[Charlie]

Thanks Whale, 

 

That is 100% it. You have been extremely helpful. Thank you for your advice.

 

Charlie 

[Charlie]

Thanks Struggler, Also very sound advice. 

There is obviously a reason the concrete slab was put there in the first place. Regardless of the tiles on top.

I understand that the concrete membrane to stop water running into the garage below would be more effective if it had another concrete slab/tiles on top rather than grass and soil, in addition to the engineering reasons for the slab.

Regards Charlie  

[Charlie]

Thanks Whale, Very sound advice.

 

Its the piece “the latter may suit them” ie. The OC determines what they want, which is the ambiguous part – I was hoping there was a firm law that stated “one way or the other” so there was no squabble – just a pre-determined outcome.

I guess the next step is to present those options as alternatives as part of submitting a request for a special resolution as means of compensation for exclusive use of the patio area – I get it. Its a pity its taken 35 years for this to become an issue.

I will stand firm on the OC replacing the concrete slab/tiles in the first instance and that the exclusive use and bylaw is a secondary step.

 

Charlie 

[Charlie]

Thanks Whale,

That is really good advice. I appreciate the time you took to answer my post.

It is unfortunate and possibly an oversight the the patio is not included in the strata entitlements. It has been used as a patio for the accompanying units for 35 years so it quite a unique situation that has risen.

 

Regards

 

Charlie 

[Charlie]

Thanks JimmyT,

 

You are correct that for the purposes of maintenance and repair the balconies are common property. I wish it was that simple.

 

The balconies are actually included in their strata unit entitlements/levies, and the patio that extends from our unit is not. The registered strata plan does not include the patio/landing in the drawings (which is unfortunate).

 

We pay our share of strata fees just like anyone else and have contributed to the special levies for this major works, but some of the owners on the EC  have an issue with us not paying for the extra entitlements not included on the strata plan for the patio. We would be prepared to pay that, but they want to go to vote on special resolution before we have even discussed this.
 

Does that change your perspective in any way?

 

Regards

 

Charlie

[Charlie]

Hi everyone,

 

I can appreciate the thoughts here around people doing their own thing on common property and trying to get away with it. I have an unusual position and would love some community feedback. 

I have posted my issue in the “common property” forum about the use of a patio that is actually registered on strata as common property. ie. It isn’t drawn into the strata plan as part of our lot.

 

When we bought the ground floor unit ( 4 years ago ), the tiled area outside our door was already there and the previous owners used it by having a small table and chairs on it. From what we can tell, it has been there since the building was built. ie 35 years ago. Until now we have never had an issue.

 

It is a tiled areas that is on one concrete slab that run across two ground floor units. There is also a divider between the two units.

 

The area has to be dug up to treat a concrete roof of a carpark underneath it. Some of the unit owners are hesitant to replace the tiled area as they feel it is common property and they don’t benefit from its use (like we do).

 

They have called an Exec Committe Meeting to propose not replacing the tiled patio area outside out door by means of special resolution to go to the OC.

 

We are extremely reasonable in our use of the patio area, far from damaging common property or causing disruption to others. The grassed area that flows from the patio is never accessed by other residents, but is left completely unobstructed and clear.

 

Any thoughts greatly appreciated 

[Author]

Replies