- This topic has 5 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 9 months, 1 week ago by .
-
Topic
-
we are in a group of 12 villas approx 25 years old. one of the villas shower waterproofing failed and resultant water damage occurred into bedroom and linen cupboards. the owner has decided to do a bathroom reno at the same time as repairs. the owner justification of strata / owner split is as follows;
“The water damaged the frame, bottom plate and wet the gyprock on the whole wall from the shower and the bedroom wardrobe to the point of the plate needing to be completely removed and part of the stud walls. This also went into the linen closet. The only way to fix this is to remove the common wall sheeting between the bathroom and wardrobe and also the bathroom and linen closet to allow access to the frames. There is evidence that the water has migrated under the shower waterproofing causing tiles further out to be drummy and lack of adhesion. The water proofing has been patch repaired at least twice and failed causing further water damage. To complete the waterproofing the whole bathroom floor needs to come up and up at least 2 tiles except for the shower wet area which requires the whole wall to above the shower head to be water proofed. This means that the entire bathroom floor and common wall from the shower to the bedroom wardrobe and the common wall to the linen cupboard are the Strata responsibility as you cannot just waterproof the shower area. This has been tried previously which can be seen by the different colour tiles in the shower, and this failed again. To remove the floor tiles it requires the removal of the vanity and the toilet though we are happy to pay for these as you cannot re-install the old toilet and the vanity is worse for age. When repairing the wall the new Villaboard on the wet area and the replacement of the wet, previously removed Gyprock, is also a Strata cost. Retiling the floor and the shower area is a Strata Cost but extending the tiling and removing the bath and tiling and waterproofing the section under the bath is an Owner Cost. ”
does this seem right.
-
Replies
-
It would be best to ask a strata lawyer for advice. On this forum, everyone volunteers an answer and we try to be helpful. We are not lawyers. Your problem seems like an expensive one.
You need to determine what is common property and what is not common property. Every strata plan has a document called the registered plan. Your strata manager should have a copy of the registered plan. Otherwise, you can get it from the NSW government. By convention, thick black lines represent common property. Internal walls are usually not common property. My understanding is that waterproofing is common property.
Your problem is that the damage has extended to other parts of the villa. The definition of common property is not that the there is a common wall between the bathroom and the next room. It is usually the roof, floor, external walls, external windows, external doors, slab between floors, walls between lots. As I said, it is shown by thick black lines on the registered plan. Also, common property is not carpet, paint or wall paper. Those things are stuck onto common property but they are part of the lot.
Quite possibly, however the Committee has a responsibility to all the lot owners to ensure the OC is not paying more than is necessary. In my role as Committee Chair I would get the Committee to engage its own plumber or builder to do an inspection and confirm this split of responsibility. I would also require a Committee member to be present during the inspection to ensure the lot owner doesn’t try to influence the Committee’s inspector. And I would insist on at least two quotes for any work that the OC is paying for. If the lot owner wants the OC to pay, then he has to expect the Committee to play an active role in clarifying the scope of work, the cost of work and who does the work. Also, if the OC is taking ongoing responsibility for this work, then the OC has to take some responsibility for who does the work and to what quality. If the lot owner wants to choose his own workers (dodgy unlicensed plumber married to his cousin maybe?) then he can pay and he can take responsibility for ongoing maintenance. You’ll probably need a by-law for these renovations BTW. The by-law should include details of the work to be done, who is doing it, hours of work, who is paying, who is responsible going forward etc etc. your strata manager may have model by-laws to get you started, or a strata lawyer can draw one up. Cost of by-law – I suggest split between lot owner and OC in the proportion of cost of work.
Rather than getting into the financial weeds on this, and spending more money to work out how much you should be spending, I would just try to establish whether the majority of owners think the proposal is fair and the way to do that it to have a general meeting or even just an online vote.
I have known owners who have demanded a complete bathroom renovation because their water proofing failed, the repairs meant their tiles would no longer match and removing the other tiles meant their vanity, sink and WC had to be replaced.
The owner in this case seems to be acting quite reasonably so I would cut your losses and go with their plan or a variation of it.
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.
Is the situation different if the water issue is not related to faulty membrane – but is actually due to a split original copper water pipe – embedded in a concrete block. Where access to the water pipe requires substantial building works including the removal of bathroom tiles; entry into the ceiling space and heavy drilling into the concrete slab. Just gaining access to the split section caused severe damage to an owners apartment – aside from the inconvenience – is the OC responsible for the entire “fix-up” including new bathroom tiles. The building is more than 40 years old and the bathroom was still original.
Is this a hypothetical, or are you asking because you are in this situation?
In the situation you describe, I’d say it’s an OC responsibility, but I’d be making an insurance claim if the issue is caused by a split copper pipe. We made a successful insurance claim for that same scenario. Turned out to be a bit less-than-successful though as we now struggle to get anyone to insure us.
The insurance issue aside, OCs need to be making provision for building repairs, and repairs that involve water always seem to have a lot of damage. But the owner also needs to be fair. If the original bathroom was somewhat basic, with laminate cabinetry and painted walls, then the owner can’t demand stone bench tops and full tiling. The insurer will only pay out to replace to the same standard and that should be the OCs position too. The owner should pay to “top up” if they want to take the opportunity for an upgrade with additional lighting, spa bath, tiles to ceiling etc.