Condo door is common property, owner not responsible for replacing glue-filled lock, B.C. tribunal rules

A North Vancouver condo building has lost its bid to force the owner of one unit to pay for a replacement lock after a bizarre incident in which glue was "injected" into the locking mechanism.

The owners of Strata Plan LMS447 took Iakovos Seni to B.C.'s Civil Resolution Tribunal after he refused to reimburse them for the $219.10 they paid a locksmith to fix the problem.

In British Columbia, a condominium owners' association is known as a strata corporation.

Seni told the CRT his front door and its lock are part of the strata's common property, meaning the strata is responsible for repairing and maintaining it, and he is not responsible for paying the locksmith charge.

In a decision issued Monday and posted on the CRT website, tribunal member Jeffrey Drozdiak agreed with Seni and dismissed the strata's claims. 

Lock filled with glue

The incident that led to the dispute took place on March 9, 2023, according to Drozdiak's decision.

"Mr. Seni and his wife discovered that someone had injected glue into their front door lock, preventing them from accessing their strata lot," the decision reads. "They filed a police report and went to the strata president for help. The strata president phoned the strata’s caretaker and asked them to contact the strata’s locksmith."

The locksmith came later that day and fixed the lock by "drilling out the old lock cylinder and replacing it," according to the decision.

The decision does not provide any additional details about who filled the lock with glue, other than noting that both parties agree it was not Seni.

CTV News reached out to North Vancouver RCMP to inquire as to whether anyone was ever arrested or charged for the apparent vandalism. The detachment confirmed in an email that it was called about the incident.

"No arrests were made," said Const. Mansoor Sahak. "The investigation was concluded due to lack of evidence to proceed forward."

Regardless of who injected glue into the lock, the strata corporation paid the locksmith's invoice. It argued that Seni's door is not common property, and therefore he should reimburse it for the repairs.

Door is common property

Drozdiak's decision notes that B.C.'s Strata Property Act makes strata corporations responsible for repairing and maintaining common property, and strata plan LMS447 has a bylaw that creates the same obligation.

While there is an exception to the bylaw requiring owners to pay for damage they cause to common property, Drozdiak found that exception does not apply in this case.

"The boundary of a strata lot is the midway point between the exterior wall and the common property," the tribunal member's decision explains.

"There is no evidence to suggest that the front door is set inside of the wall’s centre, so I find it is not. On this basis, I find that (Seni's) front door is common property. This finding is consistent with past CRT decisions."

The strata argued that even if the door is common property, the lock is "solely controlled by Mr. Seni for his exclusive benefit," and therefore should not be considered common property.

Drozdiak was unconvinced by this argument, addressing and rebutting several points raised by the strata in its submissions.

First, he noted, the fact that owners routinely replace locks when they move in or when they lose their keys does not have any bearing on the strata's obligation to maintain and repair common property, as neither of those scenarios involves the lock being broken.

"Second, the strata argues the current situation is no different than when an owner accidentally breaks their key off in the door lock," the decision reads.

"The strata says in those circumstances the owner is responsible for the repairs. I find this example is not comparable. If an owner broke their key off in the lock, the lock becomes inoperable. So, the strata would have a duty to repair the lock. However, bylaw 3(10) would make the owner responsible for the cost, as they caused the damage. That is not the case here, where someone else damaged the lock."

Finally, the strata argued that treating locks as common property "would be problematic from a policy perspective" because it would give strata corporations ownership and control over keys to every unit.

"I have difficulty understanding the strata’s argument," Drozdiak's decision reads.

"The strata does not say why repairing and maintaining a locking mechanism means it owns and controls the key. In any event, I find a strata’s duty to repair and maintain a front door lock does not extend to ownership over the keys. The locking mechanism is part of the door, which is common property. The key is not common property, as it is a physical object."

The tribunal member dismissed the strata's case, finding it had failed to prove that Seni was responsible for paying the locksmith bill.