← Back to all articles

A condo purchase is really two purchases. You buy a unit, and you buy a share of a corporation that owns a roof, an elevator, a boiler, a parkade and an insurance policy. The unit you can walk through in fifteen minutes. The corporation you have to read about, and the documents that tell you whether it can pay for what is coming are not difficult — they are just long, and most buyers run out of condition period before they reach the part that decides it.

The reserve fund study and the reserve fund balance are two different things

This is the single most common mix-up I see, and it matters more than any other detail in the package. They sound like the same thing. They are not, and a building can look fine on one and be in trouble on the other.

  • The reserve fund study is an outside professional's projection: what the building's major components are, what condition they are in, when they are expected to need replacing, and what that is expected to cost. It is a forecast, and it has a date on it.
  • The reserve fund plan is the corporation's answer to that forecast — how much it intends to put away each year so the money is there when the forecast comes due. This is where a board either accepts the study or quietly decides to fund less than it recommends.
  • The reserve fund balance is the money actually sitting in the account right now, and you find it on the financial statements, not in the study.

A healthy building is one where those three line up. An unhealthy one usually fails at the middle step: a reasonable study, an honest list of what is coming, and a contribution set below what the study asked for because nobody on the board wanted to be the one who raised the fees.

So the question is never "is the reserve fund big?" A large balance in a building facing a full envelope replacement in two years is not comfort. A modest balance in a young building whose major components are decades out may be entirely appropriate. Size only means something against the timeline.

What a healthy contribution looks like

I cannot give you a dollar figure that is right for every building, and anyone who does is guessing. What I can give you is the comparison that works, because it is internal to the building and does not depend on what anything else in the city charges.

Take the annual reserve contribution the study recommended. Then find the reserve contribution line in the approved budget. If the budget number is the smaller of the two, the corporation is running a deficit against its own plan, and that gap does not disappear. It turns up later as a fee increase, a special assessment, or deferred work that gets more expensive the longer it waits.

  • Is the current study recent, and was it done by a qualified reserve fund planner? An old study in a building that has since had major work is describing a property that no longer exists.
  • Does the budget fund the study's recommended contribution in full? If not, by how much, and for how many years running.
  • Has the operating budget been balanced, or is it being topped up from the reserve? Borrowing from the reserve to cover day-to-day operating shortfalls is a serious signal.
  • Are fees rising roughly in step with costs? A fee that has not moved in five years, in a period when insurance, utilities, snow removal and contractor rates all moved, is a contribution that is quietly shrinking in real terms.

Fees that never rise are not evidence of good management. They are usually evidence of a board that has chosen to be popular, and the bill lands on whoever owns the unit when the roof finally goes.

The minutes tell you what the financial statements cannot

Financial statements tell you the position. Board minutes tell you the story, and the story is usually where the problem announces itself a year or two before it reaches the numbers.

I read them in bulk and look for repetition, not drama. One leak is a building. The same leak, in the same stack, discussed at four meetings across eighteen months, is a building that has not solved something and is paying for it repeatedly. The same goes for elevator call-outs, parkade drainage, boiler service, and any phrase along the lines of "the board will obtain a further quote."

  • Recurring maintenance items — the same component appearing over and over across meetings.
  • Legal matters — litigation, a builder or contractor dispute, an owner action. These are slow, expensive and often the reason a reserve is not being topped up.
  • Insurance discussion — a renewal that came in sharply higher, a deductible that moved, or a coverage change tells you the insurer's view of the building.
  • Board turnover and quorum — repeated failures to reach quorum at an annual general meeting mean decisions are not being made, which is its own risk.
  • Arrears — owners behind on fees. A small number is normal. A rising number is the building's cash flow narrowing.

Special assessment history is evidence, not a verdict

Buyers hear "this building had a special assessment" and walk. That is often the wrong call, and occasionally the expensive one, because the building that has just funded and completed a major repair can be in better shape than the one that has never levied anything and has a forecast full of deferred work.

What I want to know about a past assessment is four things: what it paid for, whether the work was actually completed, whether it was funded in full, and whether the reserve study was updated afterward to reflect the new condition of what was replaced. An assessment that answers all four is a corporation doing its job in public. A series of assessments for unrelated surprises is a corporation that keeps being surprised, and that is a different building entirely.

There is also a timing question that catches people mid-transaction. Whether a levied or pending assessment falls to the seller or to you is a matter of when it was levied, how it was structured, and what your purchase contract says about it. It is not something to sort out on possession day. It belongs in the offer.

Who pays for what when something breaks

Financial health is partly about the corporation's money and partly about where the line sits between the corporation's money and yours. Two documents decide that: the bylaws and the insurance policy.

The bylaws describe the boundary between your unit and common property, and they describe what happens to the corporation's insurance deductible. In some corporations a deductible arising from a loss that originates in a unit can be charged back to that owner. That is a real exposure and it is worth knowing the number before you own it, not after a supply line lets go at two in the morning.

The insurance certificate tells you what the corporation covers and to what standard — and by extension what your own unit policy has to pick up. Buyers routinely under-insure here because they assume the building's policy reaches further into the unit than it does.

The building itself tells you what is coming

You can predict a good deal of a corporation's future spending from the kind of building it is, before you open a single document. Construction type, age and the presence of certain structures change the shape of the cost curve.

  • Construction type. Wood-frame and concrete buildings have different component lists, different lifespans and different insurance profiles. Neither is better; they are different bets.
  • Age relative to the last major cycle. A building that has already replaced its roof, boilers and envelope has spent that money. A building of the same age that has not is holding the same bill unspent.
  • A parkade. Membranes, drainage and structural repairs in an underground parkade are among the larger line items a residential corporation faces, and in Calgary they are worked on in a short season.
  • Post-tension construction. Some concrete buildings use post-tension cables, and cable repair is specialised work with a specialised cost. It is a known category, it is checkable, and it belongs in your questions.

None of this tells you a specific building is good or bad. It tells you what to go looking for in the documents, which is the point.

The order I read them in

Time is the constraint. A full condo document package can run to hundreds of pages and your condition period is finite, so the order matters more than completeness.

  • Estoppel certificate first. It is short, it is the corporation's own statement, and it names any assessment, arrears or litigation up front.
  • Then the most recent financial statements. Reserve balance, operating result, arrears.
  • Then the reserve fund study and the current budget, side by side. The gap between recommended and budgeted contribution is the number that matters.
  • Then the minutes, working backwards. Two to three years, reading for repetition.
  • Then the bylaws and the insurance certificate, for the boundary and the deductible.
  • Everything else after that, if the first five have not already answered the question.

If that is more than you want to take on, a professional condo document review is money well spent, and it is a standard step rather than an extravagance. What I would not do is remove a condition on documents nobody has actually read. The unit is rarely what goes wrong with a condo purchase. The corporation is.

If you are looking at a specific building and want a second read before your condition deadline, bring us the package and the deadline. And if you are still narrowing the search, our condo documents centre covers each document in turn, and the buildings directory is the place to start on a specific address.