@leif said:
Jimmy I think with no damages for not following the SSM there clearly will be less care about SSM in the future. I assume the new finding does not exclude fines that at best are miniscule in comparison to the damage done.
I think many people are confusing the fact that we can no longer sue for damages for non compliance with Section 62 with not being able to take action.
The CTTT has a range of possible sanctions against Owners Corps for non compliance, ranging from fines up to $5,500 to removal of the EC and replacing the decision making process with the statutory appointment of a strata manager.
There is also the potential question of personal liability of EC members if they have deliberately blocked votes on Section 62 matters. Strata insurance only covers EC members for bona fide errors. If someone has been told they must comply with the law and deliberately refuses to do so, I think there’s a possibility that individual or individuals could find themselves facing damages claims.
I think it means significantly increase of risk of diminishing the value of each individual lot and shorten the life of the property due to no damages applicable, when not maintaining the property to the standard and functionality as present when registered as a strata plan and doing un-authorised changes.
That would be true if there were no sanctions available, but, as I explained above, there are still sanctions but the issues have to be handled at the CTTT and, if appealed, the district courts. Having witnessed at close quarters the result of one owner forcing the Owners Corp to address his unit’s defects while they were in the middle of a defects claim for the whole building (which they ultimately lost because of delays) I can only think that keeping these things at the CTTT level – for all its faults – is a good thing.
I think the SSM would work if there were any way of enforcing it as even the basics seems currently ignored.
Again, it can be enforced and it can be pursued very cheaply through the CTTT. The Act is absolutely clear – common property must be maintained and repaired and any EC that defies a CTTT order to do so will be in hot water very quickly.
I think my question is how do we ensure and find out that even the basics maintenance is implemented and owners informed today, with currently no risk of damages payable by the ones breaking even the basic rules?
Elsewhere in your post you refer to the legal obligation to have a sinking fund maintenance assessment done. There are no Strata Cops who are going to come around and check – it’s up to owners when they don’t see evidence of this having been done or pursued to challenge the EC or strata manager as to why it hasn’t happened.
In an extreme situation, you can take the Owners Corp to the CTTT and seek an order against them to comply with the AC. Have a look HERE and scroll down to the section on how to take action for a CTTT order (with links to the requisite forms). If mediation failed and you did have to seek an adjudication, it would be under section 138.