Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
If you require such, and they aren’t initially presented, I’d be requiring the agent to giddy up and go get them. You’ll wait. I’d assume they would expect to get these given by the owner. If you liked the property, I imagine you can get the owner to allow you to permission to approach the manager and do your own search. That’s what I did, and I like it, as I then get information not available to the prospective competition for the place.
Your committee volunteer to do, among other things, what owners collectively tell them. A vote passed at a AGM is their current, among other, riding instructions. It’s not their choice to pick and choose what they do and they have little leeway if the motion was specific enough. In Qld the official process can take a while unless it is something specific such as this (not getting on with it) – then you can pay a small bob more for expedited service to ensure it soon gets done.
You’ll need confirm your thoughts, and who then pays, from the actual legislation relating to this. Aswking in here may be right or too general or may be wrong. But for my 2c worth which may be one of the 3, I’d think the flip the apartment upside down and see what doesn’t move will tell you which is the committees cost, and which drifts or crashes to the floor is hers, and her home contents insurer if she has such.
The problem isn’t the sex-workers, it’s their clients? Really? If there weren’t these people in your property you wouldn’t have the attending clients to begin with. A girl in my former block was on the game, had a raging injection problem, had a rough cut bouncer boyfriend keeping watch, looked like a witch, and had all sort of clients coming through or waiting in the foyer at all sort of hours, often times with their mates awaiting in the car. And your property becomes known as such to all the wrong sort of people. I don’t care in the slightest if this is a legal work from home business or not and so any sense of annoying, exposing, or discouraging clients is what I’d be doing. Self-preservation of other owner’s right to peaceful enjoyment and retaining property values will take precedent over those who want to rent themselves out, every time.
The secretary may not be doing their job, but ultimately it is the committee collectively at fault. They as a whole or just some members may not have noticed the issue of concern or might be feeling exactly as you do. The job is required by law to be done correctly – and the committee is required to know this and act that way. Perhaps the speediest way to improve things, and to prove you have tried to right the ship should it come to adjudication further down the track, is to put a motion to your committee to vote on regarding this concern. Read up on this to get your words right and that it is actionable by the committee. They are required to vote on it within a reasonable timeframe, and you will get the problem fixed or the committee will show themself at fault. Either way, you are then ready for the next step.
You need to agree in advance to these and any other bills if they were not included in the annual budget, so says the Act (somewhere). I’ve seen it and explored this when the committee just thought they’d get some exclusive use cleaning done to balconies. If there’ is no prior agreement it just doesn’t fly nor are you compelled to pay for it. Imagine if you could have done it yourself, or it gets priced at a totally stupid price, or just wasn’t necessary? – so, they’d just expect you to pay it? No way. Your annual levies are different, and you knew and agreed to these at the AGM each year. Not paying the others is a different issue. Tell them, they’re dreaming. Find the case history from a number of adjudicator decisions to prove your point.
My understanding, for Qld at least, is that security or screen doors installed when the legislation regarding this didn’t exist, or allowed them at the time, and they are okay to keep. Our annual checks only look at the door proper (including closure integrity, locks, and peep holes and other things they won’t pass). Old screens are not considered and though dangerous for the reasons stated above, can be easily busted or sawn through by the Firies so they let the older one be. That suits me as with all the recent break-ins I’m happy for another layer to be between me and them.
Maybe it’s up to the big truck guys to propose a motion to increase all or some carpark space dimensions to accommodate these new vehicles. They will get the message either way, and either side will have something to lean on going forward.
Might there be a chance that should you not bring this to the Bcorp attention, and it all blows up – say via a massive plumbing leak, that you might get done by those affected or chased for the fix up costs because your building insurer didn’t know, so won’t cover the situation that arises?
You AGM changes will take too long, but proceed that way I guess if the changes will bring benefit to all in future. In the nearer term I’d think get the body corp to write to the person directly maybe if you can deliver or post it, and pop it on his windscreen if not, telling him to park in his spot, and please watch himself. And drop in that cops will be involved should any nonsense be continued. Cops are interested in curbing on-going nonsense and the thought that he has been personally mentioned to police because of this may be enough to calm the horses. If it does get out of hand and you feel to pursue it police might discuss with you the possible implementation of a court ordered peace and good conduct order – but that’s starting to be serious and you make prefer not going that far.
The committee volunteered to execute things on behalf of or as instructed by the other Lot owners. So get on with it. It’s a bit rich not to act expeditiously there after an AGM vote has decided upon some idea, but I guess things can genuinely get in the way. But if you took them to adjudication the word ‘reasonable’ would get a run and they’d need a good excuse for not doing what others have told them to do. As for the difficult committee member, you should be voting at a committee level after discussing any issue, putting it up as a Motion to vote upon, and thereafter if he likes it or not – on you go – with or without his blessing.
Would not your own car insurance, assuming you had such, deal with this (fixing your car and trying to recoup it from the known damage causer) on you paying your excess?
You will probably find there is already a signed agreement in place between you and them as a service provider for what their service include and what it doesn’t. Check that first I think.
Charging of any vehicle, cars or scooters, when left for a long time and unattended seems to be a real fire issue. I wonder if location of any charging point should then be considered – not near flammables, easy access for fire brigade to get water and service to, and if in a garage (which most new places do not have) not surrounded by all sorts of junk. Billing for an owner’s with an in-garage power-point most often is not linked to the common property account but you’d need check that for sure.