Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Hi Kiwipaul
In NSW a bit different in that the Owners Corporation receives one bill for the total water consumption, and individual owners are hit separately with a bill for a supply or connection charge. As Jimmy pointed out, the Owners Corporation expense is included in the levy notices by apportionment according to Unit entitlement. In NSW each unit owner could only be charged the same amount per unit if each unit had the same entitlement.
There are pluses and minuses to having individual meters to each unit. There is the cost of metering, and the need to read the meters on an ongoing basis, and the extra accounting involved. Then there is the question of unmetered supply to common areas, in our case with fairly extensive common grounds we would find residents less willing to water lawn areas if they were to be also footing the bill through their meters. And then if owners dispute their bills how to test and identify faulty meters.
If this was a tenanted unit, then I agree with Whale that an outgoing condition report by the letting agent should have picked up the missing door closer, and the tenant should have been charged for it. Although owners may squeal and protest when getting a bill for damage to or missing common property, they are the ones who engage letting agents, not the owners corporation. If they employ duds, then it’s up to them to fight it out with their agents, and if necessary sack them and get a better one. Astute landlords also take out landlord insurance to cover them for damage to the building.
Interference with fire doors and their closers could result in a life threatening situation for other residents of the building in the event of a fire breaking out within one unit. If such a door is left open flames and smoke could penetrate into the stairwell, making evacuation difficult or impossible.
It probably should be mandatory for fire doors to be labelled that these are part of the building’s fire safety protection, and should not be removed or modified.
This is an area which becomes very difficult to resolve, in any sort of formal manner. In my previous complex we insisted that the Council provided individual bins for each unit, as the bylaw made each resident responsible for putting their bin out for collection and returning it afterward. The Council were after all charging us the same amount per unit for garbage removal as a separate house in the street. There were some residents who had difficulty through disability, but we made informal arrangements to assist them. (on a voluntary basis).
I can’t see how you can bring compulsion into this by amending the bylaw to make anyone responsible for anything other than their own rubbish. It can become very expensive to hire some-one just to put in or take out bins, especially if they have to attend the property at additional times outside their normal roster.
The closers on a fire door are an integral part of the door, so are common property just as the door itself is. So that makes the OC responsible for their maintenance, end of story. Same principle as the door hinges. If the Strata Manager is telling you any different, they don’t know their job.
A bit nasty, but legal in NSW at least. In effect you’re short paying each levy by $2.30, which bobs up on the next bill for the following quarter. So you are in arrears by that amount each time. If you pay an extra $2.30 for a quarter then you should be OK and thus financial. Interestingly, there is no requirement for a Strata Manager to send out levy notices in the Strata Schemes Management Act, you’re supposed to pay in full and on time when the levy is due. Of course if they didn’t do so, a lot of owners would “forget” and there would eventually a lot more arrears to chase, and more interest incurred.
Narelle
There are a few problems with the approach you have taken. Firstly, don’t believe what an agent may tell you regarding the attitude of the other owners.
The by-laws are in place to be observed, and you have more animals than permitted. Although some of the owners have tolerated your breach over the past 6 years, you cannot assume that all the owners when you bought are going to stay there in perpetuity, and if they are replaced by owners with a different level of tolerance then where do you stand?
You could have in the past applied to change the by-law to accommodate your pet situation, and still have this opportunity. But if you do you must get the matter listed on the agenda prior to a meeting so it can be voted upon. If it is voted down though you must be prepared to abide by the decision. You could ignore the current complaint and see whether it is further pursued.
It makes the other situation regarding parking difficult for you, if you find yourself out of favour with the other residents over the pet issue, you may not get a great deal of sympathy from them or the Strata Manager.
Hello Jimmy
You’re on the mark (as usual!). There’s a reference here in the Registrar General’s Directions:
https://rgdirections.lpi.nsw.gov.au/strata_schemes/miscellaneous/pre_1974_plans or https://tinyurl.com/ldk8ytx
You’re on the right track. Your Owner’s Corporation has a Management Agreement for a specified period with the Strata Manager. Unless the Executive Committee has delegated all its powers to the Managing Agent it may limit the extent of the Managing Agent’s authority to expend money. Under Clause 7 d of our agreement “The Owners Corporation may limit the amount that the Strata Manager may incur on behalf of the Owners Corporation without obtaining the Owners Corporation approval, by notice in writing to the Strata Manager.” So refer to your Agreement, and send a written instruction with your requirement to your Strata Manager.
