A decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice last November sends a strong warning to condominium corporations that it will not tolerate any abuse of power or oppressive conduct over its members.

The case involves Leigh and Harvin Gonzales who were looking for a condominium back in November, 2021. They inspected unit 133 at 4001 Don Mills Rd. and decided to buy it. The balcony had been converted into a solarium, and it made the unit more desirable for them.

Although their real estate agent obtained a status certificate from the condominium corporation, the buyers did not review it in any detail. They relied on their agent who told them it was “clear and clean.” The certificate made no mention of the solarium being an unauthorized change to the common element balcony.

An agreement of purchase and sale was presented and accepted. The buyers deleted many of the customary conditions which would have operated in their favour.

In April, 2023, the condominium levied two $3.2 million special assessments to be paid proportionately by the owners of the 161 units in the building. The money was earmarked for replacement of the aging balconies.

The share of the first assessment for the Gonzales unit was $21,905. They refused to pay it and the corporation registered a lien on their unit.

In order to replace the balconies, it was necessary to demolish the solarium on the Gonzales unit balcony and three other solariums on other balconies in the building. The Gonzaleses no longer had a copy of the original certificate and asked the corporation to provide a copy.

Instead of providing the original 2021 certificate, the corporation gave them a falsified copy which stated that the solarium was a modification and any removal would have to be at the expense of the owners.

The altered and falsified copy of the original certificate was backdated to 2021 and was signed by the previous manager.

Eventually the Gonzales couple found the original certificate and realized that the second certificate was falsified. The corporation refused to explain why the second certificate differed from the original.

Ultimately, the corporation removed the solarium and added the $11,000 first instalment of the cost to the unit’s account.

When the evidence of the altered certificate was presented in court last November, justice Robert Centa was shocked.

In his ruling he wrote, “The condominium corporation and its agents engaged in a shocking abuse of trust and power. The alteration and back-dating of a status certificate is among the most serious breaches that a corporation or its agents could commit.”

The judge ordered the corporation to pay the owners $75,000 in damages and the cost of removing the solarium. He also required the corporation to remove the lien on the Gonzales unit. The order for damages, he wrote, “is to denounce, in the strongest possible terms, the oppressive conduct of the corporation.”

The judge also noted that his decision “is to send a message of general deterrence to all other condominium corporations: the court will not tolerate oppressive and abusive conduct of this sort.”

Sadly, 160 innocent owners in the building have to share the cost of the $75,000 damages, $11,582.50 to remove the solarium, the building’s legal fees, and the court costs of the Gonzales couple.