[Annie]

Thanks Julie

You have made some assumptions in your response – the three styles of windows/doors are the original (wood), a 2011 unauthorised change (looks the same but metal) and now a completely different looking set of doors/windows (sliding and centred and metal) approved by the Strata manager despite objections by the Committee.

The Committee’s expectation would have been that the door/windows be replaced with a similar style to the all the other windows/doors. By giving approval without consulting the Committee and despite the Committee raising objections when the door/window arrived on site.

My question was seeking advice about what action we can take, given the change impacts the ascetic of the property, and as you say sets a precedent that means a fee for all. Design guide is interesting and has not been raised by our Strata manager as a solution. Can you explain? Where does that fit in the legislation?

What control does an Owners Committee have if the Strata manager can make unilateral decisions unless a manual is created outlining all possible requests and our position? Surely the easier solution would for the Strata Manager to ask the duly nominated and very active Owners Committee for approval?

[Annie]

Thanks Jimmy. It was the Strata management company (the Strata Manager) who gave approval without consultation, and did not prevent the change when I asked told them Committee approval was required, citing ‘precedent’.

The strata management company director, in response to our complaint, came back to the Committee yesterday saying the only way forward was to have a special ballot of all owners. The way they proposed to word the postal ballot was misleading and frankly infuriating. The director argues the “owners” rather than the Owners Committee would be required to agree to the facade change and thus a postal ballot is required. That is not my understanding of the legislation (Victorian).

[Annie]

The property is located in Victoria.

[Author]

Replies