- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Hi All
We have an owner who had to get a plumber out to test for a leak from his Lot into the Lot below, the problem was the plumber could not shut off the water because the shut off valve needed a new washer and would not shut off the water.
This unit was extensively renovated (not by our present owner but his father), creating new wet areas and things were not done to the building code of NSW standard. The original owner was fined $3,000.00 by the council and made by NCAT to provide Schematic plumbing diagrams which were attached to the Special by-law covering the renovations.
The new owner wants to be reimbursed the cost of the plumber by the OC, as the shut off valve is wholly within his Lot and shuts off the water to his Lot only my understanding is that is should be his expense, especially if he has the Special By-law covering this area. Isn’t that the point of the by-law to protect the OC?
Is my understanding correct that it is the owners responsibility?
Thanks
Slim
-
Replies
-
According to the Fair Trading Common Property memorandum, Owners Corporation Responsibility 8(c) the main stopcock to a unit is common property and everything downstream of that is lot owners responsiblity.
Now, this has changed over recent years but that seems to be the current thinking.
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.
According to section 107 of the strata Act, a common property rights by-law (probably agreed for the purposes of a renovation) prevails over the common property memorandum. Section 107 (4) says:
The provisions of a common property rights by-law or a by-law made under section 108 for a strata scheme prevail, to the extent of any inconsistency, over the provisions of a common property memorandum adopted by the by-laws of the strata scheme.
The significant thing about the Memorandum is that you can choose to adopt it in its entirety but you can’t change it. And even if you don’t adopt it, an NCAT adjudicator is likely to take its provisions into account in a dispute.
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.
According to section 107 of the strata Act, a common property rights by-law (probably agreed for the purposes of a renovation) prevails over the common property memorandum. Section 107 (4) says:
The provisions of a common property rights by-law or a by-law made under section 108 for a strata scheme prevail, to the extent of any inconsistency, over the provisions of a common property memorandum adopted by the by-laws of the strata scheme.
The significant thing about the Memorandum is that you can choose to adopt it in its entirety but you can’t change it. And even if you don’t adopt it, an NCAT adjudicator is likely to take its provisions into account in a dispute.
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.