Doorbell cameras become point of contention at BC strata
A leasehold tenant at a BC strata has demanded that doorbell cameras be removed from common property because they contravene strata bylaws.
In a BC Civil Resolution Tribunal decision, Shelley Hudson brought her claim against the strata in question.
Hudson claims that the strata acted contrary to SPA section 36 by failing to provide the records and documents she requested about the doorbell cameras. She says the strata has allowed owners to install doorbell cameras and other video devices on common property, which she claims violates bylaws.
The strata said that it has sufficiently addressed Hudson’s request and that the doorbell cameras merely replaced the original doorbells, hence not actually constituting an alteration of common property.
The strata adds that the bylaws don’t require owners to obtain permission to install doorbell cameras or video cameras and wanted Hudson’s case dismissed.
- You might also like:
- Ding damn: BC renter sues strata for not being allowed a doorbell camera
- BC strata owners face big fine for inappropriate use of Ring camera
- BC strata owner loses fight for parking spots they used for decades
Hudson initially requested copies of correspondence with the strata council, strata manager, and individual owners about doorbell cameras and other devices in April 2023. The tribunal decision states that no legislation supported the necessity of a bylaw for doorbell cameras.
“Based on this conclusion, the strata determined that releasing the requested correspondence to Ms. Hudson was ‘an unnecessary and inappropriate violation of privacy,'” the decision stated.
Despite the strata’s hopes that the tribunal would dismiss the case, the tribunal actually did find that the strata had to provide Hudson with copies of the correspondence related to doorbell cameras, “with certain exemptions.”
The tribunal further disagreed with the strata’s assertion that replacing a regular doorbell with a doorbell camera was not an alteration.
“I reach the same conclusion about a camera that is added to an exterior wall where no camera existed previously,” the tribunal added.
The ultimate decision by the tribunal was the most damning for the BC strata.
The tribunal declared that the strata had to pay Hudson her tribunal fees ($236.60), provide the documentation she requested, and that, if people wanted to keep their doorbell cameras, they needed to apply in writing to the strata. Further, anyone who didn’t apply should have their doorbell cameras removed within 60 days of the tribunal decision. Hudson’s remaining claims were dismissed.
Click here for the full decision.
This isn’t the first time a case about doorbell cameras made its way to the BC tribunal. Last year, we published this story about an owner being fined for inappropriate use of a doorbell camera. There was also this renter who sued their strata for not being allowed a doorbell camera.
Do you live in a strata that has been involved in a dispute about alterations like this? Share your story with Vancouver@DailyHive.com, or leave your thoughts in the comments.