Tribunal blasts Kelowna strata after condo owner endures years of issues from unhoused population

It was only a few months into owning his Baron Road ground-floor condo when Braden Rosenfeld realized how bad the situation with certain members of the street entrenched was.

With only a low railing dividing his patio from the road, he constantly endured theft, loitering, littering, and open drug use directly beside his patio. To make matters worse, his unit was beside a fire exit with a covered alcove, which acted as a shelter and a place to sleep.

And when Rosenfeld turned to the strata, which assured him something would be done before he bought the place, the issue got worse.

Instead of building a wall or fence to give him the privacy and security the other units had, the strata washed its hands of the matter, levied him $12,000 in fines, and barred him from using the building’s facilities.

“It was the worst,” Rosenfeld told iNFOnews.ca. “I just wanted a home that was safe… I didn’t want anything more.”

The situation dragged on for three years, until last month when Rosenfeld won a legal challenge against Strata KAS2071, with the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal ruling that the Strata actions were “burdensome and harsh” and that it had treated him “significantly unfairly.”

“It’s probably the biggest relief in the world,” Rosenfeld said.

Rosenfeld’s case is laid out in an unusually long 22-page Tribunal decision, which ordered the strata to wipe the fines and for a “first-class” wall or fence to be built within the next four months.

It’s a victory for Rosenfeld, who says it’s been a long time coming.

Rosenfeld’s unit is unique in the complex, while all the other units’ patios are inside the Strata’s gated area, his isn’t.

The decision says months before Rosenfeld bought the ground floor unit, the Strata cut down a well-established cedar hedge as unhoused people were “starting fires, doing drugs, and using the bushes for various things.”

When Rosenfeld inquired about what would replace the hedge, the strata assured him the matter would be dealt with.

“I bought it with a… reasonable expectation that this would be resolved,” he said.

It wasn’t.

The decision says he provided evidence to the Tribunal of what was taking place next to his patio.

“Pictures showing unhoused people congregating, doing drugs, and sleeping in the alcove next to his patio. The pictures also show drug paraphernalia, urine, garbage, and the remains of a fire,” the Tribunal said.

He submitted video evidence of people yelling, swearing and threatening him, until he retreats inside after someone throws something at him.

Rosenfeld also submitted statements from a local security company that patrols nearby which reiterated the concerns about anti-social behaviour. An RCMP officer also provided a statement about the local street-entrenched population and how Rosenfeld’s patio was easily accessible and needed increased safety features.

When the strata failed to act, Rosenfeld built his own security fence. It was unauthorized, so the strata began fining him.

He offered to pay $1,000 himself to fix the issue, but the strata refused.

At one point, he put up security cameras, but again the strata fined him.

The Tribunal was not impressed.

“At this point, Mr. Rosenfeld had been living in (the condo) for over two-and-a-half years and faced the brunt of the ongoing security issues within the strata. The strata could have worked with Mr. Rosenfeld. Instead, it took the punitive approach, which I find harsh,” the Tribunal said.

The Tribunal ruled that by removing the hedge, the strata created an “inequality” as all the other units have a walled patio.

“Every other residential strata lot owner can enjoy their limited common property patio in privacy. In contrast, Mr. Rosenfeld’s patio is fully exposed, and offers no privacy or protection,” the Tribunal said.

The Tribunal went on to say that failing to address the issue was burdensome and harsh and criticized the strata’s “significantly unfair actions.”

“The strata could have worked with Mr. Rosenfeld to erect a temporary privacy screen that all parties could accept. Instead, the strata chose to fine Mr. Rosenfeld $50 weekly while he tried to address legitimate security and privacy concerns. The strata also decided to reverse its stated position and demanded that Mr. Rosenfeld pay for any modification to (the) patio. This is despite the strata creating the issue when it removed the hedge,” the Tribunal ruled.

The Tribunal said while the strata have since planted 10 small barberry bushes in front of the patio, there was no evidence as to whether they’d be effective.

In an unusual move, the Tribunal also ordered the Strata to build a patio barrier using precise measurements, at a cost of $21,500. Work has to be done within 180 days, the Tribunal ruled.

Rosenfeld said the entire situation has been very stressful.

“It was never turned off. It was always like some sort of thing present,” he said.

In his jubilation, he had a T-shirt printed.

It reads, “I beat my strata in court,” and on the back it says, “Ask me how?”