OHTA.ca

Help!

My boyfriend and I each own a smart car and have been sharing a parking spot in our condo for the past three months. Together, both vehicles fit in the spot easily.

A couple nights ago one of our cars received a $30 ticket from the Toronto Parking Authority, who we later learned had been called in from the management of the building. The security guard, on instruction from management, let the Parking Authority into the garage and asked that the first car be ticketed because it was blocking another car (mine) in.

The official ticket says that the car does not have permission from the propery owner to be parked there.

When we spoke to the management/corporation of the building, they told us that "one parking space = one car." We asked to see a copy of the rules and regulations and, after giving us a hard time about it, management showed us the rule that states that our condo is entitled to one parking space. There is no rule that we cannot park two vehicles in that spot.

We asked about the spaces in which a car and motorcycle share (there is at least one), and they said that is acceptable, but two smart cars are not. They told us that our only option is to take them to court.

We'll be writing a letter to the board but neighbours have told us it probably won't do any good.

I'm wondering if we can also try fighting the ticket. Should the Toronto Parking Authority have asked to see the rule stating that two vehicles cannot share a spot or can they just ticket based on the word of management? Again, the rule is not included in the rules and regulations of the condo, and the management/corporation never notified us in any way that this non-existent rule would be enforced.

As infractions are based on the laws of Ontario's Highway Traffic Act, I'm hoping someone here can give me some advice!!!

Thanks in advance.

Your first place to start is here:

I would then send them a registered demand letter with

c.c. your barrister and solicitor

Then, print off a filled out ONTARIO SMALL CLAIMS FORM (google) with CASE ID as "PENDING" typed out on top.

If that doesn't works, file your claim and take the PROPERTY MANAGER (not the condo owners) to the cleaners!!

Good luck, keep us posted

Fight the ticket. Take a picture of the motorbikes and proceed to court. The rules of the road apply equally to both MC's and cars so.........Your management group is trying dirty tricks to get you to pay for more then what you need.

Fight the ticket, sure. But there is no need to go to court against your building yet. Simply bypass the property manager and take you issue up with the building's board of directors. Let them know that there is no no clause in the corporation's bylaws that state one space = one car. Let them know that you are willing to see it play out in court.

Taking the property manager to court on this issue is the same thing as taking the corporation to court since the manager is representing the interests of the corporation.

A smart car is a motor vehicle for all purposes of the HTA, POA or municipal roadway related by-laws.

A motorcycle is also a motor vehicle for all purposes of the HTA, POA or municipal roadway related by-laws.

Since the building owner already allows a car and motorcycle to be parked in one parking space they are allowing two motor vehicles to use one space.

They cannot deny you the same right.

If the building is not owned by the city then the Toronto Parking Authority has no jurisdiction to issue parking tickets on private property.

You should also consider organizing either:

1) A coup to elect yourself and your friends to the board so you can fix the bylaws.

2) Organize a bylaw change to specificially allow 2 your situation.

Greatest Canadian wrote:

If the building is not owned by the city then the Toronto Parking Authority has no jurisdiction to issue parking tickets on private property.

Wrong. The corporation can grant the parking authority permission to issue tickets on it's property. In fact, management firms usually use security firms that are licensed by the parking authority to write parking tickets. Payments of these tickets goes to the city. A nice little scam.

Frozenover wrote:You should also consider organizing either:

1) A coup to elect yourself and your friends to the board so you can fix the bylaws.

2) Organize a bylaw change to specificially allow 2 your situation.

Good points. Even is the OP succeeds in a lawsuit, the board of directors can move to amend the bylaws to prohibit the parking of 2 vehicles in one spot. To really save your parking spots, you need to start politicking now and building up support among the other residents.

LOL, I will never buy into a condo.

Under what Act are you suggesting the city can issue parking tickets on private property?

The only control a city has over private owned parking lots or facilities is under the disabled parking spaces.

And despite what the court has already stated regarding disabled spaces, I disagree with them. A city can require so many spaces be for the disabled on private property, I doubt a condo would be subject to this, but they have no enforcment provosions available because the Lieutenant Governor in Council has not made regulations prescribing private property subject to the HTA and its disable permit provisons.

