Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@proudsceptic said:
Thanks Jimmy T.It is useful to point out the differences between the roles of ‘strata manager’ and ‘building manager’. These terms and roles can sometimes be confusing.
In another Forum comment Jimmy T stated: It is OK for the owners to delegate the roles of chairman and secretary to the strata manager (for which he and she will be paid) and under the new laws building managers and letting agents can’t be on the committee unless they are also owners.
The differences are explained here:
Actually all I am trying to ascertain is if a strata manager can hold an office bearer’s position. I am aware they can be delegated powers but can they be an office bearer?
I spoke with OFT today and their advice was while they can be delegated powers they can’t hold a position but when pressed on the relevant part of the new legislation couldnt provide me with a convincing answer.
It’s all pretty confusing.
Your biggest problem with the use of a fridge in a garage is not the electricity but the possibility of fire from the use of a motor compressor in a garage/storage area.
How often is the compressor checked for build up of debris for example? Is the compressor under continuous load? Are there items stored around the fridge and is there sufficient clearance? How old us the fridge and us it in good working order?
These are all serious issues regarding the use of appliances such as fridges in garages. Fridges are a very common cause of house fires. A simple Google search will confirm. Or better still speak to your fire services provider and/or local fire brigade.
And because garage fires can be so devestating it is unwise I would suggest to allow in garage/storage areas the use of continuous load appliances such as refrigerators.
If there is a courtyard or balcony outside your unit you might also look at your strata plan as very often the airspace above the hardstand of courtyards/balconies for a height of a couple of meters or thereabouts is included in your lot.
If that is the case in your plan then anything in that airspace such as a light fitting would form part of your lot and is therefore your responsibility.
I also think we should also refer to:
“STRATA SCHEMES MANAGEMENT ACT 1996 – SECT 92
Insurance claim where owner at fault
92 Insurance claim where owner at fault
If an insurer of an owners corporation accepts a claim by the
owners corporation based on an act or omission by an owner of a lot, the insurer has no right of subrogation in relation to the owner based on that act or omission unless it is proved that the act or omission was wilful”.Last year in our plan a lot owner's internal flexible water supply pipe underneath the sink in his bathroom burst while he was away on holidays. The damage caused was considerable, not only to the lot owner's property, but also the common property.
Anajr said :
“I don't know whose fault the leak is because the OC won't answer my questions about it but I know it wasn't mine so don't see why I should be out of pocket for it. “
If Anajr's argument can be sustained then I am sure Anajr would agree our OC should be able to recover the many thousands of dollars damage to it's property from the lot owner because the leak in our case wasn't the OC's fault.
Of course we did not do that but claimed on our insurance and the OC paid the excess. But if we had thought the damage caused was due to the lot owner's negligence or say a malicious act then we would have advised our insurer who in turn would have followed up.
May I suggest that would be the best course of action for Anajr – claim on your insurance, give your insurer the full facts and let then do the follow up which they would do if you could show them that OC failed to maintain the common property.
Notwithstanding I think lot owner's should be very careful about what they wish for. It is very dangerous, in my opinion, to take the view that if my property is damaged and it wasn't my fault then why should I be out of pocket. Some day Anajr's internal water supply pipe might burst or a fire could start accidentially in his kitchen or whatever. I suggest Anajr would be very unhappy if his neighbour (or the OC) adopted the view it wasn't my fault and subsequently came running after him for money to effect repairs.
This issue has been raised many times in the forum and I am surprised that many owners and occupant's have the view that the OC's liability is unlimited even if damage caused to lot owner's or occupant's property has not been due to negligence on the part of the the OC but has been an unfortunate accident. In Anajr's case I have assumed that the burst water pipe occurred without notice and did not result from a lack of maintenance on the part of the OC.
A question I would ask Anajr is that suppose the burst water pipe destroyed his Bang & Olfsen $25,000 sound system or $15,000 entertainment setup (or both) would he expect the other owners to pay for replacement when the burst pipe was an unforeseen accident.
That's why all owners should insure contents, which includes the painted surfaces and carpeted areas in the lot.
I would agree however that if the OC knew there was a problem with the water supply system AND did nothing to address the problem and the water supply system ruptured then that is another matter entirely. That may be construed as negligence by the OC and I would suggest Anajr's insurer in these circumstances could or would pursue the OC for recompense. if he isn't insured or did not wish to claim on his insurance then he may well have a case for recovery of costs provided he could prove the OC was negligent.
