Strata tries to pin $15K security camera bill on landlord after catching tenant doing nothing

A Chilliwack, B.C., strata that hired its own security company to try to catch a tenantbreaking the law has lost its battle to have thatextra security paid for.

One of the main reasons it lost? The cameras didn't catch the tenantdoing anything illegal.

The Windsor Pines complexstrata went to the Civil Resolution Tribunal this year, asking a unit'slandlords to put $15,000 toward the cost of surveillance.

Neighbours suspected the tenantwas doing something illegal in thehome.

The strata lost, largely because security footage from the company only captured the tenantgoing in and out of the building, letting guests in and holding the front door.

"The hours of the comings and goingmay give an appearance of something untoward, [but] they do not show the former tenant was engaged in any illegal activities," read the ruling, dated Oct. 30.

Neighbours complain

Neighbours in the building believed the tenantwas up to something illegal a number of times leading up to August 2017.

They went to their strata, which hired a third-party security firm.

That security firm gathered footage from August 2017 to March of this year but nothing other than the tenantcoming and going, walking their guests to and from their suite and propping the front door open appeared on the tape.

In February, other owners in the building voted to coverthe $18,257.40 cost of the past year's surveillancewith the strata's contingency reserve fund.

The strata went to the CRT later in the year, asking the tenant's landlords to pay for $15,000 of that cost.

'You always have to justify it'

Jennifer Neville, who hasbeen a strata property lawyer for 15 years, said the strata didn't succeed for three reasons.

First, it didn't prove the tenants broke any building rules.

"Arguably, they certainly were going to argue that the security camera was necessary for remedying the contravention of the bylaw, but what they failed to prove was that there was a bylaw breach in the first place," said Neville, who didn't work on the case but read a copy of the ruling.

Second, if the strata had proven a breach, it would have had to notify the tenant or their landlord.

Third, the strata also didn't point to a bylaw that would have allowed them to claim the money in its case with the tribunal.

Neville said strata corporations can claim money against an owner to cover any repairs or remedies that come from the owner breaking a bylaw, but there are common mistakes made.

"I regularly see this situation where strata corporations are trying to charge a cost and they're probably doing it because they feel in their gut it's the right thing to do, but what they forget is you always have to justify it," she said.

The strata had also asked the owners pay $1,200 in bylaw fines and hire a property management company to help choose tenants in future. The tribunal dismissed both those issues.