- This topic has 4 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Looking for some guidance/views from the knowledgeable folk here 🙂
Complex is medium size and based in NSW.
Issue: Claim for damage to car paintwork from efflorescence.
Background: Earlier this year, a unit had a secretion of efflorescence from the concrete slab above their car space which landed on their vehicle causing drip like marks to the paintwork. General car wash did not remove the marks.
At the time the owner reported the issue, they were advised to park in a visitor space whilst it was investigated/addressed. Which they agreed to do.
A solution was installed within approx. 6 weeks of it being reported.
A secondary solution was then installed a few weeks later when it was identified the issue had not been 100% resolved.The car owner is now submitting a claim to cover cost of addressing damage to the car paintwork.
The Strata Manager has advised this is not covered under OC insurance as the vehicle is not OC property.
Question 1: has anyone had experience with this type of issue and what was the outcome?
Question 2: where does the OC stand with respect to liability?
Appreciate any insights offered.
-
Replies
-
The strata insurance would have Public Liability cover which would be appropriate in this instance.
The car owner is now submitting a claim to cover cost of addressing damage to the car paintwork. The Strata Manager has advised this is not covered under OC insurance as the vehicle is not OC property.
Wow! What a narrow and fundamentally flawed idea of liability. So if your car’s handbrake fails and it runs down a hill and rolls over a prized collection of garden gnomes, your insurer isn’t liable because they didn’t cover the gnomes?
If the strata manager fails to make a claim, the car owner can go straight to the strata insurer. The next step after that would be to ask the strata commitee why they are employing that particular strata manager.
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.
The Strata Manager has advised this is not covered under OC insurance as the vehicle is not OC property. Question 1: has anyone had experience with this type of issue and what was the outcome? Question 2: where does the OC stand with respect to liability?
While it’s not OC common property, strata (OC/BC) compulsory insurance can cover more than OC common property. It can cover lot fixtures and fittings and OC liability for other damage. A car is not a lot fixture or a fitting, so it boils down to liability cover.
Q1: Yes. It usually depends on if the OC’s insurer considers the OC to be legally liable for the damage.
Q2: It usually needs negligence to be established. If the OC somehow negligently caused the leak, they would likely be liable. Else any other party that somehow negligently caused the leak would likely be liable.
That other negligent party might be a lot occupier who is not covered by the OC’s insurance (eg a tenant). But if the other negligent party was an owner occupier, they could independently try claiming on the OC’s insurance else on their own contents insurance.
I have had a few dealings with damage to cars. So the outcome I have always had is:
1. The OC is not responsible for the car, they maintain and repair common property not private property.
2. The OC insurer will note that it is not covered under the insurance policy.
3. The owner of the car will get very frustrated.
As a SM I would have lodged the claim on behalf of the lot owner, even knowing the outcome as it is not my choice to make if it should be lodged or if it would be successful.
I would advise the car owner to lodge a claim with their insurer noting the OC as the responsible party and let the two insurance companies sort it out at a claim level.
I think there are 2 points to remember. Garages do not need to be waterproof as they are not a habitable area. Also swap (car and paint work) for (cardboard boxes and clothing) the OC insurance coverage and liability is the same. Would that change your opinion on what the OC and SM should be doing?