Normally I would turn to the “Who’s responsible …” memorandum but this is one situation where its advice seems a little contradictory and more than a little confusing.
For a start, it says this is Owners Corp responsibility: “Water leaking through tiles or from one lot and affecting another lot or common property.’
However, it also says the lot owner is responsible for ‘damage to a lot caused by any water leak mentioned above as a result of the problem itself.’
Now, does that mean water leaking from another unit or does it just refer to damage within the lot where the leak occurs? Every time I look at this I think I read it a different way
And just to confuse things further, it says that damage to lot owners property caused by effecting a repair to common property is the responsibility of the Owners Corp.
A couple of other things you need to bear in mind are that the memorandum isn’t law but it is the guideline to which your strata manager and the CTTT will turn to help determine any responsibilities.
Throw into the mix the question of whether or not the leaking bathroom was a common property issue – for instance, if unapproved work had been done on the bathroom or if approved work had been done on the proviso that the lot owner took responsibility for any consequences, that that changes everything.
However, this is how I see it – and am aware there are different views on this (some of which may have been expressed by me in previous posts).
The Owners Corp has to pay for the repair of the leak in the bathroom (if it is in common property) and the damage to the lot owner’s property, including damage caused in effecting the repair.
If there has been unapproved work done on the bathroom by you, the Owners Corp could argue that that was where the problem initiated and you could be liable for any claims that would otherwise have fallen to them.
If the unapproved work was done by a previous owner, the Owners Corp would have to accept responsibility.
If the work had been approved, you would look at the terms of any agreement or special resolution to see who was responsible for the repairs and maintenance.
Getting back to the memorandum, even though it isn’t law (unless it has been adopted as a by-law,) it will be used as a reference by adjudicators. And that’s why the Department of Lands (who pulled this all together with input from all sorts of stakeholders) need to clarify that point – who is responsible for water damage to another property by a failure of common property?
You can read the memorandum in full HERE.