A Nanaimo strata has been ordered to pay an owner $4,588 for strata-wide cockroach treatment problems billed to her account.
Alanna Hurren claimed the strata unfairly charged back $4,588 to her account, according to a Sept. 24 decision from member Maria Montgomery. She said was there no evidence that cockroaches originated from their strata lot.
The strata denied Hurren’s claim.
“It says the pest control management company identified their strata lot as the source of the infestation and that Mrs. Hurren did not take appropriate action to address the problem,” Montgomery wrote.
She said the strata became aware of complaints of cockroaches within some strata lots in early 2021 and asked a pest management company to treat them.
“The infestation grew to impact many strata lots resulting in a pest management company attending the strata many times throughout 2021 and 2022,” Montgomery said.
The strata said that the pest control company informed the strata verbally and in writing that Hurren’s strata lot was the originating cause of the infestation and that Hurren’s lack of cooperation prevented the eradication of the cockroaches.
So, the strata decided it was appropriate to charge Hurren’s strata lot for the cost of future treatments.
According to Sept. 12, 2022, strata council meeting minutes, the strata sent Hurren a letter regarding chargebacks for pest management services on Sept. 6, 2022.
The strata provided 10 invoices it said were charged to Hurren’s account, totalling $7,733.25.
Montgomery said neither party explained the discrepancy between that charge and the $4,588 claim.
Hurren said the true origin of the infestation was a strata lot beside her, based on a conversation they had with the owner of that strata lot.
Montgomery said the question before her was whether the strata, having arranged and paid for pest management treatments, had the authority to charge back those costs to Hurren.
She said sa国际传媒 Supreme Court considered a strata’s obligations specifically in relation to a bedbug problem and found that a strata’s obligation to manage and maintain common property includes the responsibility to protect common property from harm, including harm from insects and pests.
“Here, I find that the strata was obligated to address the cockroach problem as part of its obligation to repair and maintain common property,” Montgomery said.
But, she said, the question remained as to whether the strata, after discharging that responsibility, had the authority to charge Hurren for the cost of doing so.
What tipped the decision in Hurren’s favour was that the strata did not have a bylaw allowing it to charge her strata lot when it sent her the chargeback letter.
“So, I find that the strata’s chargeback is invalid, and I order that the strata repay Mrs. Hurren the amount of the chargeback they paid, which is $4,588.50,” Montgomery ruled.
