[Andy]

Yes I think the major hurdle will be to ensure reviews are honest and of course can be substantiated.

An unfair review can be devastating for the recipient and there would need to be a mechanism to appeal/remove such reviews.

If the platform was put on notice that a review was incorrect (or even only potentially incorrect) then I think that platform would need to act, otherwise they could also become liable.

A field day for lawyers on all sides.

[Andy]

I believe Buzzfeed is an online newspaper and produces it’s own content hence the defamation action. The OP is suggesting an online platform to he used by non-associated individuals to post a review or opinion.

I’m not saying the suggested review website may never face a legal threat but i didn’t go into detail as such a scenario (or scenarios would be hugely complex and beyond me for sure.

However if a business could be reliably sued for simply providing a platform which is used by an unknown third party to produce defamatory content, then we would all  be liable.

For example if the local council rents out their hall for a community meeting, and someone turns up, stands on the platform at the front of that hall to make defamatory claims about something; then surely the council can’t be sued for simply providing that platform? If they could be sued, then the builder could be sued for building the hall, the brickworks for supplying the bricks, etc etc…

[Andy]

There is a difference between the person/company providing the website to provide a review (merely a platform of expression) and the person providing the review.

The website provider won’t be subject to defamation proceedings only the reviewer.

[Andy]

Apologies, I omitted to type the most important piece of information making my post useless. Anyway picked up by Jimmy being whether there is an air con bylaw in the first place.

Reference to legislation (and checking bylaws) meant to do some homework first.

[Andy]

So some balconies have been refurbished at OCs expense while others haven’t. I assume the balconies are owned by the OC and not each individual owner? Who owns the tiles on each balcony?

[Andy]

First step is to go through your by-laws as both your and the OCs obligations should be explained. Second step is to check legislation. Third step is to ask the strata manager or SC…which you seem to have done as permission has been granted.

[Andy]

I remember this. Why didn’t you get your reno approved when complete?

You probably have to wait until your neighbour has finished their renovations now if there’s a connection between the properties. Also I wouldn’t rely on tiles to create a waterproof barrier. Water has a habit of pooling in the gaps under tiles and will saturate and rot whatever is underneath causing all sorts of problems down the track.

 

[Andy]

Irrespective of your tap being fixed the issue remains of a leak somewhere in the drainpipe. If 1 drip from your tap equates to 1 drip from the drain pipe, then 200 litres from your tap will equate to 200 litres in the unit below.

[Andy]

With all due respect to Jimmy T and his answer above I’d like to make some comments.

Who laid the decking? Was it the OC or the builder when the place was built, or was it added on top of the existing surface as an option or by a subsequent owner? If the latter then I’d say it’s the responsibility of the owner.

If the owner had sole access to the area then I would assume they are responsible for ensuring any drains are not blocked. If they neglected to keep drains clear I assume the subsequent stagnant water damaged the decking.

[Andy]

I get grumpy easily. On a scale of 0 to 10 (10 being the worst) shoes in the lobby makes me 1 on the scale, and that’s om my most grumpy days.

[Andy]

Judging from past posts the first poster is a tenant. They previously mentioned an issue regarding their pet which might be the FT matter.

[Andy]

Ive always wondered what is the financial year dates for NSW schemes and how this is decided. Ive searched the act and the best i could find is when a scheme came into being.
Irrespective of that, in our scheme AGMs seem to be called to occur on rather elastic dates each year which makes grumpy old men like me, grumpy.

[Andy]

Thank you Jimmy

[Andy]

Andy said:

Following the above I’m a bit worried our OC might be outside of requirements. A few years ago we voted to charge interest on overdue levies. I need to check but think this is legit.

Not just legit, but obligatory – unless the Owners Corp decides otherwise (by special resolution, I think) you must impose a 10 per cent penalty interest charge on overdue levies.

Not sure about the $70 admin fee, though

Ok the 10% was voted so all good. The admin fee seems to be ok also as it has to do with chasing unpaid levies by the SM.
Still its exorbitant for the poor buggers who can’t pay due to their financial circumstances.

[Andy]

I think I understand. Council doesn’t believe you live in the suburb and is trying to control the number of permits due to the local business district.

Still I don’t think they have the right to say no even if there is already a carspace in the building (some families have more than one car). I’m not a real estate specialist but it seems the real estate agent is also restricting your right in regard to obtaining the permit.

Maybe if you go back to council with more evidence of your residence they will come around. Better still send a written complaint and ask for a written answer explaiming why they are refusing. Beaurocrats hate putting anything in writing as they then can’t deny it. It might make them reconsider.

[Author]

Replies