Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
We have been through this exercise.
As far as defects are concerned, a building is defective if it fails to meet the BCA’s Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions.
I can tell you that as far a noise is concerned, the BCA’s Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions (BCA part F5) are pretty low.
You can have have consultants and engineers check the building. If the building passes the Deemed-to-Satisfy Provisions then any changes you make to improve noise insulation would be considered improvements rather then defect remedies. They still might be worthwhile but an OC might not be compelled to make them (nor would the original builder).
There is another possibility here.
And that is that it’s NOT Foxtel’s authorised contractors that are doing the installations.
That is what has happened in our OC, but the history needs a bit of explanation.
Foxtel initially wanted to do un ugly satellite installation in our 2 buildings: 2 satellite dishes and 2 x RG6 cables per apartment running all over the common property from inside each apartment to a satellite dish.
We objected and got an integrated solution that used our existing MATV system. We already had the cables for satellite dishes to the MATV area but they were not good enough for Foxtel. So we installed Foxtel approved cables (only 2 of them) from their dish to our MATV system and then a lot of electronics to integrate it with Free-to-Air TV. All residents then got Foxtel to all TV outlets in their apartment.
But this was expensive to do and one of our 2 buildings objected, saying no-one in the building wanted Foxtel. So we only integrated one building (and only charged those owners).
But what happened was that Foxtel considered us as a single address. And in their data-base the OC became marked as “satellite system installed” (even though one building wasn’t). This meant any resident could order a Foxtel service. New tenants in the not equipped building have managed to install a dish (on the roof) and cabling. Foxtel was none-the-wiser that it was a pirate install and allowed them a service. We only discovered this after the tenants moved out! We have no idea who did the installation but it’s poorly done and NOT to Foxtel’s standards (eg they used the Sat cable that was there that Foxtel had refused to use).
So I know there can be true pirates out there! And it can happen if Foxtel has your OC’s address as “satellite system installed”.
@JimmyT said:
@Austman said:
Sorry JimmyT, but I think you advice is wrong here. OC’s should be aiming for reasonable solutions re the NBN introduction. They are out there and being implemented in other countries!Ehhhhh … where did I say any different? I agree with you.
Sorry! My fault. My over interpretation of Post#2 about getting the cable to at least to each floor? Even that’s quite hard to do in many buildings. Telcos know this. And NBN Co has deliberately avoided these buildings so far.
We have had the cable companies to our building before and their suggested solutions were either really ugly or really expensive.
Not allowing reasonable alternative solutions (that even NBN Co wanted to implement) is a political decision that might soon change.
Here is an example of what is being achieved in other countries: https://www.telekomaustria.com/presse/news/02.07_pr_g.fast_en.php
Sorry JimmyT, but I think you advice is wrong here. OC’s should be aiming for reasonable solutions re the NBN introduction. They are out there and being implemented in other countries!
Interesting article here: https://www.zdnet.com/au/conroy-claims-first-major-apartment-block-is-nbn-ready-7000015529/
It’s not such an issue installing the NBN in new developments. It’s of course the existing apartment blocks that are the big problem for the NBN. It seems NBN Co themselves wanted a “fibre to the basement and existing copper wires from there” solution but the government rejected it. If a change of government happens then things might become different.
From the link:
“As to existing apartment buildings, Conroy claims the NBN Co is going to deliver fibre to all of those premises — battling with body corporates, drilling holes in apartment walls, nailing conduit to the side of the building if there is no room in the riser … oh, it will be a fun old time running FttP into every apartment in Australia.”
Heavens!!
JimmyT said
Austman, I just had a look at that link (thanks for that) and this is what it says:
NBN Co plans to connect all apartments within the NBN’s fibre coverage areas. These apartment buildings and other multi-dwelling units will often be connected slightly later than stand-alone houses in a fibre area. This is due to the additional work needed for multi-dwelling units in terms of liaison between NBN Co and the body corporate, and the more extensive internal cabling within the building.
NBNCo are talking about hooking up apartments, not buildings. Where did you read that Owners Corps will have to pay for backboning themselves. My understanding is that NBN Co will pay for installation to the communication hubs on each floor of an apartment (where your phone lines are now) unless the Owners Corp refuses them access.
You could be right JimmyT. There just doesn’t seem to be exact information out there. I can say that with Bigpond/Foxtel/Optus connections it was at the OC’s expense. I know because we had to pay – when it was free (or often free) to houses.
And there is still the installation from the “hub” to the apartment. From what I can find that’s the 23mm (25mm external) conduits. In our building we don’t have hubs at all – just an MDF in the basement and copper phone lines from there to each apartment. 1,000s of smaller building are like that. If we have to pay for the installation from our MDF to each apartment – that’s going to be expensive.
……and if the Coalition wins the Federal Election, then conceivably the Plan’s existing “backbone” would be utilised to deliver the NBN from the “node” to those Lots that want it; personally I’m happy with wireless.
