Some of the property owners involved in legal disputes with the District of Sechelt over the evacuation of the Seawatch subdivision say the district has tried to “COVID-shame” them for continuing to press their lawsuits.
Seawatch was evacuated in February of 2019 because of ongoing issues with sinkholes dating back to 2012 and at least 12 property owners now have legal action pending against the district, the developer and others.
The district has said little about the lawsuits outside of its court filings, but on April 9 it issued a release saying it was putting developer Concordia Seawatch and the property owners “on notice” about what it claims is a contractual obligation to “take responsibility for the repair and stabilization of failing road infrastructure, slopes and similar features.”
The district claims that a covenant that was part of the original approval of the subdivision “included a requirement that Concordia, and subsequent purchasers of lots in the subdivision, accept the risk and be responsible for the future repair of certain potential problems which could arise through the use and development of the lands.”
In an immediate response, the lawyer representing two homeowners involved in the lawsuits called the district’s demand “mean-spirited” and “without legal foundation.”
This week, eight other Seawatch property owners and their lawyer issued their own public response.
Lawyer Jeff Scouten said the covenant doesn’t contain any sort of collective obligation to repair the roads and hillside.
“In its recent demand, the District seeks to take the covenant a step further and maintains that it creates a positive obligation on the part of the homeowners to spend millions of dollars – which the District claims it cannot afford – to fix the subdivision themselves,” said Scouten. “If this is the hill the District has chosen to wage its battle with the owners on, it is pretty shaky and unstable ground.”
In the District of Sechelt’s April 9 release, Mayor Darnelda Siegers is quoted as saying, “It is unfortunate that this situation is escalating at a time when we should all be focused on the current health crisis. However, the District must direct appropriate legal action to the parties who hold the legal responsibility to repair this subdivision: the developer and the other owners.”
Rod Goy, one of the homeowners represented by Scouten, was critical of the district for “insinuating that we are irresponsibly ‘escalating’ the situation” during the pandemic.
“For over a year, the district and the province have totally ignored our requests to explain how they plan to address the ‘state of emergency’ that they keep extending every week,” Goy said. “And then, when we take steps to try to move our claims forward, the district demands that we fix the problem ourselves and takes the opportunity to ‘COVID-shame’ us in the process.”
The Seawatch residents represented by Scouten have called on the district and the province to reach an out-of-court resolution to this dispute.
“The Seawatch lands, if returned to their natural state and converted to public use, is a success story just waiting to happen in reclaiming and preserving British Columbia’s natural spaces for future generations,” the response by Scouten and his clients said. “Why will the District and the Province not seize the opportunity to make this a reality?”
