[Iain]

Sorry for not being clear, the whole thing is quite confusing to me. Yes, at the last EGM a motion under 65A was passed. This authorised owners to enclose their balconies (at their own cost) and owners to replace the balcony railings and do some other work (at their own cost). There was also a deed presented with indicative costings. Those costings have since changed (got more expensive) and we have been resent the Deed and asked to sign, return and pay within 14 days.

My initial thought was that the request for me to replace the balcony railings (at my own cost) was inappropriate as I thought it should be a strata cost. Based on the above I think I understand more clearly that I don’t have to replace these but as they aren’t a safety issue (they just look old and ugly) if I do choose to replace them (as I’m now entitled to do given the 65A motion which has been passed), I should pay for the work required to alter those myself.

The other particular issue that I have is that for those balconies which are enclosing, they are required to install a horizontal spandrel for fire protection and compliance with BASIX requirements. Those owners should pay for that themselves in my view (and that is consistent with the 65A resolution which has been passed). However, the 65A resolution also attempts to compel other owners who are not enclosing (such as myself) to install matching spandrel on our balconies which is not required for fire compliance or BASIX but is merely required so that each balcony looks consistent. If I understand the summaries above, I cannot be compelled to do this work (at my own cost) and if the Owners Corporation decides that they want to do it in order to keep the look of the building consistent, then they can vote on that and the cost would be paid for by way of unit entitlements.

It’s quite expensive and I really don’t want to pay the extra when the only reason it is required in the first place is to match the units of those who are enclosing (which is nothing to do with me). To put it in perspective, the cost of this work to replace one window, a balcony railing and install the spandrel has been priced at $35,000 which seems very expensive for the actual end result.

Thanks for all your help.

[Iain]

Thanks for your help. I agree that the building is going to look very strange with some balconies enclosed and some non-enclosed. This point has been made on a number of occasions and the whole sorry saga has been ongoing for a number of years.

There is one particular EC member who is really driving the agenda (and rounding up proxies for the OC meetings) but all parties are agreed that something needs done as the old windows are leaking and balcony rails are getting to an unsafe point (plus in desparate need of modernising) and the EC (via this member) won’t allow consideration of any option which doesn’t include enclosing her balcony.

It really is down to how to pay for these. In my view it seems relatively clear, owners pay for additions/alterations to common property (e.g. enclosing balconies) if they so choose to enclose their balconies, the Owners Corporation should pay for the other changes (via unit entitlements) required (i.e. replacement of the balcony railings on the non-enclosed). 

There have been resolutions passed under 65A to try to force a different outcome and the latest communication is to try to get all owners to sign up to a Deed to have all the work done at individual lot owners cost.

[Author]

Replies