It was a car cage grudge match at the B.C. Civil Resolution Tribunal June 21 but a B.C. strata walked away the winner after being told it didn’t have to pay for a safety cage for two owners’ vehicle.
Babak Sadeghvishkaei and Elham Khosravani of Langley told tribunal member Kate Campbell their car’s the catalytic converter was stolen while it was parked in the strata’s underground parking area.
They said the strata was negligent and claimed $10,000 in damages — including $3,496 to build the cage.
The strata denied any wrongdoing or liability.
The strata plan shows that it was created in August 2021, and consists of 91 residential strata lots, and 25 commercial strata lots, in a four-storey building with underground parking.
“The strata’s bylaws create separate sections for the residential and commercial strata lots,” Campbell said in her
Sadeghvishkaei and Khosravani said after the theft, they built a wooden “cage” around their parking space to protect their vehicle. They requested that the tribunal provide “direction” about whether the strata must allow the cage to remain.
The strata, however, said the cage might be a bylaw violation, something Campbell ruled outside the scope of the complaint.
The vehicle repair cost was $2,528, of which ICBC paid all but $412.
Sadeghvishkaei and Khosravani alleged the strata manager was present at the time and likely involved in the theft. The strata said the management company employs the manager, and that it's not responsible for the employee’s conduct.
Campbell said she found no evidence the manager was negligent and that he was involved in the theft.
“The police report says there was no evidence to justify interrogating or arresting (the manager),” Campbell said.
She also found the garage is limited common property for the exclusive use of "residential section owners."
“I find the residential section, and not the strata, is responsible to manage, repair and maintain the parking garage. This includes the security issues raised by the applicants in this dispute,” Campbell said. "So, I find the strata did not owe the applicants a duty of care in this regard."
And, she added, the fact the theft occurred does prove the strata or residential section acted unreasonably.
“I find the applicants have not shown that any specific security measure would have prevented the theft,” Campbell said. “The applicants argue that there should have been better security in general, but they have not proven that their loss would not have occurred otherwise.”
All told, of the $10,000, Sadeghvishkaei and Khosravani claimed for the cage, $3,000 for Sadeghvishkaei’s lost income and $3,000 for injury to dignity under the Human Rights Code.
Campbell dismissed the claim.
