- This topic has 2 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 12 years ago by .
-
Topic
-
Hi people
I purchased a unit this year and two months after I attended the first agm I was told a special levy of 12000 was required to fix the balconies.
This issue and how major it is was first disclosed to owners 6 months before. I fact they had a report done that said they were so unsafe they shouldnt even be used. They discussed financing and even had an egm one month before settlement to further discuss it.
The previous owner lied in his disclosure statememt by saying they were looking at replacing some decking on top floor units. In fact he was given a report of the issue and a break down of cost to fix it. And the situation is a lot worse the replacing a couple of boards. My settlement agent said she did section 43 enquiries with strata and nothing was mentioned about this.
Would anyone have any advice here? Everyone in the process is just passing the buck. Saying another party should of disclosed this. But who?
Thanks
-
Replies
-
I’d think it largely depends on which state you are in. I seem to recall that the ACT had disclosure statements. But even there, where it comes down to purchasing a property, it’s largely a case of caveat emptor (buyer beware).
Once the settlement is made, it would be difficult and costly to prove that there was misrepresentation over the defect, and to receive compensation.
If your settlement agent was negligent it is possible you could claim restitution, but wouldn’t like your chances without a major fight through the courts.
Sorry to be so pessimistic.
DaveB
catg80 – sorry to be also pessimistic, but if you’re in NSW, the current requirement is that a vendor must annex to their Contract of Sale a print-out of the Title Search, a Sewerage Service Diagram, a Section 149 Certificate from Council, and a copy of the Strata Title Plan; that’s all.
It was your responsibility to commission a Building Inspection and a Strata Search, where in the latter case the Report that you refer to about the extent of the balcony problem and the Minutes of the subsequent Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) would have been identified and brought to your attention pre. the exchange of Contracts so that you could have made an informed (and possibly different) decision on the purchase.