- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 4 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Question – Are there disadvantages in changing ownership of windows to each ‘Property owner’, instead of the current ‘Common Property’ ownership?
Background – A By law to change ownership of unit windows from ‘Common Property’ to ‘Property Owner’ is currently being considered. If By law is introduced, owners would each pay for proposed new windows (according to lot entitlements), then be responsible for maintenance/replacement cost of their own windows in future.
My understanding of situation – If windows are ‘Common Property’ owned, costs to maintain/replace windows are shared fairly by owners according to lot entitlements.
If windows are ‘Property owner’ owned, the owners cost to maintain/replace may differ amongst the owners. Some may pay a little, others may pay a lot more (ie. some windows may degrade quicker due to high sun/rain exposure).
I look forward to receiving input on this matter
-
Replies
-
Bad idea. I can think of four good reasons for not doing it.
Firstly, you lose control over the look of the windows which affects the look of the building and therefore the value of all apartments.
Then if someone refused to fix their windows it can affect the integrity of the structure if there is ingress of water into the cavity between walls.
Thirdly, it undermines the sense community and shared responsibility. How about if the majority of the people in the building make the roof the sole responsibility of the people on the top floor – hey, we’re in the majority and they ARE the roof for the people one floor down. If people don’t want to live as part of community, they have these really cool things called houses.
Finally, if one side of the building suffers more wear and tear from weather than the other three, there’s your 25 percent vote that could and should block any changes to the by-laws.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I agree with Jimmy’s comments about the disadvantages, and would add that notwithstanding those I don’t believe that such a Special By-Law (SBL) would withstand legal scrutiny in NSW.
I appreciate that home to rest‘s Owners Corporation (O/C) is not proposing that common property windows not be maintained at all, but rather just not maintained by it, however Sect 62 (3) of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act (SCMA) only permits an O/C to make that decision where it “will not affect the safety of any building, structure or common property in the strata scheme or detract from the appearance of any property in the strata scheme.”
As Jimmy observes, a breach of the the above clause may well be a consequence of the O/C’s proposed SBL, especially as the wording of that clause is will not… (as opposed to “may” or “might”), and the fact that a note to that clause specifically flags the ability of an Adjudicator to review any SBL of the type proposed.
Further, the proposed amendments to the SCMA that make the O/C responsible for fitting and maintaining locks on bedroom windows above the first level of the building “irrespective of any By-Laws in place” represents yet another complication to the operation of the proposed SBL.
I agree…..it’s a bad idea!