Condo corp asked for $39,535.53 in legal costs. The judge granted $10,000
"Ultimately, in fixing costs, I must assess what is “fair and reasonable in the circumstances, ..."
TSCC No. 1930 v. Ababio, 2020 ONSC 5472
Superior Court of Justice—Ontario
Court File No: CV-19-00612719-0000
Before: Justice Gillian Roberts
Date: 14 September 2020
Heard: 10 September 2020 ( via zoom)
The dispute started over a $5,000 insurance deductable that the unit owed the corporation. Then a few NSF cheque fees were added to this. The owners always paid their monthly maintenance fees and were in process, if slowly, of paying off the backcharges, including the interest.
The judge ruled that the condo owners owes the corporation $4,883.33 and that the lien that was registered against their unit is valid. Counsel for the condo corporation requested $39,535.53 in total legal costs. The judge granted $10,000 in costs.
He wrote: “In this case, TSCC 1930 succeeded on its motion and is entitled to costs, but I do not think the amount claimed is fair and reasonable in the circumstances. This is a routine action, relating to a relatively small amount of money.”
https://bit.ly/33ZKcob
The small townhouse condominium corporation has won a judgement for $14,883.33 that cost them $39,535.53 in legal costs.
Yet they really didn’t win much. The $4,883.33 was a chargeback that the condo was in no danger of losing and they were collecting monthly interest on that chargeback.
Who won?
The lawyers.
Who lost?
The owners of Unit #29 who have to pay their lawyer, the $10,000 cost award and most likely the costs of removing the lien. They already agreed that they owe the $4,883.33.
All the owners lost (including the owners of Unit #29) because they will have to pay their share of the $29,535.53 outstanding legal fees.
—H. Marshall
How is this consistent with the 'entry level' competencies outlined in CMRAO's wonderful assessment?
https://www.cmrao.ca/resources/publications/competencyprofileconsultationreporten.pdf
Lawyers causing corp and owners substantial financial injury like this, rather than providing sound legal advice, and maybe less harmful solutions through mediation, CAO resources, etc—is inconsistent with an entry level management competency—shouldn't the quality of service 'exceed' "entry level" when our esteemed lawyers become involved?
If lawyers are providing services to corps and owners that don't meet this standard, are they in breach of good faith fiduciary obligations? Is LSO's obligation to regulate and resolve?
—a reader
All we have here is a court decision. We do not know enough to understand:
• was it the Board or management who decided it was best to go to Superior Court?
• it is the Board who made the final decision. We don’t know what basis they used to make
that decision.
• what was the relationship between the owner, management and the Board?
• are there other outstanding chargebacks from other units?
• why was it so hard for management to give a proper breakdown of the outstanding
backcharges and legal fees?
• did the owner try to present a reasonable payment plan?
All we know for sure is that going to court is almost never a sure thing.
—H. Marshall