1. Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by clicking here: Upgrades
    Dismiss Notice

Court for downtown property owner

Discussion in 'Canada' started by mark handler, Jan 31, 2016.

  1. mark handler

    mark handler Sawhorse

    Oct 25, 2009
    Likes Received:
    Court for downtown property owner


    By Jason Miller

    Belleville, Ontario

    The owner of the former Intelligencer building could be dragged back into court just months after being fined thousands for defying a city order.

    It appears Terry Mian, still isn’t following through on his promise to repair spalling bricks and other defects identified on the exterior walls of the downtown property he said will be transformed into a apartment complex.

    “The owner was suppose to have completed some work by the end of 2015 and that work was not completed in the timeframe required,” said Ted Maracek, city’s chief building official. “They needed to complete repairs to the east wall because there is bits and pieces of brick that continue to fall on the sidewalk.”

    Mian was fined about $6,500, but claims he has been unfairly treated by city officials who brought the order against him and the courts which found him in contravention of building regulations.

    Justice of the Peace Sam Cureatz contended Mian was dragging his feet and wasting the court’s time.

    Mian could be back in legal hot water just months after Cureatz had warned him if the demands aren’t satisfied further action could be taken.

    “At this point we’re reviewing our options but no decisions have been made yet with respect to if we’re going to proceed with further action or not,” Maracek said. “In addition to the monetary penalty the court imposed against the owner, the court also issued a prohibition order which basically said comply with the requirements of the order issued by the city. That court order has not been complied with and further action on that would see the city apply to the court,” he said.

    Maracek said city hall is reviewing all option as the court route is a “lengthy and costly process that we’re weighing the merits of at this point in time.”

    An order to remedy was issued on Feb. 25, 2014 with various requirements -- to fence the property, hire an engineer to review the building’s condition and report to the city by March 14 and then complete any remedial work by April 30 2015.

    The owners could have opted to appeal the order, but failed to do so. Mian has said he intends to develop the vacant property into residential units.

    The Intelligencer began operating out of the building at the corner of Bridge and Pinnacle streets in 1965 and ran its operation there before relocating to Century Place. Mian said his group purchased the property for roughly $1 million in 2008 though a three-year lease was signed keeping the paper at the corner property until 2011.
  2. Keystone

    Keystone Registered User

    Feb 23, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Not sure how it works up there however IMO just return to the issuing court over and over.

    Been through magistrates and county courts, either option can be a game of dice.

    I've dealt with one magistrate who impeded processes, slowed it down, outright dismissed cases brought by myself or the municipalities attorney. Irony is the fact that magistrates office was consolidated due to a lack of work load, sad part is it took years of persistence to accomplish.

    One the other end I've had great success with other magistrates.
  3. tmurray

    tmurray Registered User

    Jun 10, 2011
    Likes Received:
    it's contempt of court in Canada to disobey a judge's orders. This will typically result in jail time and a fine, but sometimes it is only one or the other. It depends on the situation that caused the order. In this case I would be surprised if the property owner did not get jail time and a hefty fine.
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page