British Columbia · Strata Property Act
Courts and the CRT strike down BC strata fines for procedural mistakes here more than almost anywhere else in the Act. A couple of questions to check where you are in section 135's sequence, and what's still required.
Question 1 of 2
Question 2 of 2
Where this stands
—
✓ Verified August 27, 2026 · Strata Property Act s. 135
Sources checked automatically every Monday. Last check October 5, 2026, no change found. See the record
Want this — and the AGM notice, special levy, CRF, records, and depreciation-report deadlines, a fine-enforcement checklist, and the insurance deductible guide — all in one printable pack with a calendar, checklists, templates, and reference guides? Get the BC Board Starter Pack → CAD $49 one-time
AGM notice, quorum, levies, records and more — the key BC rules on one page, each with its section citation. Free.
Your cheat sheet is ready right now — open the BC Strata Compliance Cheat Sheet →
Section 135 of the Strata Property Act is written as a precondition, not a suggestion — the strata "must not" fine, charge back costs, or deny recreational facility use unless every step below has happened:
"...unless the strata corporation has (d) received a complaint about the contravention, (e) given the owner or tenant the particulars of the complaint, in writing, and a reasonable opportunity to answer the complaint, including a hearing if requested by the owner or tenant, and (f) if the person is a tenant, given notice of the complaint to the person's landlord and to the owner." — s. 135(1)
Decision and notice come next, in its own subsection — and this is the one place a specific number could plausibly live, but doesn't:
"The strata corporation must, as soon as feasible, give notice in writing of a decision..." — s. 135(2)
One secondary source states the hearing "must be before the council within four weeks of the request," presented as a hard rule. We searched the full text of both the Act and the Strata Property Regulation directly for "four weeks" and "4 weeks" — zero matches, anywhere. What the Act actually says is narrower and vaguer than that: a "reasonable opportunity to answer," with a hearing included in that opportunity if one is requested. No specific week count is stated for requesting a hearing, holding it, or deciding afterward. Treat any firm "four weeks" figure you see elsewhere as that source's practice guidance, not a quotation of the statute.
The one number that is defined is what a hearing has to look like once granted:
"For the purposes of section 135 (1) (e) of the Act, 'hearing' means an opportunity to be heard in person at a council meeting." — Strata Property Regulation s. 7.2
These serve different purposes and come from different places in the legislation. One is a default that applies only if a strata hasn't changed it; the other is a ceiling that no strata's own bylaw can exceed.
| Per bylaw contravention | Per rule contravention | Continuing contravention | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard Bylaw 23 default Applies unless your strata registered a different figure | $50 | $10 | Every 7 days (Standard Bylaw 24) |
| Regulatory ceiling The most any strata's own bylaw can set, s. 7.1 | $200 | $50 | Every 7 days |
| Short-term rental bylaws A bylaw restricting rental as vacation/travel accommodation, s. 7.1(1)(c) | $1,000 | — | Daily, not every 7 days |
Most established stratas have amended bylaw 23 upward at some point — check your strata's own registered bylaws before assuming either the $50/$10 default or the $200/$50 ceiling applies to you. The short-term rental figure is a real, separate exception: not only is the per-contravention cap higher ($1,000), a strata may fine it daily instead of the usual every-7-days floor for an ongoing breach — which is how that exception produces a practical "up to $1,000 a day" exposure for a continuing short-term rental contravention.
Section 135(3) is easy to misread in either direction. It does not mean every fine needs its own fresh notice-and-hearing cycle — and it does not mean one hearing clears the strata to fine anything, forever, without limit.
"Once a strata corporation has complied with this section in respect of a contravention of a bylaw or rule, it may impose a fine or other penalty for a continuing contravention of that bylaw or rule without further compliance with this section." — s. 135(3)
Read precisely: once the full s. 135 process has been completed for a given bylaw or rule, a continuing contravention of that same bylaw or rule can keep being fined without repeating the process each time. A genuinely new, separate contravention — of a different bylaw, or a fresh instance rather than an ongoing one — still needs its own complaint, particulars, and opportunity to answer.
Terry v. The Owners, Strata Plan NW 309
2016 BCCA 449
An owner had underpaid strata fees by about $5 a month for close to ten years; the strata fined her $7,210. The BC Court of Appeal confirmed that s. 135 requires strict compliance — particulars sufficient to actually identify the contravention to the owner — and that a procedural shortcut anywhere in the sequence can make the resulting fines unenforceable, regardless of whether the underlying contravention was real.
Schoffield v. Strata Corp. NW 73
[1983] B.C.J. No. 2471 (B.C.C.A.)
Continuing fines over a pet kept in violation of a no-pets bylaw were struck down because they were imposed without giving the owner an opportunity to be heard — an early, still-cited confirmation that skipping the hearing step is fatal to the fine.
Dimitrov v. Summit Square Strata Corp.
2006 BCSC 967
A strata imposed a $50 fine over a pet-bylaw contravention through a notice that also invited the owner to a later meeting to discuss it — after the fine was already imposed. The court held that a procedural defect isn't cured after the fact by offering to talk about it once the decision is already made; the opportunity to be heard has to come first.