Assumption of Liability ("AOL")

I don't know if a lawyer drew up this Indemnity Agreement "template" for SPABC, or if it's unique to First Service Residential BC Ltd., but I'd love to hear comments from owners who have experience with AOL agreements.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1IDAWXg-ncobXaFUtF7pNG_tD94hjhm4w/view?usp=sharing

I hope no strata paid a lawyer or other professional to draft this crap, for the following reasons:

It looks like paragraphs B and C should be reversed, since B applies a leading capital to the word “Property,” as if it is a defined term that’s not defined until C.

Of course, twisting the terms around that way could be an intentionally deceptive strategy since the strata is NOT generally responsible for the “repair and maintenance” of the strata lot in B as defined in C.

Inserting the words “of the STRATA” after Property in paragraph #1 of the template seems to add another layer of ambiguous deception, as the property belongs to individual owners, and the strata very seldom owns any of it. 

In #2 the owner agrees to assume the expense for the alteration, and that's normally fair enough. I think all the rest is distracting crap, if not coercion to offload statutory responsibilities, or fraud to avoid user fees, but usually it's both. 

In #3 the owner, instead of the strata, is required to acknowledge that what is most likely common property “is in a good state of repair.” I think no reasonable person could do that honestly or voluntarily, since most owners have no direct knowledge of hidden defects or repairs and maintenance that are the strata’s responsibility. 

In #4 the owner pointlessly agrees with the strata that work must be done in accordance with the plans, when at that point in the agreement the strata’s responsibilities in that regard are unchanged. 

In #5 the owner pointlessly agrees with the strata (a mutual agreement) to protect "the Property" (presumably in accordance with each party’s respective statutory responsibilities.) 

In #6 I’m not so sure that an agreement between the strata and an individual can undermine mandatory insurance that other owners are paying for and relying on for protection.

I think the claim in #7 that an agreement made by 2 parties is binding on a third party is a fraudulent misrepresentation to shirk responsibility and AVOID USER FEES under s.6.9 of BC's Strata Property Regulation. 

I say “fraudulent” because even a layman with no experience or knowledge of the legal limits of privity of contract, knows, or ought to know, that such an inequitable notion flies in the face of reason or common sense. 

In law responsibility reverts back to the strata upon sale, contrary to the best interests of the strata, and the new owner is legally entitled to rely on the strata to repair and maintain common property pursuant to s.72 of BC's Strata Property Act, whether it has been altered or not. 

Strata bylaws to the contrary are unenforceable to the extent that they contravene s.72 or any other law.

And so the story goes on, and on… 

My respect for First Service Residential BC Ltd and property management companies like that parallels the limits of the company owner's liability.