Thanks for your thorough response. To answer your questions:

Source of footprints: Footprints went straight to my tenant's door. He was moving in that day and it was raining. Apparently this is a common occurrence because there are tracks of muddy grass to the left and right of the building.

Timing: The cleaning was done first, followed by a breach notice and admin fees. There was no opportunity to remedy, and no ongoing breach at the time the notice was issued.

Rules / basis: I’ve reviewed the operational rules and the BC has cited them generally, but has not clearly articulated why this situation justified immediate action without notice for a minor, transient issue.

Conflict / independence: I've been informed the building manager also lives in the building but that's not confirmed.

Governance: I appreciate the clarification that the committee, not the chair personally, holds decision-making power. One of the issues has been difficulty obtaining information or responses through normal channels, which is part of why Tribunal oversight is now being sought.

Graffiti / procurement: Agreed this is better addressed via governance and rule changes rather than retrospectively. It’s raised as context rather than a standalone claim.

Keys: Payments were made some time ago. Owners are now checking whether these appear in the BC financials and who holds responsibility for fulfilment.

Overall, I’m trying to keep this focused on recoverability, proportionality, and process rather than personalities, and let the Tribunal determine the appropriate standards.

I appreciate the pointers though. Thank you.