Pretty straight forward and it puts the onus on:
1. The OC to maintain the CP and react to problems as soon as they come to its notice and
2. All owners and occupants to take out the necessary insurance to cover the lot owner's or occupant's property.
The current inquiry into Strata Insurance is a good reference for issues such as Anajr's.
It is a good practice when adopting minutes of a previous meeting at a meeting for both the chairman and secretary to sign and date the minutes on day they were adopted (with any changes handwritten therein) and certify they are a true record of the previous meeting.
If one or both the above officeholders are not available then have two committee members sign.
The signed minutes are then copied (with signatures) and placed on the noticeboard and/or distributed to lot owners.
Thanks Jimmy and as you said in one of your blogs 'a wake up call to OC's'.
In Makinson's case he should suffer no loss in his lot value as the AC unit should be relocated, and rightly so, at the OC's cost. However there is still the option open to remove if 75% of OC agrees.
I have great sympathy for owners who have bought into lots thinking they are getting something when they are not simply because an unauthorised addtion wasn't picked up in the pre purchase inspection.
I am aware of instances where very expensive unauthorised additions have been made to CP attached to lots, the lots have been sold without disclosure either by the seller or the OC, and the new owners think this part of the lot is CP and therefore will be looked after by the OC.
In these instances the new owners are vulnerable to the whims of the OC especially if the OC decides not to repair or worse to remove the unauthorised addition which it is entitled to do through special resolution.
When a plan, through loss of control of its CP, condones, through inaction, unauthorised additions to CP then financial pain for all owners either through the need to repair, replace or remove these additions will sooner or later come back to bite.
The solutions is for OC'c, through their EC's, to continually monitor its property, conduct regular inspections and be firm with owners who make unauthorised changes. On the other hand OC's must be flexible and recognise that all owners at some time will want to do some alterations. They must therefore have processes in place to encourage lot owners to apply for changes and above all not be unreasonable with requests. its a two way street.
Final point – Clover Moore's draft Strata legislation amendment bill if it ever gets reintroduced includes:
Schedule 1 [7]
amends section 98 of the Principal Act to require certain additional matters to be recorded on the strata roll for a strata scheme. Those matters are licences granted by the owners corporation for use of the common property, plans and approvals for building work to the common property, details of loans to the owners corporation and copies of special resolutions passed to allow additions and alterations to the common property or the erection of new structures on the common property.
If passed that would put the ball well and truely in the OC's court.
If you had an inspection done prior to your purchase I would be going back to whoever did the strata inspection and ask why they did not advise you of this unapproved alteration to the common property attached to your lot.
If your strata inspector asked the question and was told there were none then the SM would be at fault and I would refuse to do anything for the time being on that basis alone.
If your strata inspector didn't ask the question I would want to know why.
The other thing to consider is that the AC unit is now part of the common property even if not approved by the Owners. As such there are various processes applicable to CP changes which are contained within the Act.
I forgot to add one other observation about unit living which I call the “I pay my taxes (levies) syndrome”. It puts EC’s on the back foot from the day they take office.
I would suggest the majority of unit owners believe their responsibilities
start and finish with the payment of their levies. And like taxes most think levies are too high. Consequently many take the view that because they pay their levies on time it gives them the right to do basically what they want as far as strata living goes.I have felt for a long time the term levies has such a negative connotation that someone has to come up with a better term to describe the contributions owners must make to the running of the building. In our plan we have from time to time prepared simple spreadsheets breaking up the levy component for each owner e.g. how much of their levy goes to water, electricity, insurance, cleaning, gardening, fire services, repairs and maintenance but still most owners think the levies are too high and like a tax they are more often than not hated.
There are also some owners who have no idea what levies are used for. They are suprised when you tell them that we have to pay water rates, insurance and other statutory costs.
Ironically when I have sat down with owners who have moved from a house and gone through the levies in detail and compared their contributions with what they paid on their house on a year to year basis almost universally the levies were much lower. But the still the view persists i.e. levies are no different to taxes and rates.
So I think we should try to come up with a better name than levies – something which recognises it is not an impost but rather a planned contribution to the running of a building, minor repairs and major replacements and capital works.
Or maybe when levy notices are sent out we need to indicate on the notice just how levies are spent for each individual owner.
Any ideas?
I sympathise with Struggler. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. The reason why people buy into Strata. I have a friend of mine who explained to me why he was selling his house and buying a unit. He hated having to do work around the house – “When I move into my unit I will just ring Strata and they will fix everything” he said. “I won’t have to a lift a finger”. And, beleive it or not, this bloke was a former strata manager.
There is a general view with unit owners that their house/home management duties are over because “Strata” will take over. Nirvana.
2. I have known some owners who have no idea they themselves are a member of the Owners Corporation. Some think Strata is some
quasi semi government body who just come in and fix things up; anything. I quote from the 2010 annual report of our plan to all owners:“Owners are also reminded that the Executive Committee is not some amorphous body, detached from the complex, which springs into action when there is work to be done. Obviously the Executive Committee is made up of fellow owners working in an honorary capacity for the good of all owners. It is not all knowing and can’t immediately resolve issues. The EC needs to be kept informed on any problems owners might have with their properties because more often than not it will involve the common property. Communication is the key and any requests, reports, complaints directed to the EC will be acknowledged, taken to meetings of the EC and acted on. You are all encouraged therefore to get involved with the management of the plan, if not on the EC, then by being prompt in your advice to the Committee on property matters that concern you”………………”and please do not make any changes to the common property attached to your lot without reference to the OC via the EC”.
The plea had little effect.
3. Many unit owners move into units because they can’t or won’t look after a free standing house. They have little understanding of
even the basics of home construction and maintenance and many are forever running to “Strata” with even the most minor of problems. Many of these problems turn out to be their responsibility. Those which turn out to be the responsibility of the OC, are often caused by actions of the owner. I could give dozens of examples but a couple which are indicative – “Strata, we have a mould problem. Please come and fix as I have two small children and am very worried about their health.” On investigation you find out dryers are being run without venting or windows are seldom opened but the owners continue to insist the OC must fix the mould. Or the owner whose unit has been flooded and on inspection you find the hoses at the back of the washing machine are that old they have perished.4. Owners want privacy. Understandable but this means access to fix up problems in their lots becomes a nightmare because they have
to be home! They just point blank refuse to leave keys with the Secretary or a member of the OC who themselves are prepared to give up their time to meet with tradesmen. So repairs just drag on and on and the EC cops abuse for the delays.5. Despite attempts at educating owners as to just what constitutes common property many owners just won’t listen. They refuse to
accept that most of their lot belongs to someone else and that the OC as the owner has rights. As a consequence owners just go straight ahead and make changes without any reference to the OC. Many of these same owners run to “Strata” when they have problems. So you have the situation that it is my property when I want to do something to it but magically it becomes common property when I want it repaired.The best way to sum up the problems facing even the most dedicated of EC’s is that the problems with strata is that many of the people that live in Strata act as though they don’t.
I think the only way to change the whole scenario is for there to be a paradigm shift in the thinking that surrounds unit ownership. This can only be done with education of all stakeholders, professional strata management and training of EC’s.
I also believe sooner or later office holders in EC’s will have to be remunerated due to the complexity of the many laws that relate to community living.
It will be a long process.
I sympathise with Struggler. Here are some of my thoughts:
1. The reason why people buy into Strata. I have a friend of mine who explained to me why he was selling his house and buying a unit. He hated having to do work around the house – “When I move into my unit I will just ring Strata and they will fix everything” he said. “I won’t have to a lift a finger”. And, beleive it or not, this bloke was a former strata manager.
There is a general view with unit owners that their house/home management duties are over because “Strata” will take over. Nirvana.
2. I have known some owners who have no idea they themselves are a member of the Owners Corporation. Some think Strata is some
quasi semi government body who just come in and fix things up; anything. I quote from the 2010 annual report of our plan to all owners:“Owners are also reminded that the Executive Committee is not some amorphous body, detached from the complex, which springs into action when there is work to be done. Obviously the Executive Committee is made up of fellow owners working in an honorary capacity for the good of all owners. It is not all knowing and can’t immediately resolve issues. The EC needs to be kept informed on any problems owners might have with their properties because more often than not it will involve the common property. Communication is the key and any requests, reports, complaints directed to the EC will be acknowledged, taken to meetings of the EC and acted on. You are all encouraged therefore to get involved with the management of the plan, if not on the EC, then by being prompt in your advice to the Committee on property matters that concern you”………………”and please do not make any changes to the common property attached to your lot without reference to the OC via the EC”.
The plea had little effect.
3. Many unit owners move into units because they can’t or won’t look after a free standing house. They have little understanding of
even the basics of home construction and maintenance and many are forever running to “Strata” with even the most minor of problems. Many of these problems turn out to be their responsibility. Those which turn out to be the responsibility of the OC, are often caused by actions of the owner. I could give dozens of examples but a couple which are indicative – “Strata, we have a mould problem. Please come and fix as I have two small children and am very worried about their health.” On investigation you find out dryers are being run without venting or windows are seldom opened but the owners continue to insist the OC must fix the mould. Or the owner whose unit has been flooded and on inspection you find the hoses at the back of the washing machine are that old they have perished.4. Owners want privacy. Understandable but this means access to fix up problems in their lots becomes a nightmare because they have
to be home! They just point blank refuse to leave keys with the Secretary or a member of the OC who themselves are prepared to give up their time to meet with tradesmen. So repairs just drag on and on and the EC cops abuse for the delays.5. Despite attempts at educating owners as to just what constitutes common property many owners just won’t listen. They refuse to
accept that most of their lot belongs to someone else and that the OC as the owner has rights. As a consequence owners just go straight ahead and make changes without any reference to the OC. Many of these same owners run to “Strata” when they have problems. So you have the situation that it is my property when I want to do something to it but magically it becomes common property when I want it repaired.The best way to sum up the problems facing even the most dedicated of EC’s is that the problems with strata is that many of the people that live in Strata act as though they don’t.
I think the only way to change the whole scenario is for there to be a paradigm shift in the thinking that surrounds unit ownership. This can only be done with education of all stakeholders, professional strata management and training of EC’s.
I also believe sooner or later office holders in EC’s will have to be remunerated due to the complexity of the many laws that relate to community living.
It will be a long process.
This is not as straight forward as it seems. I am not sure I have come across a plan where some lots have gas and other don't (or at least the capacity to connect). It is a pity that all owners did not agree to connect the gas as the gas connection from the street to the lots would have then have formed part of the common property where it crosses the CP and owner’s property after entering into the each lot's airspace. No by law would have been needed in this case in my opinion as the ongoing responsibility for the gas would be covered under the strata plan and the Act (Sec 62).
Be that as it may I think the Strata Manager is right. Also I don’t think there would be any financial incentive for him to take this stance. Minutes are not a legal instrument and remember minutes are not in perpetuity so somewhere down the track responsibility would get lost in the mists of time. A bylaw on the other hand is registered on title for all successors in title.
Connecting a utility service however to a limited number of properties in a strata plan presents all sorts of problems and I think a by-law would be very difficult to draft e.g. if you wanted to do work somewhere later or repairs were needed that required the moving, digging up or changes to the gas service running through the common property who would pay – the four owners or the OC and how would you draft this? The cost of an EGM and registering the by-law would be minimal in my view to the cost of drafting a workable by-law.
Personally I would try and get all owners to get the gas connected – it would significantly increase the value of their property and could
then be funded from the owner’s corporation funds or through a special levy.Alternatively have an EGM and vote on connecting gas through
the common property with capacity at some later date for individual lot owners to hook up if they wish at thier own expense.All money spent by the OC is lot owners money and should only be spent if it is preceded by the issuing of a purchase order (PO) or the expenditure can be related back to a contract. PO and contracts before approved must have the necessary supporting documentation e.g. quotes, EC approval.
The OC may exempt small purchases (say up to $250 as an example), statutory charges and utilities and have a system of confirmation orders in the case of emergencies but generally the principle of POs, contracts and certification of accounts as correct for payment should be followed by all strata plans.
To support and review this system all cash accounts of the plan should be reconciled monthly and a reconciliation report provided to the EC with details of all each individual receipt and payment. This gives EC the opportunity to query any item.
It goes without saying that all payment records comprise the invoice, approved and signed PO and a certification that the work has been done or goods received. Suppliers to the plan need to be under no allusion
that if they intend to do work over and above a contract or the approved
purchase order they have to get approval first or they won’t be paid for the additional work.To further ensure probity in the system no cheques or monies should be able to drawn from the plans accounts unless two signatories or two passwords are used. Certification of accounts for payment should not be made by the person who authorised the PO.
It is not a difficult system; does take a little time to set up and requires fiscal discipline but ensures all money spent can be accounted for. It
provides an audit trail and should be available not only to EC members but also any lot owner to inspect at any time if they wish.It is important to remember that audits ensure compliance with accepted accounting standards and won’t pick up poor purchasing procedures
including contract variations, cost overruns, poor quotation or tender
procedures etc. You cannot rely on audits to determine the judicious spending of funds.