Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
What I’m suggesting is that an OC themselves can be authorised to arrange for the inspection (and replacement) once a year.
This is exactly what will happen. It’s about the frequency of the inspection, rather than the person inspecting (although there may well be a requirement in the regulations). This is what the proposed amendments to the legislations say:
Section 118 Window safety devices—child safety
Omit “5 penalty units” from section 118(1), penalty. Insert instead “50 penalty units”.
[71] Section 118(1A)
Insert after section 118(1)—
(1A) An owners corporation must—
(a) properly maintain the window safety devices and keep the devices in a
state of good and serviceable repair, and
(b) without limiting paragraph (a), ensure the window safety devices are
inspected in accordance with the regulations.
Maximum penalty—50 penalty units.It’s worth noting that the proposed maximum fine for breaches has gone up from $550 to $5,500
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I can see both sides of this argument. As a Tassie owner, I’m curious about what the actual standard is that the locks must comply with. Is it a national standard or a state one? Does anyone have that link?
This from AI: Treat with caution and refer to original quoted sources.
Australian building codes require childproof window locks or safety screens on high-risk windows where a fall is possible from a height.The rules are set out in the National Construction Code (NCC) and apply across Australia to prevent accidental falls by young children. [1, 2]Where Window Locks Are Required- In bedrooms: The internal floor is 2 metres or more above the ground outside.
Technical Requirements for LocksAccording to the ABCB Advisory Note on Protection of Openable Windows, approved devices must meet strict performance standards: [1]- Opening limit: The lock must restrict the window opening to a maximum of 12.5 cm (125 mm) so a young child cannot fit through.
- Strength test: The device must withstand an outward horizontal force of at least 250 Newtons (25 kg).
- Release mechanism: If the window can be opened fully past 12.5 cm, the lock must feature a child-resistant release mechanism. This requires a key, a tool, or a coordinated two-handed action to release.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
This link quotes outdated (2013-18) legislation and not the new changes.
That may be because the old legislation is still in force and the new rules are being held up by horsetrading in the upper house where the minor parties can hold up important legislation by making demands for concessions on other legislation that has nothing to do with strata law.
You can see a summary of the proposed changes on the Bannermans website. In essence, they will pass responsibility for inspections to the strata committee but they will demand a regular inspections schedule.
It’s not just window locks. I’ve been told that the new regulations on compulsory training are not strictly legally enforceable because the laws behind them have not been passed yet.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
Can separate legal action be taken against strata for the things we cant claim on insurance?
I am not any kind of lawyer, let alone a personal injury brief, but this does point up a common misconception in strata living: In a nutshell, a strata scheme’s liability is not limited by the extent of its insurance cover.
In other words, your block may only be covered for the absolute minimum legal requirement under strata law, but it may have liabilities beyond that. Or the insurer may put a limit on the amount that it will pay under specific circumstances.
However, if the scheme is legally responsible for damages beyond the level of its cover, it still has to pay. Your real problem in this situation could be that the cost (in legal fees and time) of pursuing full restitution amy outweigh any financial benefit.
Chat to a lawyer. Many will give you a free 15-minute consultation to let you know your options and the likely outcome.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
As far as I recall, the regulation only requires that locks be fitted, not that they be used. But the legislation does take care of situations where the landlord or rental agent never gets round to fitting them, or making sure they have been fitted, by passing the responsibility to strata schemes.
On the question of balustrades, the wire and post arrangement was probably in breach of local planning laws, largely because the owners could not guarantee that no child would ever be in the apartment unsupervised. And I recall a retired coucil inspector writing to us years ago to point out the planter boxes next to balustrades were illegal for exactly that reason.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I believe there is legislation going through parliament to limit building manager contracts to three years (rather than 10). Your scheme is ahead of the game.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
As far as I can tell, the lot owner is responsible for the damage to the unit where the leak occurred – which they can claim against their own insurance. And the Owners Corp is liable for the cost of repairs to common property, which they can claim against strata insurance. If there is an excess on strata insurance, the OC can claim charge that to the lot owner who can claim it through insurance or directly from the tenant.