Moreover, vicarious liabilities under the HTA are unconsitutional, and in my view, they are also unconstitutional under a city by-law. Thus even if the city could issue parking tickets on private property under a city by-law they must be issued to the driver committing the infraction, and the ticket cannot be left on the car leaving the the owner of the vehicle liable for the infraction.

If you believe that the city can't issue tickets on private property (when given permission by the property owner), why not park your car in a condo parking lot and try it out yourself. Fight the ticket in court and let us know how it turns out.

I agree, Pinch. This practice has been going on for years. The TPA issues the ticket - the ONLY ticket that one has to pay [ETA: Impark is the only other ticket issuer that you must pay and the ONLY private company with this privilege in the City of Toronto, and probably in the province].

There were scams going on not too long ago where private tow companies were issuing tickets that looked identical to the TPA tickets in order to receive payment. The City of Toronto made the public aware of this scam, and made them aware of the fact that their licences would only be affected if they did not pay legitimate TPA parking tickets.

Also, if your car was towed off of private property (this law might be changed now) in the city of Toronto without the authorization of TPA(Toronto Police Service Parking Authority), the impound lot had no right to refuse you your vehicle. This happened to me, I freaked out at the impound lot, called the cops, and the tow company impound lot employees were ordered by Toronto Police to release my vehicle. They wanted over $300.00 for ticket fee (for no ticket, imagine that) and towing fees and impound fees. I didn't have $300.00 on me, nor in my bank account (these were the days before Debit machines at every vendor's cash point).

See, they were towing on behalf of a private company on private property. There were no tickets issued by TPA to my car, nor any towing orders issued by the TPA. There were no legally required signs quoting by-law numbers, no "No Parking" signs, no "Tow Zone" signs - zip, zilch, nada. These particular vultures (the tow truck drivers) were, I and my friend both remember, idling on the far side of this HUGE lot that we parked in. I remember looking around for "No Parking" signs, but saw none and thus parked. They were WAITING for people such as us to park, and I'm willing to bet that they towed my car as soon as my friend and I were inside. Creeps.

Therefore, ultimately, the property owner was on the hook (pun not intended!) to pay for all towing costs associated with the removal of the vehicle(s). They tried to get me to sign a release paper to try to take me to small claims court, but I told them to shove it, I was not required to, nor would I sign anything. Also, it was not worth it for them (the property owner) to take this to court, and in truth, only a small number of people were aware of this law so they took the loss. In fact, because they removed my car and caused damage to the front bumper (minor), I could've theoretically counter-sued. The police told them that it was considered theft if they did not release my car, and so they did. I was only 23 at the time, and I was so mad I was screaming at the top of my lungs as they continually refused to release my car. There were no "No Parking" signs where my car was towed from. I was absolutely rabid! When I left, the morons at the impound lot went on the PA to say goodbye to me (being sarcastic) and right in front of the police officers, I gave them the middle finger salute.

I have NEVER in my life been that angry before. Not before, and not since. I was so angry that it was embarassing, but it was 3am, we had to take a ride from complete strangers to downtown Toronto from North York, and I had my friend (who just had a baby 6 weeks prior) with me to drive home. Man, I was absolutely a crazy person, and I do not regret one minute of it because I got my car back within 2 hours with the help of the police with no fees, and they never came after me in court. Because of me, everyone behind me whose cars were towed from the same lot had their cars released without payment. Two years later, on "Michael Coren Live" I saw City Counsellors discussing this exact topic, and informing the viewers to call police - just as I had done. I had to get uncontrollably angry to get it done, but sometimes that is what it takes. I surprised my friends with my anger, turned off some people with my anger, but in the end I was not scammed by these jerkoffs.

To the OP, do your research as this may still be law (I don't live in T.O. anymore) and if it is, stick it to them.

You did not and cannot post an Act that allows a city to issue tickets on private property.

Section 100 and 100.1 of the Municpal Act come close but in my view don't apply.

First, is a parking area within a condo considered "land"?

A condo is also not a parking lot within the meaning of s. 100, it is a condo that also provides parking spaces.

Even if it falls within the meaning of s 100, the area requires signs to be posted at each entrance. No sign No fine!

Moreover, condo's are owned by hundreds of different people within a property. Is the management of the building really the owner of the land?

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not sure.

Thus, in my view, each condo owner might be considered a joint owner of the land and before a ticket could be issued, each condo owner would have to consent that the vehicle was parked without there consent.

