OFSC 2026

The appellant property owner appealed an inspection order issued by the Brantford Fire Department regarding 23 Fire Code violations at an illegal lodging house.

The appellant did not dispute the violations but sought an extension of time to comply due to financial constraints and ongoing planning disputes with the city.

The Fire Safety Commission found that while the appellant had not taken sufficient steps to achieve compliance and significant fire risks remained, a brief extension was appropriate to allow the appellant to commence compliance activities.

The inspection order was amended to extend the compliance date to June 30, 2026.

The appellant appealed two Fire Marshal Review Orders confirming Inspection Orders that required the appellant to either install a sprinkler system or reduce storage heights to 4.5 meters to comply with the Fire Code.

The appellant argued that the orders effectively required structural alterations, which is prohibited under s. 22(1) of the Fire Protection and Prevention Act, 1997 for buildings constructed prior to 1992.

The Fire Safety Commission found that the orders did not require structural repairs, as reducing storage height was a viable alternative to installing sprinklers.

The Commission also ruled that the orders remained enforceable despite the appellant corporation's recent amalgamation.

The appeals were dismissed, but the compliance date was extended.

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.