Redscape - View topic - Seeking Condo Owners' Advice

Seeking Condo Owners' Advice

Page 1 of 1

Author

Topic

slappy
Dignitary

Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:07 pm

...or anyone else who might know a thing or two about this.

My wife and I own the top 3 floors of a stacked townhouse condo. Our neighbours own the bottom two floors. I got a note today telling me that the lady downstairs has some discoloration on her ceiling, right below my kitchen. I went down to look at it, and it's far from catastrophic, but it looks like something is indeed leaking from up my way. The number one guess is my dishwasher (which I have never pulled out from the counter and I don't think I can even attempt to pull out without pulling up the countertop a little to make room). If it's not that, it's either the sink drain or (best case scenario for me because it's not my nickel) the building's sprinkler system.

I've got a plumber coming tomorrow to cut into the lady's ceiling in search of the leak. I talked to my insurance company and they seemed to agree that this was my responsibility. I'm going to suggest to him that he try to check out the dishwasher first, just in case it is easier to inspect than I think it is. Failing that, I'm looking at a bill to repair the plumbing (unless it's the sprinklers) and to fix this lady's ceiling.

I'm not really seeking any specific advice here, but experience has taught me that it never hurts to seek input from those who may have traveled a similar road. Has anyone ever been in a similar situation, either as the leaker or the leakee? Smile

Anything I should watch out for or keep in mind?

_________________
"I suppose it is tempting, if the only tool you have is a hammer, to treat everything as if it were a nail." --Abraham Maslow

posts: 5317 | location: Upper Canada | joined: 07 Mar 2005

Green Arrow
Ambassador

Wed Jul 28, 2010 8:58 am

Pigmalia and I own a Property Management firm and have had a situation very similar to this occur last year.

Upstairs condo leaks at the hot water tank, and causes damage downstairs. We manage upstairs tenant, downstairs managed by someone else.

The bottom line of who was responsible was:
Upstairs owner is responsible for the damage
Downstairs owner was responsible to call for vendors. The reason for this is because of the liability the upstairs owner would incur in coordinating repairs. Suppose you call a plumber and carpenter to repair the pipes and ceiling. Upon opening up the ceiling they find mold, and asbestos. The price of the job just skyrocketed, and then your insurance may or may not cover it all. If you ordered the vendors you have liability to them. If the downstairs called the vendors, then the vendors are the downstairs responsibility. I am sure there is great communication and cooperation in your case as with ours.

We live by the maxim that no good deed goes unpunished.

_________________

posts: 2429 | location: Walla Walla, WA, USA | joined: 25 Jun 2000 | medals: 3

slappy
Dignitary

Wed Jul 28, 2010 9:26 am

Thanks for the reply, GA, but I'm a little confused by the term "vendors" in this context.

The plumber just left my house in the last hour. I lucked out and got a guy who seemed both very competent and very honest. He did not want to cut into the ceiling downstairs if we could avoid it. The frustrating thing was that he could not see any clear cause of the ceiling discoloration in my kitchen plumbing. There was some moisture on some wood way in the back, just above the floor, but no clear culprit. The only two possibilities seemed to be the dishwasher drainage hose (although he couldn't find a leak in it) and some water leakage around the base of our kitchen faucet when it was all the way on. I'm a worrier, so despite the fact that he advised me to wait a while to see which might be the real problem, I wanted it fixed now. I paid him to replace the faucet and he threw in the hose replacement for free and he didn't charge for the labour for the faucet installation. I wish some of you lived in the GTA because I'd love to throw this guy some more business. (In somebody else's house, of course.) Smile

At the end of the day, though, I really have no idea if I've stopped the leak yet. I have to keep a close eye on the floor under the dishwasher and the below-sink cupboards for the next week, and of course the lady downstairs will be keeping a close eye on her ceiling. To make things even more interesting, it turns out the poor woman is trying to sell her unit, and it must be annoying to her that she has to put up with that discoloration for at least another week. If a week goes by with no further evidence of a problem, I need to start pricing painters for her ceiling.

Ah, the joys of home ownership. At least with a condo I don't have to worry about the roof. Smile

posts: 5317 | location: Upper Canada | joined: 07 Mar 2005

Green Arrow
Ambassador

Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:03 am

Vendors: Any hired contractor or worker (i.e. plumber or carpenter)

posts: 2429 | location: Walla Walla, WA, USA | joined: 25 Jun 2000 | medals: 3

slappy
Dignitary

Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:14 am

Ah, ok. That's not a use of the term that I've ever encountered before.

GA wrote:

Downstairs owner was responsible to call for vendors. The reason for this is because of the liability the upstairs owner would incur in coordinating repairs. Suppose you call a plumber and carpenter to repair the pipes and ceiling. Upon opening up the ceiling they find mold, and asbestos. The price of the job just skyrocketed, and then your insurance may or may not cover it all. If you ordered the vendors you have liability to them. If the downstairs called the vendors, then the vendors are the downstairs responsibility.

