⚠️ “We were advised by our lawyers…”
That line is not a justification – it’s an excuse. The board wants you to believe that spending đź’° $3 million of your money without owner approval is acceptable because their lawyers said so.
âť— Why This Is Dangerous
- 👛 Lawyers don’t pay the bills- you do.
Their fees, their advice, their mistakes are all paid out of our pockets. - 📉 Track record of failure.
These are the same lawyers who advised the board to sue owners in the Condominium Authority Tribunal (CAT), only to lose, and then waste even more money on an appeal. If their advice was so “sound,” why did the courts reject it? - 📜 The law requires oversight.
- ⚖️ Section 97, Condominium Act, 1998 – Substantial changes to the common elements require owner approval. A $3 million project is not a minor repair.
- 🗳️ Section 56 – Borrowing by-laws (to authorize loans) also require a vote of the owners.
- 🛑 Section 135 – Oppressive conduct by a board, including stripping owners of their voting rights, can be challenged in court.
🤔 The Real Question
If their legal advice already cost us hundreds of thousands in failed litigation, why would we blindly trust them?
âś… What You Can Do
- 🗣️ Refuse to be silenced by slogans. “Our lawyers said so” is not a legal defence; it’s a distraction.
- 🔎 Demand transparency. Require the board to call a meeting and hold a proper vote before encumbering the condominium with millions in cost.
- 👩‍⚖️ Hold them accountable. Section 37 of the Act imposes a duty on directors to act honestly and in good faith. Blind reliance on failed advice is not good faith – it’s negligence.
💡 Bottom line: Lawyers are advisors, not rulers. The board cannot outsource accountability. If they insist on spending millions without consulting owners, the problem is not just bad advice- it’s bad governance and a breach of the Condominium Act.
