@JimmyT said:
Smart OCs and owners would negotiate a mutually agreeable formula with owners who have unapproved expensive tiling whereby the lot owner would pay the excess over the cost of the replacement cheap tiles and the OC would pay the rest – in exchange for agreement of a catch-all SBL to make all previously unapproved tiling the lot owners’ responsibility henceforth.
Wouldn’t smart OCs never ever approve lot owner’s additions/alterations to CP?
Then all additions/alterations would be unapproved and the lot owner’s responsibility.
You wouldn’t need a big long register of SBLs.
And the OC may even be able to charge the lot owner for removal of unapproved tiles stuck onto CP when they have to get at the waterproof membrane.
Under what circumstances would an OC ever want to agree to being responsible for a lot owner’s changes to CP?
Where in the Act does it say that unapproved additions/alterations to CP suddenly change status and become CP when the lot changes ownership?
Caveat emptor, I say.
Also, lot owners should be careful tiling balconies for the first time, or re-tiling over existing tiles, as this alters the effective height of the balcony rail, and may therefore breach building standards.