Expectant couple told to sell their home after B.C. strata votes to make complex 55-plus

Razan Talebian and her husband were overjoyed when they found out last month they were expecting their first child together.

They had finally found a place to live in Maple Ridge, B.C., with their cat and dog in a building that was originally only for people ages 35 and older.

But when the B.C. government amended the Strata Act to remove almost all rental restrictions last November, Talebian and her husband put in an offer right away.

“So we’re on the market in September looking for a house. November is when the restrictions were lifted and we put in the offer and a day after and we were able to live in our house at the end of December,” she said.

Then some more good news came for the couple when Talebian found out she was pregnant in early January.

Shortly after they received a notice that a special general meeting was being held to vote on whether owners wanted to change the complex to only ages 55 and over.

Only buildings that are 55-plus can implement an age restriction bylaw under the amended Act.

“I thought, ‘Wow, I’m lucky I got pregnant before that,” Talebian said. “But I shouldn’t have even been feeling that way. I should have just felt confident that I felt safe for my future and for my future children.”

The couple attended the meeting on Feb. 8.

“It was an open floor and everyone was kind of talking about their concerns,” Talebian said. “People don’t want families in this complex. They don’t want children running around. And I spoke and I said, ‘Well, what does this mean for me and my children?'”

She said when she voiced her concerns about having a child and starting a family, many of the owners and council were laughing at her.

That’s when she said they told her they would have to put their house up for sale.

“And I said, ‘Well, you know, the baby’s part of me. Before we even had the special general meeting’,” Talebian added. “They start laughing and they say, ‘Well, he’s not physically here’.”

1:55 Some B.C. stratas considering 55-year-old age minimum

Tony Gioventu, the executive director of the Condominium Homeowners Association of B.C., told Global News that age restrictions only apply to occupancy, not ownership strata.

“Corporations can’t force someone to sell their home,” he said. “Nor can they prevent someone who’s underage from purchasing a home. Oftentimes, families may purchase units for retired parents or relatives, and it’s not in their name, but that’s irrelevant. Ownership cannot be prohibited by an age restriction. It’s just purely occupancy.

“The bigger challenge I think that happens is this weird transition period that people have when you’ve purchased a place, but then you have a transition that occurs where a bylaw is changed and that has a significant impact on potential use of property in the future.”

Gioventu said the strata could make an application to the Civil Resolution Tribunal and request enforcement of the bylaw, which would consist of awarding fines and an order to comply.

“And the difficulty, especially for this person, is that their family status is going to change,” he added. “And they were occupants in residence at the time the bill was passed. So they’re exempt from the bylaw. But the real question comes down to now is because their family status will change, does that affect them? And, you know, age restriction bylaws are enforceable.”

In a statement to Global News, Bayside Property Services said it provides strata management services to the corporation through the elected strata council.

“We take direction from the strata council. Bayside has no comment on the issues regarding the 55+ bylaw recently approved by the owners at a special general meeting of the strata corporation, other than to say that we will be recommending the strata council seek legal advice regarding this extremely complicated situation.”

2:18 B.C. strata denies condo sale to family of five

Talebian said they have not received any follow-up communication about the bylaw so they are trying to figure out what to do next.

“This is a very unique situation because I was pregnant before the vote was passed,” she said. “So I’m thinking, okay, you know, I’m not even three months into my pregnancy. What if I have a miscarriage? And that is very normal for a woman to have within three months of their pregnancy. Are they going to try and say, oh, it was just for the baby before the vote was passed?

“And what does that mean for my second child? Does that mean because it’s 55 and over and that’s what they were trying to push on me, that since the vote is now 55 and over, I need to sell my house?”

Gioventu said he thinks both Talebian and the strata council seek legal advice on this matter.

“I think the really big message out of this is that strata councils have been writing their own age restriction bylaws and they’ve been getting themselves into a bit of trouble,” he said. “They need to get some legal advice on their own bylaws before they adopt them, before they pass, and seriously think about what the consequences are going to be.”

Talebian added that she is very confused by the situation.

“And what does that mean for my second child?” she asked.

“What if I do get pregnant again? And I have to feel like I have to put my house up for sale or be in a lifetime of debt if I do not break even from that. It’s just a big gray area and we need to have the information out there.”