[danih]

Holy Dooly!

I’m with Jimmy on this one. This guy sounds deplorable!!

Besides the temporary relief Jimmy has suggested, it might also be worth putting a call into the anti-discrimination commissioner to find out your rights in relation to discrimination law.

You’re best bet is certainly to stay cool and not engage with him. Keep the tenants in the other building on side – surely they see his irrationality.

If he’s threatened you physically or psychologically then definitely register a complaint with the police. Then if/when he rings them to complain about you he’s flagged as a nuisance.

If a new strata manager is appointed they may be able to explain the situation to the other owners and over ride the previous damage.

 

Good luck… hope you smash the ba$&@rd

[danih]

Hi Brianpr… Thanks for this informative post. But you’re obviously starting from a point where the committee has some basic functionality and competence!

I live in a small, 12 unit block (Sydney, south eastern suburbs) built in the 1960s. At our recent AGM (which was more than 3 months overdue) every (financial) resident owner nominated and were appointed to the committee – 7 people in all. One gentleman (I’ll call him U10; he’s lived here the longest and owns 2 units) is treated as the nominal chair simply by dint of his tenure. The building is reasonably well looked after and major issues get fixed fairly quickly but with minimal consultation. I have been trying to institute a more proactive approach since I moved in 5 years ago to no avail. Mr U10 uses textbook passive aggressive tactics to avoid convening meetings and we end up having discussions over group emails. The only benefit of the email issue is that it means these “discussions” are recorded.

I’ve tried to call a meeting but then U10 says “I don’t think we need a meeting…” and so nothing happens!!!! I’m not a particularly patient or politically adept person so this is driving me completely mental.

I look forward to reading more.

[danih]

Thanks Bonnie. The issue isn’t a blockage – we’ve had the camera eels up the pipes in the past. But yes, looks like getting a plumber to weigh in may be the way to go. Thanks for your input. 🙏

[danih]

Thanks Jimmy… that may be what we’ll need to do eventually. I’ve asked for 3 quotes and a “theory of cause” from the local plumbers.

I was quite amused at how fast I got a reply when I said I was escalating the issue to my local councilor!! Still not satisfied but I think you may be right about “city hall”

cheers

[danih]

Hello clever people…

So we’ve heard back from one of the two strata committees involved in the above issue. They say they’re not responsible for our costs because they didn’t know about the problem and, now that they do, they’re investigating cutting down the tree (sad – Personally, I would like them to investigate the possibility of a root barrier rather than wholesale removal… even though the tree drops tons of leaves and seeds into our parking area. It’s a nice tree!!).

I have informed them politely that ignorant is not a defence.

We haven’t heard anything from the other strata scheme, which appears to be self managed (their strata mailbox was overflowing…)

My questions are:

1) can one strata plan unilaterally remove a tree that goes over two property boundaries?

2) As most of the units in these blocks are rented out, what rights do the tenants have with regard to removal of the tree?

thanks!!

[danih]

**sigh** and don’t forget that if you do live in an older building the original parquetry floors are considered common property!! If they’re coming to the end of their lives the OC could be liable to pay for constant repairs. Our OC passed a by-law to remove the remaining horizontal floor on our 50yr old building from the common property register. Most owners had already replaced their old floors at their own expense. Sadly nothing lasts forever, even beautiful old floors.

[danih]

Thanks ScotlandX and Cosmo. I agree with you but if we don’t get a report the owner can say we’re being negligenT in not investigating. Once we have the report (in train now) we will draw a line. If the owner doesn’t agree with the findings we’ll definitely be telling her it’s her problem!! If she wants more tests done she can organize them herself!!

youre right that we’ve been more than patient. She seems to expect us to guarantee things beyond what’s reasonable. It’s ridiculous!!!

thanks for the positive reinforcement though. Much appreciated. 

[danih]

Hi Bonnie… We’re hoping to avoid having to cut the tree down if we can. It provides excellent privacy and good shade in the summer. Unfortunately, given I’ve discovered it’s actually on two properties I can see this being quite a complicated!! 