In any event, s. 100.1 states that s. 100.1 does not apply to land used as a parking lot, thus if you park your car in the parking lot area, you are not subject to s. 100.1

If you park in front of the building or elsewere on the property that is not a parking lot area, you would be subject to s. 100.1.

pinch wrote:If you believe that the city can't issue tickets on private property (when given permission by the property owner), why not park your car in a condo parking lot and try it out yourself. Fight the ticket in court and let us know how it turns out.

Parking, Except on Highways

Parking lots

100. Without limiting sections 9, 10 and 11, a local municipality may, in respect of land not owned or occupied by the municipality that is used as a parking lot, regulate or prohibit the parking or leaving of motor vehicles on that land without the consent of the owner of the land or regulate or prohibit traffic on that land if a sign is erected at each entrance to the land clearly indicating the regulation or prohibition. 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 41.

Other land

100.1 (1) Without limiting sections 9, 10 and 11, a local municipality may, in respect of land not owned or occupied by the municipality, regulate or prohibit the parking or leaving of motor vehicles without the consent of the owner of the land. 2002, c. 17, Sched. A, s. 20; 2006, c. 32, Sched. A, s. 42.

Exclusion

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to land used as a parking lot. 2002, c. 17, Sched. A, s. 20.

Greatest Canadian wrote:You did not and cannot post an Act that allows a city to issue tickets on private property.

Section 100 and 100.1 of the Municpal Act come close but in my view don't apply.

First, is a parking area within a condo considered "land"?

A condo is also not a parking lot within the meaning of s. 100, it is a condo that also provides parking spaces.

Even if it falls within the meaning of s 100, the area requires signs to be posted at each entrance. No sign No fine!

Section 100 does apply. The parking area of a condo is land. All land is land. Condominiums have parking lots. These parking lots are zoned by the municipality. Signs are posted at the entrance of condos and throughout the parking lots. The say:

"Private Property AUTHORIZED PARKING ONLY unauthorized vehicles will be tagged and/or towed at owner's expense. by-law 3948403048358308-0000000000000000000000000000

Maybe the OP can tell us if his condo has the same. I'm sure it does. These signs are usually black letters on a white background, or red on a white background.

Greatest Canadian wrote:

Moreover, condo's are owned by hundreds of different people within a property. Is the management of the building really the owner of the land?

Maybe. Maybe not. I'm not sure.

Thus, in my view, each condo owner might be considered a joint owner of the land and before a ticket could be issued, each condo owner would have to consent that the vehicle was parked without there consent.

Condominiums are incorporated under the Ontario Condominium Act. Each unit holder is an owner of the corporation. Each unit holder has a vote in electing a board of directors who manages the affairs of the corporation. The board of directors hires a manager to carry out the day-day operations and act in the interests of the corporation over the common elements. The manager manages a property, nothing more. All contracts (like a parking a enforcement agreement with a municipality) are sign by the board of directors i.e.; the corporation i.e.; every unit holder.

If every contract, bill payment, decision, had to be signed off on by every single unit holder, nothing would ever get done. Managing the building would be a full time job for ever single unit holder. They could not live their lives but instead have to sit in a conference room all day and vote on every piece of paper that crossed their desk. Who would want to buy a condo then? This is why the condominium act exist.

Greatest Canadian wrote:

In any event, s. 100.1 states that s. 100.1 does not apply to land used as a parking lot, thus if you park your car in the parking lot area, you are not subject to s. 100.1

If you park in front of the building or elsewere on the property that is not a parking lot area, you would be subject to s. 100.1.

You last point does not stand up because, as I said, the parking lots of a condo have already been zoned as such by the city. Before new apartments and condos can be approved, they must meet zoning regulations that require X number of parking spaces per units in a parking lot. These parking spaces will be referred to as a 'parking lot' in the city's zoning for the building (sorry..... but the city is quick to spot a potential revenue generating scam, and they spotted that one a long time ago).

You may be right. Each city will draft its own by-law and no two city by0laws will be the same, so you'd have to check you city by-law.

Nonetheless, in the case of the OP, the building already allows two motor vehicles to park in one parking space so they cannot deny the OP from doing the same just because their two motor vehicles are two smart cars and not a car and a motor cycle.