- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 months, 2 weeks ago by .
-
Topic
-
I have access to and pay for, by way of lot entitlement, an exclusive use area of 85sqm on a flat roof and there is another area of 100sqm for all to access. The entire roof was recently rewaterproofed at the OC’s expense out of necessity and the pavers had to be destroyed for the necessary waterproofing work. In order to continue to use the areas recreationally and in keeping with the waterproofing warranty, both areas require new pavers to cover the bitumen waterproofing otherwise the area cannot be used for recreation purposes, ie no tables, chairs etc.
The EC have covered the area for all to use but have refused to reinstal paving on my exclusive use section as they say it is my responsibility. The existing ByLaw says the lot with exclusive use is responsible for repairs and maintenance. However as this is more than a repair or maintenance and was not faulty due to any action arising from exclusive use, I am disputing this. I am now paying for an exclusive use area that I can’t use. This area is not on my title and is accessible via common property.
Before getting expensive legal advice I would welcome thoughts from this community, and all opinions would be appreciated.
-
Replies
-
As you are responsible for repairs and maintenance, I think you are lucky the OC didn’t hit you up for the cost of re-waterproofing your portion of the space. Maybe just accept the cost of new tiles and treat yourself to the tiles of your choice.
As you are responsible for repairs and maintenance, I think you are lucky the OC didn’t hit you up for the cost of re-waterproofing your portion of the space.
Responsible for repairs and maintenance of what? If the relevant by-law doesn’t state that the lot owner is responsible for the common property, then the OC should compensate them for the destruction of the tiles required when the common property roof was re-sealed. I’d be taking that one to Fair Trading and the Tribunal. I have responsibility for my bathroom tiles but if my OC wanted to dig them up for THEIR purposes, I’d be looking for a reasonable pay-out.
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.
It’s possible the by-law would be void as the condition of the exclusive use area was changed by the OC. It’s unreasonable of the OC not to renew the pavers they damaged in accessing the waterproofing.
It’s possible the by-law would be void as the condition of the exclusive use area was changed by the OC.
Common property by-laws can only be changed with the written approval of both parties. I’d apply for mediation with a view to seeking orders at NCAT.
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.