[danih]

Lady P… thank you so much!! You are a legend!!

I can and will do all of that. 

I’ve just been out to photograph the tree and have discovered it seems to straddle two seperate properties – it’s at the apex of 2 blocks that come to an apex. 

I’ll read through the links you posted. Looks like it could get complicated!!

xxx

[danih]

Thanks Lady Penelope

I’ve been struggling to figure out the appropriate trade but your suggestion of a competent builder is certainly the logical approach. 

You’re the best!!

[danih]

First let me thanks this forum, and in particular Jimmy and Lady Penelope, for your salient advice. As per the post above, our Owner’s Corporation retained an excellent lawyer and the NCAT action initiated by the disgruntled owner was withdrawn.

Unfortunately she has now requested immediately that the strata committee authorise (and I quote)

…an immediate inspection by a qualified engineer, followed in turn by immediate repair work, be made of the outer wall and roof of my unit, including but not limited to the following:

–     gaps between the external brickwork skin and window frames

–     lack of installed cavity flashing

–     failed flashing

–     absence of weep holes.

These areas are points where water can access the internal areas of my unit.

All these issues were clarified in the reports of the insurance company contractors who rejected her key assertion of water ingress.

The strata no longer have any obligations towards her floor.

I have no problem authorising inspections and quotes, as long as it doesn’t cost the strata a fortune. Unfortunately I believe this to be a way for her to try and game the committee and reassert her assertion that her initial problem was caused by water ingress!! a claim that has been thoroughly investigated!

Does the forum have any suggestions for another strategic course of action? 

[danih]

Thanks Jimmy,

We knew this owner would lodge some sort of protest over us voting to use strata funds to pay for legal guidance. She believes the committee is acting maliciously and she has framed the conflict as a personal vendetta of some sort.

We’re doing what we can to follow the letter of the law. The lawyer we are have decided to engage advised us to exclude her from voting on those grounds.

The owner protested at the meeting and I asked her to submit it in writing, which she did. Today I received an email questioning the way the meeting was run (we’re pretty informal but the decision making process was quite clear).

Thanks for the references. I’ll definitely file them in the event we lose the case, which I hope we don’t.

Cheers

[danih]

Hi Dech… I only wish this was all over but unfortunately the saga continues. 

As Scotlandx pointed out as this is original parquetry it is common property as per the common property memorandum on the fair trading website. The complication here is that none of the owners in the scheme were actually aware of that fact and so 9/12 have already replaced their old floors at their own expense. 

This particular owner is non resident and has always avoided spending money of their unit if it’s at all possible. It still has its original kitchen and bathroom, where as most others have been renovated. the tenant had actually been complaining about the floor for a while but after the stormy week the owner saw her opportunity to claim on strata insurance. It was only 6 weeks later that she discovered it was common property herself and started insisting the OC replace the floor. As th OC contend her actions damaged it the request has been refused.

we finally had our mediation session a few weeks ago and sadly that failed too. We are waiting to see if she opts for the tribunal. Since she has been called out on several inconsistencies and “inaccuracies” in recollections [lets not call them lies… such a harsh word] were not sure what’s going to happen next. She is still holding the OC responsible for lost rent. The OC also made a good faith offer just to resolve the dispute that was refused. Balls back in her court.

[danih]

A little post script to this ongoing saga… After our mediation was cancelled by DFT I wrote to the minister complaining. Yesterday I received a hone call from the head of mediation, Paul King. We had a rather long and cordial conversation. Since we had already made an offer to the owner to repair her floor (she still hasn’t accepted our offer and is continuing to argue minutiae)

Paul’s advice was to leave the ball in her court, which is what we intend to do. 

Sadly, he also wasn’t able to give me definitive guidance on the scope of strata responsibility for the floor given its age. He did, however, say that it sounded like we had done what we could to try and resolve the issue responsibly.

Cheers xxx 

[danih]

I’d love her to take us to NCAT! We’ve got a better chance of not having to pay out one red cent!! You’re a legend Jimmy… (love listening to you on 702 too.) xxx

[Author]

Replies