It’ll be interesting to see… Many think that due to all the signed contracts it will cost a fortune for the FTTH to be changed to FTTN.
But a FTTN like system would be ideal for OC’s. Where the “node” is located on Common Property – eg near the existing MDF (where the existing telephone cables are connected). And from the “node”, for the short distance to each unit, existing infrastructure (eg the phone line) is used.
Unfortunately, that’s not what seems to be planned for OC’s at the moment.
The way I understand it, if you are in a house you will get NBN FTTH (fibre to the home) for free. The same might apply for some types of MDUs (eg townhouses) where an individual connection is possible. But if you live in an apartment block, and in some urban areas over 80% of people do, then FTTH will not be free for you. The OC will have to pay for the internal installation which will have to be done to NBN Co’s exact specifications.
And once the NBN comes into an apartment’s area, the OC will have little choice but to connected it because all the existing phone and internet services will be switched off 18 months later.
So the connection is hardly going to be cost equitable. Apartment owners will have to pay for what home owners can get for free.
Agree with JimmyT.
And some of the standard Victorian Model Rules should apply:
1.1 Health, safety and security of lot owners, occupiers of lots and others
A lot owner or occupier must not use the lot, or permit it to be used, so as to cause a hazard to the health, safety and security of an owner, occupier, or user of another lot.1.3 Waste disposal
An owner or occupier must ensure that the disposal of garbage or waste does not adversely affect the health, hygiene or comfort of the occupiers or users of other lots.
Then there is the Act itself:
129 Care of lots
A lot owner must—
(a) properly maintain in a state of good andserviceable repair any part of the lot that affects the outward appearance of the lot o rthe use or enjoyment of other lots or thecommon property;
I’ve found out a bit about what NBN Co will want in new MDUs (ie apartments): NBN-NO-GDE-0011 section 6.2 says see NBN-TE-CTO-284 which says “Provision of a minimum of P23mm nominal inside diameter, white, rigid communications conduit with draw string, from either the telecommunications room or riser/closet location to each NTD location.” The NTD is the device inside each apartment that eg a router will connect to.
So separate 23mm (ca 25mm outside) individual conduits to each apartment is what they want.. and it may well turn out to be a similar requirement in existing MDUs! But that information still seems vague.
How to run those conduits at reasonable cost and impact (they might look pretty ugly) is what OC’s might have to decide unless other solutions that use existing cables (eg telephone cables) are eventually permitted.
Got an email from our OC managers yesterday that included info about the NBN!
https://www.vbcs.com.au/pdf/NBN%20Roll%20Out%20NBN.pdf
But, as you can see, it’s all rather big on spin and small on detail.
Still,it does at least show that NBN Co will be going down the same track as Bigpond/Foxtel/Optus did – in that they will leave the internal building connections to a “construction partner”.
I think all OCs should check on the NBN Co website for when your area will be connected. If it’s like my OC and not even in a “construction starts within 3 years” area (together with huge parts of central Melbourne!), then I think it would be unwise for an OC to invest too much time/money/effort in NBN at this stage. By the time NBN eventually comes along, the options, methods and technologies of how it will connected inside your building are likely to be different to what’s on offer today.
It seems that the laws in NSW to allow OCs to limit the number of occupants per apartment are in the pipeline:
APARTMENT owners will be given greater powers to fight overcrowding and ”hot-bedding” in their blocks under new strata laws to be introduced by the state government.
Owners’ groups will be able to set a maximum headcount in flats based on floor space or the number of bedrooms, it is understood. A limit of two adults per bedroom, except in special cases, is likely.
Just to add, you only have to Google “nbn multi-dwelling units” to see just how little information is out there for OCs and to realise that apartment buildings have been very much a secondary consideration, so far, for the NBN roll out.
But that has to change!
The problem is we don’t know what NBNCo wants! Or more importantly what they will allow. Because that will very much decide on how it can be connected in medium sized apartment blocks.
If we look at the Optus/Foxtel example, they simply dictated what they wanted in a ‘take-it-or-leave” manner. No back-bone to their exact standards meant no Foxtel for you. Optus were even harder to deal with.
Our building was just 1 year old when we tried to get Foxtel connected – with the cable just outside our door. We had a brand new TV distribution system, even cables going to any future satellite dishes on the roof.
Foxtel sent their techs and gave it the thumbs down. It didn’t meet their standards. They refused a cable connection and said we had to go satellite. Even then they refused to use out new cabling. We had to run a new back-bone – which we managed to do in a less than perfect way (and we still are not allowed Foxtel IQ). Anything else would have been enormously expensive or ugly.
So I’d want to be pretty sure about what NBNCo will require before doing too much installation. They might end up behaving like Optus/Foxtel and have pretty strict requirements.
I once went to a seminar run by Comsumer Affairs Victoria (who administer the OC and Tenancy Acts) and someone asked a similar question.
Their answer was no.
There might be other Acts and laws that come into play here.