me, "Why did you WAIT?"

The answer is I didn't wait at all.  The strata management team did, in reliance on limitation dates.

I protested to the strata PROMPTLY and CONTINUALLY from the very day that a neighbour vandalized common property and cheated us out of peace and enjoyment by cutting down a tree to build extra decking contrary to the strata bylaws. I also did everything in my power to mitigate and remedy the damage and get along anyway possible, for as long as possible. I did all that I could do, as soon as I could, every step of the way.  

Those with the statutory obligation to enforce the bylaws and take remedial action did nothing but manufacture fraudulent delays and misrepresentations to trigger limitation dates and undermine my credibility to serve their own interests while I was exhausted seeking remedies in total futility.

It was not reasonable for me to petition or sue when I had no reasonable expectation of success because I was too sickened and vilified by the misrepresentations of the strata management team to defend against them, and I had to prioritize earning a living over litigation and conflict.  As my circumstances change, I continue doing whatever I can, just as soon as I can.

People ask me, "Why circulate a PETITION?"

The answer is because the strata council persistently refuses to enforce the bylaws on their own, and it is now apparent that previous claims that the management team made repeatedly about needing to obtain legal advice before proceeding were bogus. Although I still feel unable to speak effectively in an atmosphere of hostility it is important to me to try everything else before proceeding with litigation as a last resort.  

I am trying my best to ensure that owners have the best opportunity to direct council in a more reasonable manner than previously when Al Macleod, Sherrill Berg, and Lynda Baker acted contrary to the Act for their own unjust enrichment and deceptively misrepresented fact and law to voters, thwarting informed decisions, corrective action, or reasonable remedies.  

 

People ask me, "In votes why do you often ABSTAIN?"

I abstain from voting when I do not raise my hand, and everyone can see that. It is a form of protest to expose fraudulent abuse of democratic process.

Even though abstaining is costly, and in some ways self-defeating, it serves to shine a spotlight on deception and danger; for example, when not a single vote is cast and the strata management team registers bogus bylaws with abstentions recorded as votes in favour or unanimous consent, and such fraud is accepted - normalizing abuse of democracy.

I began abstaining out of frustration when owner direction to council was sabotaged and special levy funds were diverted with tampered motions and minutes, and I continued when I was too numbed by deception and betrayal to bother with a charade. I stopped voting on motions that were unenforceable or in conflict with the Act, I no longer vote when I cannot tell what the motion is, and I seldom vote when I don't understand the content being decided - such as  indecipherable minutes and financial statements - especially when I haven't seen them in a year.

Having said that, I understand the cost of abstaining and I do support democracy. I make it my business to vote on matters of importance where there is deliberation, debate, and scrutiny - particularly in elections - federal, provincial, municipal, and strata. I make an effort to do my duty.