Current Page

[Renocamp]

We own a townhouse in NSW with a courtyard and decided to replace some pavers. We did not get approval as thought that would only apply if we were adding a pegola or awning. Half way during the works we were ordered to stop by strata committee. We did immediately and lodged the relevant forms. We have been rejected by the community scheme who say the colour pavers we chose are not keeping with the aesthetics of the complex. The pavers are grey and match the door frames and the form filled out did say grey pavers to be used. Our courtyard is surrounded by hedges and can only be seen if close to our gate.  The bylaws do not mention specific materials just with keeping with the look of the complex. We feel their objection is subjective on aesthetics and unreasonable. What options do we have to repeal this as pavers are down but not cemented. Any help appreciated. Also pavers originally down along with neighbouring townhouses are a mismatch of greys.

Topic

[Lady Penelope]

Renocamp – If I was you I would continue to finish off the paving job.

If you have complied with the requirement of installing grey pavers then that should be sufficient, particularly if no specific brand of paver was specified and no particular shade of grey was specified.

Then sit back and enjoy your finished pavers …. and wait to see what happens next. The OC may, or may not, decide to take you to Mediation or NCAT. 

Who has denied you the ability to continue with the paving? Was it the committee (via a committee meeting), or was it the OC (via a general meeting)?

Unless there is a by-law that specifies strict uniformity of the appearance of all items within courtyards then minor aesthetic differences would not be unreasonable in a general Appearance of a Lot by-law.

Apparently there are 50 shades of grey! 

Quote

[Renocamp]

Thanks Lady Penelope.

Prior to starting works we need approval from strata and the community association which is the umbrella above the oc. This is part of the management statement and by-law. As work had been started it went to the community assoc. first as they have final say. This has been done through our strata manager to the committee for their consideration. They informed the strata manager about the paver colour so no approval to do any work and no official rejection. The committee forced our landscaper to stop work and dont want to put him through that again. Ridiculous thing is they dont have an issue with the back pavers and they are not even grey! 

Quote

[Lady Penelope]

It is not clear where your problem is at …. have your pavers been rejected and are you being forced to remove them and replace them with another type of paver? Have you been issued with a Notice to Comply?

Is your scheme covered by the NSW Strata Schemes Management legislation, or is it covered by another type of legislation e.g. Community Land Development Act? The reason why I am asking is that there is a stronger dependence on the Community Management Statement ‘rules’ in Community Schemes. Community Management Statements prevail over by-laws.

If you live in a community scheme and you believe that you have been treated unreasonably and that your committee has not followed the correct procedures about providing you with a Notice to Comply, then you can apply to have the problem Mediated and/or resolved via NCAT.

This publication (at page 18) explains the options and the process: 

https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/pdfs/About_us/Publications/ft191.pdf

Quote

[Renocamp]

Not sure about the legislation of type of community scheme.

We are in limbo at the moment as no official rejection of our application just verbally from our strata manager advising they have issues with the colour.

Just wanted to be aware of our options if the works are rejected. As stated previously pavers are partially down as work was stopped by them. If rejected on because of colour issue they will expect us to remove which we dont want to do.

Again no official rejection just issues they have raised so want to be prepared.

Appreciate the fair trading document link.

Quote

[Jimmy-T]

@Renocamp said:
The committee forced our landscaper to stop work and dont want to put him through that again. Ridiculous thing is they dont have an issue with the back pavers and they are not even grey!   

Again no official rejection just issues they have raised so want to be prepared.

Preventing the work from continuing sounds like an official rejection to me.  The committee needs to tell you what they will and won’t accept and why, or back off and leave you alone.

I would be sending them a letter asking them to specify their issues but if you haven’t heard within seven days, work will proceed.

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.

Quote

[Anonymous]

Im with Lady P, I would not stop due to a perceived colour discrepancy unless they have a very specific by law because colour is subjective and I’m willing to bet they will go nowhere with it even at NCAT especially if it is not prominent  in location and not common property.

Anyway you can argue that colour changes depending on the time of day as the colour temperature of daylight changes and the amount of available light changes. Less light can make a colours appear darker and vice versa.

Are you sure this person isnt colour blind 🙂

Quote

[Author]

Replies