Claudine Wilson

The Fire Safety Commission initiated a reconsideration of its previous decision to correct the name of the Appellant.

The original inspection order was issued to Niagara North Condominium Corporation #32, but the appeal decision incorrectly named the former board vice-president as the Appellant.

Applying the principle from Chandler v. Alberta Association of Architects and Rule 17(b) of the Common Rules, the Commission varied the decision to correctly name the condominium corporation.

The condominium corporation's own request for reconsideration to extend the compliance date for constructing a fire-rated storage room was dismissed as it was filed outside the 21-day time limit.

The appellant condominium corporation appealed a Fire Marshal Review Decision that confirmed an Inspection Order requiring the removal of recycling bins from a parking garage or the construction of a fire-separated storage room.

The appellant requested a 12-month extension to construct the storage room.

The Fire Safety Commission found that while the appellant had delayed taking substantive steps initially, it had recently engaged an engineer and begun the planning process.

Balancing the need for time to complete the tendering and construction process against the ongoing fire safety risk, the Commission granted a four-month extension of the compliance date.

The Respondent, Cornwall Fire Services, brought a motion for costs against the corporate Appellant, 2416300 Ontario Inc., alleging unreasonable, frivolous, and vexatious conduct during the appeal process.

The Respondent sought $5,000 in costs, citing delays, failure to call expert witnesses, and disregard for procedural directions.

The Fire Safety Commission found that the Respondent failed to establish a solid evidentiary basis for the costs claim.

The Commission concluded that the adjournments and delays were not attributable to conduct that would justify a costs award, and dismissed the motion.

The appellant building owner appealed an inspection order requiring the installation of an operational fire alarm system and that all work be performed by qualified persons.

The Fire Safety Commission found that the existing fire alarm system was not functioning as intended, could not be repaired due to discontinued parts and lost programming, and had its ULC listing voided by unauthorized access from a non-certified technician.

The Commission amended the order to clarify the specific Fire Code contraventions and extended the compliance date to six months, effectively requiring the replacement of the fire alarm system.

The appellant appealed a Review Decision of the Fire Marshal confirming an Inspection Order issued by Toronto Fire Services regarding his rooming house.

The Fire Safety Commission upheld the order, finding that the storage of personal items in the main floor public corridor contravened the Ontario Fire Code's prohibition on accumulating combustible materials.

The Commission also confirmed the building's classification under Section 9.5 of the Fire Code, requiring the installation of 20-minute fire-rated doors on three bedrooms and the protection of the basement exit stairway with a fire separation.

The appeal was dismissed, with amended compliance dates provided for the required work.

The appellant, owner of a retirement home, appealed an Inspection Order requiring the removal of bookcases, desks, and chairs (a library) from a second-floor hallway.

The appellant argued the space was designed for this use and did not impede egress.

The Fire Safety Commission confirmed the Order, finding that the corridor is a means of egress, the furnishings constitute an obstruction, and the books and furnishings are combustible materials not permitted in a means of egress under the Ontario Fire Code.

The compliance date was extended by two months.