You need a bit more detail about what the Owners Corporation have done. In what form were the orders to the Owner? If the Owners Corporation have issued a Notice to Comply with a By-law then it can be followed up with a fine imposed on the Owner for a continuing breach of the By-law. The OC cannot evict a tenant, as leases are between the Owner and Tenant, in this case it may just be an informal arrangement between father and son. As we’ve said before in this forum, notices need to be formally issued and there really is only a need for the one notice, successive letters on the same subject only indicate to the recipient that there is a lack of resolve by the Executive Committee and or Managing Agent to follow up.
Further to Whale’s excellent response, it is evident here that the owner’s letting agent is not doing a thorough job, if it cannot be determined which tenant was responsible for the damage. A condition report should be made out prior to and immediately after each lease of the property, this would have determined which tenant was responsible. Tenants are required under the terms of their lease to be responsible for any damage to the property as a result of their negligence. A bond is collected from tenants, the cost of repair can be deducted from their refund at the conclusion of their lease.
I’ve had similar damage done to a garage door (common property) by a tenant of mine, it wasn’t reported to me and only became evident at the time the tenant vacated. As a proper inspection was done by my letting agent, the cost of repair was deducted from the bond. In this case, I’d highly recommend that the owner concerned be advised by the OC that he/she should seek a more diligent letting agent if he/she doesn’t want to wear the cost of damage to common property by a tenant.
xpose
You really need to check first what your bylaw states regarding parking. In our case there is no mention in the bylaw of visitor spaces, but the bylaw does refer to the parking of vehicles on common property. In the case of a tenant parking on common property, he/she would be in breach of a by-law because he/she would be parking on common property without consent. In your case this tenant should be issued with a notice to comply, if he/she doesn’t this can be followed up with a fine imposed. In regard to your access, is it possible to install a stop block which would prohibit vehicles from going so far forward as to block the gate?
Regards
DaveB
Unfortunately you’ve encountered inconsiderate neighbours, backed up by a landlord who doesn’t care and likewise his REA. There are some matters you have raised which are quite interesting, including the laundry on the balcony. Does that contravene another by-law? Are these tenants taking in children for reward and running an illegal child care centre, perhaps the council could investigate?
On issuing a notice to comply, this is no use unless it is properly followed up. The further warning letters are almost useless, they only indicate to these recalcitrant tenants that no-one is going to take any serious action to enforce it. You have the opportunity to apply for a penalty AND take the matter to the tribunal. If the notice was approved by the AGM it is up to the Managing Agent and the Executive Committee to follow it through to conclusion. Lean on them!
Hope you can get a speedy resolution to your difficulties.
I believe he can. There’s nothing to stop you making sure that all the other owners are aware he has quoted. Provided of course you don’t defame him. Is his the only quote? If so, there is nothing to stop any owner at the meeting putting forward an amendment proposing that additional quotes be obtained and considered before acceptance. If there are $1000s involved as you say then good practice dictates that competitive quotes are obtained.
If you can’t get into the building during a power failure then I don’t think you’ll be able to use the lift either. It’s a bit hard to know without some further information what the best scenario is for your building, eg how many units and how many floors. If there are lot of units then obviously the more keys given out and duplicated by the residents, the less security prevails. And as you say you have to watch out for the baddies within! It should be quite feasible to put in a battery backup for the security system so it will continue to operate during a power outage, whereas a lift would require a diesel generator, a much more difficult and expensive proposition. Unfortunately some of these issues aren’t well thought out by the builders, and the developers are happy to let the purchasers sort out these shortcomings (at the expense of the Owners of course!)
I wouldn’t follow the advice of your agent to tow the car on to the street otherwise you may find yourself subject to a fine by the council. I presume the car is an old one, and not likely to have been stolen. Even if it has plates I doubt whether the police would be interested in contacting the last owner, and they almost certainly wouldn’t get involved in removing it. It’s really a civil matter for you to deal with, if it’s in a parking space which forms part of your lot.
There are some interesting suggestions here:
Good luck!