- This topic has 1 reply, 1 voice, and was last updated 15 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
The security system and gates are not working on our gated complex because the developer went into receivership and the receiver sold off the balance of the estate at heavily discounted prices and did not fix these items as promised.
A t the annual general meeting the existing committee put forward their decision to rectify the gates and security system and announced a levy sufficient to repair the facilities and start a sinking fund, This was agreed to at the general meeting.and then a new committee was electedc consisting mostly of new members
Following complaints by some new members the new committee decidedto halve the levy and not proceed with the repair of the security system and gates. This would effectively destroy the complex as a prestige security gated complex and lower the value of the houses on the estate.
Is it not the responsibility of the committee to maintain the existing facilities so as not to devalue the property?Can the new committee's decision be reverses at a general meeting of the owners?
Matthew Pymble
-
Replies
-
The first thing that occurs is that the new committee can't change the levy – that can only be decided at a general meeting of the owners. Your strata managers should be on to that already (if they are any good).
Secondly, the Owners Corporation (that's all of you) has a legal responsibility to maintain common property. If they are not doing so and, in this case, it compromises the expected level of security for the building, they could face legal action at the CTTT.
And there is another element that might apply here (and I stress 'might'). If they have been warned that security has been dimished by their decision, and someone is huirt, robbed or has their property damaged by intruders, they MIGHT be guilty of culpable negligence which may not be covered by their insurance, leading to personal liability for EC members who voted against it. That may be a long shot but it's worth thinking about, just to get their attention.
Speaking generally, there are too many cases around of people buying bargain priced apartments (because of circumstances like yours) and rather than accepting the benefit already accrued, they try to reduce the building to a lower level of servic. It's not right and should be resisted.
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.