When is our next reserve fund study due, and what class must it be?

The obligation, and why the cycle lives in the regulation

Section 94(1) of the Condominium Act, 1998 requires periodic studies to check the reserve fund is adequate:

"The corporation shall conduct periodic studies to determine whether the amount of money in the reserve fund and the amount of contributions collected by the corporation are adequate to provide for the expected costs of major repair and replacement of the common elements and assets of the corporation."

Section 94(4) sets the first deadline directly, then hands the ongoing cycle to the regulations — the same pattern as everything else on this site:

"A corporation created on or after the day this section comes into force shall conduct a reserve fund study within the year following the registration of the declaration and description and subsequently at the prescribed times."

Three classes, and a rolling 3-year clock

O. Reg. 48/01 s. 28 establishes three classes of study: a comprehensive study, an updated study based on a site inspection, and an updated study not based on one. The first study is always comprehensive:

"The reserve fund study that subsection 94 (4) of the Act requires a corporation... to conduct within the year following the registration of the declaration and description shall be a comprehensive study."

Every study after that runs on a clock measured from the previous study's completion, not a fixed calendar date:

"A corporation shall conduct a reserve fund study within three years of completing the reserve fund study that it is required to conduct under subsection (1) or (2)... and after that, within every three years after completing the immediately preceding reserve fund study."

Which class — the alternation, spelled out

This is the part worth walking through rather than just stating, because a claim we found during research — that a full comprehensive study is required every six years — doesn't hold up against the text. Section 31(4) sets three possible classes for each study after the first:

"(a) a comprehensive study; (b) an updated study not based on a site inspection, if the immediately preceding reserve fund study... was a comprehensive study or an updated study based on a site inspection; or (c) an updated study based on a site inspection, if the immediately preceding reserve fund study... was an updated study not based on a site inspection."

Clauses (b) and (c) between them cover every possible outcome of the previous study — comprehensive, site-based, or not-site-based — which leaves clause (a) with no case left to trigger in normal sequential use. Followed through, the pattern runs like this, indefinitely:

Nothing in this section brings the corporation back to a full comprehensive study on any stated cycle. If a "comprehensive study every six years" rule exists anywhere, it isn't in s. 31 of O. Reg. 48/01 — we read it directly and it isn't there.

Is a full comprehensive study really required every six years?

Not under s. 31(4) as written. The clause that could require it, (a), has no case left to apply once (b) and (c) are read together — they already cover every possible class the immediately preceding study could have been. We couldn't find textual support for a six-year comprehensive cycle anywhere in this section.

What about corporations that existed before section 94 came into force?

Section 31(1) has a transitional rule for them — broadly, a comprehensive study within three years of that commencement date, with a narrow exception if they already had a compliant one. Section 94 has been in force for years at this point, so this is very unlikely to be live for any corporation checking this today; we're noting it rather than silently leaving it out.

Is the 120-day figure for reviewing the study a real rule, or guidance?

Real, and in the Act itself: s. 94(8) requires the board to review the study and propose a funding plan "within 120 days of receiving" it. It's not a CAO recommendation — it's a statutory deadline.

Does the reserve fund study relate to the CRF contribution amount?

Only indirectly, and only in BC's Strata Property Act, which uses similar language for a different concept. In Ontario, the study drives the board's funding plan under s. 94(8), which in turn shapes future reserve fund contributions — but this tool doesn't calculate a contribution figure.

Is this legal advice?

No. It's general information based on the current legislation, verified against the sources linked above. For a study that's overdue, disputed, or tied to a declarant transition, talk to a condominium lawyer.