I find this odd. Are you sure this is correct? Under Ontario law, if the damage is caused by the upstairs tenant's property, it doesn't matter who calls the contractor. The upstairs tenant is liable for the full extent of the damage caused by his water leak. I would have thought that this was the case in most common law jurisdictions. Have you received advice from a local lawyer that this is not the case in your state?

posts: 5317 | location: Upper Canada | joined: 07 Mar 2005

Archduke Russell John I
Dignitary

Wed Jul 28, 2010 11:24 am

Slappy,

I think what Brad is trying to say is if the plumber opened up the ceiling and found mold but didn't clean it up (or got sick), the person who hires them is liable.

_________________
"There is hardly a political question in the United States which does not sooner or later turn into a judicial one."

Alexis de Tocqueville (1805 -1859)

posts: 1760 | location: Philadelphia Pa | joined: 29 Jan 2003 | medals: 2

Green Arrow
Ambassador

Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:19 pm

Archduke is absolutely correct on my meaning. It just puts a veil of protection over you.

posts: 2429 | location: Walla Walla, WA, USA | joined: 25 Jun 2000 | medals: 3

slappy
Dignitary

Wed Jul 28, 2010 12:45 pm

Archduke Russell John I wrote:

I think what Brad is trying to say is if the plumber opened up the ceiling and found mold but didn't clean it up (or got sick), the person who hires them is liable.

Ah, ok. I have to say I'm still surprised, though. I would have thought the contractor would be liable for negligence in his repairs (ignoring the mold). Likewise, I would have thought that he would assume the risks of hazards like mold as a part of his business. Having a plumber sue for illness due to mold encountered in a water-damaged ceiling sounds to me like an electrician suing for electrical burns suffered while rewiring a house.

posts: 5317 | location: Upper Canada | joined: 07 Mar 2005

SuperAnt
Dignitary

Thu Jul 29, 2010 8:57 am

We aren't talking about just negligence here slappy, we're talking about and legal requirements the contractors have.

Knowing the Ontario government scams..I mean, schemes, and the like, I would expect that if a plumber or an electrician or any other contractor encountered a health hazard like mold or asbestos when opening up a wall for unrelated work, they would be required to report it. If possible, they would also likely have to fix the problem. That incurs a cost. The contractor would expect that cost to be paid.

From what I understand, if Brad's company hired the contractor, he could conceivably be considered liable if the other property management company refused to pay (for example, if they have a pre-existing ongoing contract with another contractor and want to honour it). But if the other property management company found the problems, it is the other company that is liable.

Of course, I could be way off here. Ontario has some funky property laws.

_________________
Obstacles are only the things you see when you take your eyes off the goal.

posts: 3904 | location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada | joined: 24 Sep 2001 | medals: 5

Archduke Russell John I
Dignitary

Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:02 am

It's also, if the plumber opened up the wall, found mold and then later contracted an illness from inhaling the mold spores, whom ever hired him is liable for any damages caused by the illness.

posts: 1760 | location: Philadelphia Pa | joined: 29 Jan 2003 | medals: 2

slappy
Dignitary

Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:36 pm

Archduke Russell John I wrote:

It's also, if the plumber opened up the wall, found mold and then later contracted an illness from inhaling the mold spores, whom ever hired him is liable for any damages caused by the illness.

Can you point me to a case or a statute that says as much, Archduke? I understand SA's point above about the duty to report and rectify under some health and safety statute or other raising a practical concern about who ultimately foots the bill for the mandated cleanup, but I find it bizarre that an expert on water systems who would likely have every reason to anticipate a mold discovery can sue a layperson who would likely have had no reason on earth to suspect any dangers.

Back to SA's point, just so I'm clear on this: it wouldn't be the management company that has ultimate liability, would it? They're just acting as agents for the property owners.

posts: 5317 | location: Upper Canada | joined: 07 Mar 2005

rickyp
Statesman

Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:04 am

slappy
The condomiunium incorporation act of 91 probably covers most of this...
When you bought your condo you were provided with your condominiums laws and regualtions weren't you? Check them out in detail. ... They can be different from condo corp to condo corp. But generally I think you should expect to be responsible for internal damage caused by a maintnance problem in your unit. Your bigggest worry should be mould damage. Your insurance may or may not cover this as well...read the fine print. There's damage to your unit and damge to anoterh and you may be responsible for your own, but the damage to your neighbor insurance may cover. (Liability)
It may be, however, that your condominium corporation is responsible for some of these costs according to the regulations they've decided upon. At the very least they would act as the police man for the event and ensure all sides are treated fairly and according to the agreement.
I'm gone through something similar regarding repairs to our condo and "jurisdiction". and "responsibility".

_________________
http://img376.imageshack.us/im.....ingrs3.jpg

posts: 4768 | location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada | joined: 14 Aug 2000

slappy
Dignitary

Tue Aug 10, 2010 6:51 am

Thanks, ricky. I hope that this is all taken care of now. I had a slightly leaky kitchen faucet replaced and repainted the ceiling downstairs. I'll be on pins and needles for the next few months, waiting for the next phone call about new signs of a continuing leak, but here's hoping that I've fixed it.

posts: 5317 | location: Upper Canada | joined: 07 Mar 2005

Page 1 of 1

You cannot post new topics
You cannot reply to topics
You cannot edit your posts
You cannot delete your posts
You cannot vote in polls
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Jump to: