Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Unfortunately to me they look rather ugly, and they may impede access to emergency services should there be a fire. It seems as though once installed they would be likely to remain there, even if the child they were installed to protect had grown up or moved elsewhere.
Agree with previous poster that parents aren't forced to live in a property which is potentially dangerous to their child.
In the original post if parents want to play on balconies with their children, then the children would be under supervision and hence no need for the nets.
Geoff B
It should be a case of all or nothing, not 50%. It's where they are digging out a section of your bathroom that counts. If it's in the floor, or external wall then it's common property and the repair should be at full expense of owners corporation.
Don't see that you need a lawyer (though there's nothing to stop you proceeding that way or the threat of it) , just don't agree to pay and if they bill you take it the CTTT.
I'd take a slightly different tack on this one. Firstly, I see no reference in Fair Trading's information that they require a written complaint before a Notice to Comply is issued, although the dates and relevant details of the alleged infringements have to be provided on the notice.
Without knowing the full circumstances of the case, it could be that the current Executive Committee have become aware of issues which make the location of the air conditioner unsafe or an inconvenience to other residents.
It may be installed in such a way that the Executive Committee are only now aware of its existence, eg on a top floor balcony. Perhaps leaking water down on balconies below, or has developed a defect which it makes it more noisy and obvious.
Yes it does seem rough that the new owner is held responsible for what the previous owner has done. But as you point out its also rough when the other owners have to shell out the cost of its relocation.
The purchaser admits he queried the agent on permission being granted for the unit. My experience tells me never to accept anything real estate agents tell me without independent verification.
Not sure what darryln is really asking here. Whilst I have no problem with Jimmy's answer, I'd take a punt and say the annual charge is for the CHU Insurance premium. Our managing agent gives all owners a copy of the policy summary, with notice of annual meeting, which says how much cover is arranged each year. If you want more detail on what the policy covers (and excludes), you can get it from downloading the Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) from the Company's website. There are statutory requirements in the Strata Schemes Management Act (assuming you are in NSW) for coverage of certain risks, and you should get periodic valuations to make sure you have adequate cover.
Were you offering to pay for the double glazing? Or expecting your Owners Corporation to pay? If you bought a unit facing a main road, then you should have expected some traffic noise. Perhaps you should look at some alternatives such as earplugs, or moving your bed away from the window and door.
Hi Jimmy
The same argument could apply to changing the tap washers for a shower, or washing machine if they were recessed in a common wall.
You'll always get a few owners trying to get the Owners Corporation to do every little repair, hang the expense and inconvenience of access, despite the vast majority applying commonsense and fixing such minor issues inside their unit themselves.
Peter C is most likely from the ACT, where the legislation allows for Class B units. Unlike in NSW the Class B units structures themselves are, in theory at least, maintained by the owners, so the levies would be much less. Having lived in that situation in a group of 50, as the units aged it was very hard to get some recalcitrant owners to spend money on their properties, so some of the units presented a rather shabby appearance alongside their neighbours. It was possible to repair such properties at the expense of the owners corporation, and then enforce recovery, but why should other owners have to do this from their scarce communal funds? As the current owner of two units (townhouse and villa) in NSW I am much happier with the legislation here which allows an even standard to be applied thru the complex, and for economies of scale to be achieved when doing such things as a general repaint. On present value of property my levies would represent about 0.5% per annum.
Think you'll find different councils have different rules and charging regimes.
In our complex of 20 units each resident has their own bin for general waste, and we share 7 recycling bins which are collected fortnightly. With general waste, our council offers either weekly collection at one rate, or fortnightly at half that rate. Bins are identified by a different lid colour.
You haven't stated whether the 5 bins are sufficient for your complex, or whether there is room for an additional 11 bins. Perhaps it was considered by your managing agent or committee that 5 bins was enough. If each unit owner is being billed for a bin the same as all your neighbours in separate houses, don't see why you can't insist that the council provide each unit with a bin. It worked for us when council tried to institute shared bins against our wishes, get onto your local alderman if you don't get anywhere with bureaucracy.
The Strata Manager should be acting on behalf of the Owners Corporation, in a recent case at our property our Strata Manager had no problem applying for and obtaining approval from the council to remove a tree which was past its use by date. As the tree pruner is not the owner of the land, he does not have responsibility in my understanding. If your Owners Corporation has delegated authority to a Managing Agent who is prepared to fob you off in this manner, perhaps you should consider changing to one who is prepared to put in a bit more effort.
You can do so in theory if there is enough time for the additional motion to be placed on the agenda and mailed out to owners at least a week before the meeting.
Our Managing Agent invites owners to submit motions at least a month before each AGM, if you had this opportunity beforehand then it would be unreasonable to expect your request to be granted unless it was a very significant issue. Unfortunately many motions may be of a trivial nature which can be readily addressed by the Executive Committee or managing Agent without taking up precious time at an AGM.