But there is another point here – who is really responsible? If the plumber told the tenants to turn their taps on fully but didn’t tell them to turn them off, surely the plumber is partly responsible, at least.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
You can read the Bannermans summary of the window lock regulation changes HERE.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
People who purchase into a strata scheme should understand that they are not simply buying a private apartment with an unrelated management service attached.
Good idea but who would provide the information? Developers? Real estate agents? That’s who purchasers deal with before they buy and they’re unlikely to do anything that makes potential customers think twice (or at all).
Solicitors and conveyancers? Already too late. Maybe the government could require potential purchasers to log into their website and get a code that they’d need before they could complete the purchase. Like the much-vaunted short-term letting register, perhaps. Wait a minute!!!
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I suggested to a conference years ago that strata by-laws should include a couple of examples on their front pages of by-laws that the strata committee keenly enforced. Things like: “We take noise compalints seriously” or “we stringently enforce rules in relation to visitor parking”. In other words, the kind of issues that plague some schemes more than others. The reason for not doing this, some strata managers argued, was that it would make the other by-laws look less important and encourage owners to ignore them. To which I say, sometimes it’s better to try something that might be a minor mistake than play it “safe” and do nothing at all.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
Stratahub will have the records of who has completed training and has the details of the strata management, secretary etc, so should easily be able to make the training qualifications available to the secretary, manager and the owners.
Ah, but will they? I can hear the “privacy” squeals already. The website says nothing about the records being vailable on the Hub so I would assume they won’t be.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
Are STRATA committees required to be held formally or can they have ring arounds like they’ve been doing for ages and how can you confirm if interests are being declared if there are no minutes.
Many small schemes make minor agreements using ring-arounds. They are not strictly legal but they are done on the assumption that no one will be bothered. Obviously, this is open to exploitation if a committee does everything over the phone and it’s arguable that taking up visitor parking spaces for the benefit of one owner should have gone to a proper meeting, had an agenda and had minutes issued.
If you want to put the cat among the pigeons, raise a case for mediation at Fair Trading to resolve a breach of Schedule 2, Part 2, Section 5 (assuming your block has fewer than 100 lots).
(1) The secretary of the owners corporation of a strata scheme that is not a large strata scheme must give notice of a meeting to each other member of the strata committee at least 3 days before the meeting and to each owner.
(2) Notice is to be given by displaying the notice on the notice board maintained by the owners corporation or in accordance with section 263.
At the very least, this will remind the committee that they have to be a bit more transparent in their dealings. If the secretary continues to do everything over the phone, there are processes by which you can have them removed from the committee. FYI: Section 263 is all about how notices can be delivered and includes emails.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I think you might have asked this question in another thread. My view is that everybody has a pecuniary interest in the decisions made by the committee in that they may affect the value of their lots. This rule is there for owners whose business interests may be affected by the decision.
In any case, strata committees can’t authorise major renovation by-laws and the conflict of interest ruling only applies to committee meetings, not general meetings where by-laws are decided.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I misread the original post and assumed it was about the difference in apartment levies. The post above is a pretty good summary of the difference between apartment blocks. One thing I would say, watch out for hotel conversions. They can have more lifts than purpose-built apartment blocks and that adds considerably to costs.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
Strata levies are based on the Unit Entitlements set by the developer and are based, loosely, on the relative value of the apartments. Thus a large apartment on a lower floor with no views can have lower unit entitlements than a smaller unit on a higher floor with views.
However, in the past some developers have artificially lowered the levies on premium apartments to make them more attractive to big-spending purchasers.
The problem for the other owners is that it can be horrendously expensive to get the levies adjusted to a reasonable level because you need surveyors and lawyers and the people who are going to have to pay a lot more will fight any changes. Often owners will decide that the benefit of having their levies lowered was outwieghed by the cost of getting it done.
One of the few cases that I have heard of where it was worth the apartment owners having the UEs recalculated was a development in Sydney where a supermarket on the ground floor and basement had lower levies than one-bedroom flats in the building above.
That said, it has become easier in recent years to do this as the courts will accept sample surveys of apartments rather that wanting every unit in the block to be surveyed so that comparisons can be made.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.