- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by .
-
Topic
-
If the local council has zoned our building for both owner occupier and short term rental, can the strata introduce by laws limiting which apartments can be owner occupied?
-
Replies
-
Such a bylaw would. Be struck down as Inequitable.
Bylaws have to apply equally to all lots.
Section 136 (2) 2015 Act.
“A by-law has no force or effect to the extent that it is inconsistent with this or any other Act or law.”
The zoning would be made under another law (not Strata) and so the by-law would be inconsistent with that and likely find itself in difficulty if challenged.
Strata by-laws are pretty much the lowest in law hierarchy.Hi, Your wording is strange. Are you attempting to limit the ability of the lot owners to offer the properties as short term rental? You question states “limiting which apartments can be owner occupied?” as is if you are trying to dictate to another lot owner that they can’t even live in their own property.
Hi, Your wording is strange. Are you attempting to limit the ability of the lot owners to offer the properties as short term rental?
I think the wording is at fault here and I’m guessing that the OP is saying “can the strata introduce by laws limiting which apartments can be deemed owner occupied.”
The owner-occupier loophole introduced by our Airbnb-loving government in NSW is a piece of nonsense, since the term “principal place of residence” has no legally binding definition. Its a policy that encourages apartment owners to do as they please and to Hell with their neighbours.
Say chummy next door stays in his city fringe unit four nights a week, then lets it out on a short-term rental platform every weekend – “perfect for footy parties” the ad says – while he goes and spends quality time with his partner, it is still his principal place of residence.
Or the retired couple upstairs spend three months a year cruising the Med or the Carribean, or pursuing their bucket list tour of South America while there is an endless stream of total strangers coming through the building, is that their PPoR? And the answer is yes.
This past holiday season, we’ve seen harbour view apartments turned into all-night party pads with tickets sold – totally illegally – for events that rocked the whole building. Personally I would have shut off the power after, say, 1 am (also illegal) and let them find out who was responsible.
It’s time this governments and their agencies in this airbnblighted country started looking at the impact of unfettered tourism on the people who live here and for whom our city centres and seaside towns and rural retreats really are their principal places of residence.
Interesting how the short term holiday let (STHL) lobby has managed to convince our dopey leaders that curbing them would have a huge impact on the economy while, at the same time persuading them that allowing them free rein has no effect on residential rental availability.
Just because something is legal, doesn’t make it right. And if it’s so clearly wrong for the majority of people, then it shouldn’t be legal.
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.
Section 139 (2) of theAct says this:
By-law cannot prevent dealing relating to lot
No by-law is capable of operating to prohibit or restrict the devolution of a lot or a transfer, lease, mortgage or other dealing relating to a lot.
I would think that means if the DA says it’s residential then the strata scheme can’t change it to non-residential. But I do know of buildings that were approved as short-tem lets only and the owners had to move out when it was discovered they were living there.
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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.