Strata sues BC homeowner for letting grandson stay with her in a 55+ unit
A resident who co-owns a strata lot was sued by the corporation for letting her grandson stay with her because he was under 55 years old.
It’s all related to a policy that applies to certain strata lots, where residency is restricted to residents who are 55 years old or above.
The strata was looking for $2,400 for bylaw fines.
Dorothy Bendsen’s mother, referred to as RM, was the sole occupant of the suite in question until she was hospitalized in 2019. When she returned to the unit in 2020, she required overnight medical care, which Bendsen’s son, RM’s grandson, provided.
The strata says Bendsen breached the age restriction bylaws by allowing her son to occupy the unit.
RM suffered a stroke in 2019, and when she returned in 2020, Bendsen advised the strata that her son would stay for a few weeks. The tribunal decision states there’s no evidence the strata objected.
By late 2021, the grandson stayed at the unit with RM, requiring healthcare aides two to three times per week.
In March 2022, the strata wrote to Bendsen, asking her son to vacate by April 30, 2022. Bendsen requested a council meeting in response, which took place in May. As a result, the strata sent the residents a letter and extended the vacate deadline to June 30. The letter warned that the strata would impose fines if the deadline wasn’t met.
The tribunal decision states, “On July 5, 2022, the strata again wrote to respondents. The letter states the grandson was still residing in SL1 and that the strata had imposed a $200 fine effective July 1, 2022, and that $200 fines would continue every seven days until the bylaw contravention ceased.”
Between July and September, $2,400 was imposed in fines.
The tribunal then turned to the Human Rights Code, as the residents said that RM was entitled to reasonable accommodation as the code outlines.
According to the tribunal, the strata needed to “prove RM was adversely impacted by the strata’s actions to impose fines while her grandson lived in SL1, and that her disability was a factor in the adverse impact. After that, the burden shifts to the strata to establish a bona fide and reasonable justification for not permitting RM’s grandson to continue living in SL1.”
Ultimately, the tribunal found that the strata failed to accommodate RM, meaning that the age restriction bylaws were not enforceable for the grandon giving overnight care.
Follow Channels and Categories