A Vancouver mattress owner will not receive floor replacement or other plumbing costs from his strata company after the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal ruled that the problem came from his suite. David Carten co-owns a suite in a 41-storey apartment building. He claimed that, in August 2019, the blockage of a joint property sewer caused water suction and damage to the suite. He said the mattresses failed to properly repair and maintain the sewer and provide some references to be adhered to. Carten asked for orders to pay the mattresses a total of $ 10,050. The mattresses denied any responsibility, saying the blockage did not occur in a commonly owned sewer, but in a pipe that was part of the suite. Alternatively, if it was found that the blockage was in a commonly owned sewer, the mattresses said it was not negligence. Carten dealt with the suction of water in his kitchen sink between August 8 and 14, 2019. He rented a hydraulic snake to unblock the pipe, and used chemicals to release the blockage, but his efforts were unsuccessful. So he kept a plumber to unblock the pipe and was charged $ 500.14. The plumber succeeded for the most part in unblocking the pipe, but the mattress sent his plumber, who successfully removed the blockage and priced the mattress for $ 425. The mattresses tried to persuade Carten to pay its plumbing costs, but court vice-president Garth Cambrey said that in order to recover the costs under the Strata property law, a mattress must set a law violation before charging an owner with costs. “There is no documented violation of the statute,” Cambrey said. Carten soon filed an insurance claim with his insurance company in the strata lot for damage he suffered as a result of backup plumbing support. Pay a $ 500 discount plus some floor coverings totaling $ 8,634.77. The evidence shows that there was no claim against the strata insurance policy because the water damage deduction was higher than the cost of repairs. In October 2019, Mattresses asked Carten to pay the amount of its plumbing bill. He replied that it was the responsibility of mattresses. Cambrey said there was no evidence before him to indicate the location of the blockage. “I do not have enough information to determine who is responsible for the part of the pipe in which the blockage occurred,” Cambrey said. Cambrey further found that there was no indication that the mattresses had breached their duty of care in the situation. Carten had requested hydraulic mattress files and claimed that the mattresses had not been provided. “I find that the mattresses were not able to provide all the files and documents that Mr Carten requested simply because they did not exist,” Cambrey said. Furthermore, the court found that the fact that the mattresses do not have a maintenance plan for cleaning the sewer pipes of common property does not mean that it was negligence. [email protected] twitter.com/jhainswo
