Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I’m guessing from the reference to 10 year contracts that you aren’t in NSW. Or that you’re talking about a building services manager.If neither of these is the case, and you’re referring to a strata managing agent in NSW, you certainly have options.
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 seems to be a landlord and tenant matter rather than a strata issue? Though I imagine Flatchatters who are investors/landlords would be very interested.
Just over 50 percent of apartment residents are tenants, so around 50 percent of apartment owners are landlords. That makes it relevant, in my book.
Also, I had a look around for the price on a second-hand induction cooktop on Gumtree. One was for sale because it had been cracked by a falling pepper mill. Maybe there should be a warning about storing heavy stuff above them.
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.
Say it cost $500 and has 10 yr life. Its value therefore depreciates by $50 per annum. If we assume 4 years have passed at the point you damaged
The depreciation principle may be right (although I’m not sure that it equates with carpets) but there are a lot of assumptions based on dubious figures here. The smallest standard “no-name” induction stove is going to cost upwards of $800. If it’s a name brand, you can double that.
Drant should ask when the landlord bought the stove and how much they paid for it. Then they can start the arm wrestle of who pays how much for what.
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 a 2/3 split would be reasonable. What do you guys think.
I think the landlord should have Landlord Insurance and you should have Home and Contents. Failing both, see Kaindub’s post above.
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.
Waterproofing of lots in VIC is often a lot owner responsibility, even in apartments.
I thought that mostly applied to bathrooms in individual lots.
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.
Even if the problem is with the external wall, which is probably common property, the owners corp may invoke section 49 of the Act which says:
OWNERS CORPORATIONS ACT 2006 – SECT 49
Cost of repairs, maintenance or other works
(1) An owners corporation may recover as a debt the cost of repairs, maintenance or other works carried out wholly or substantially for the benefit of one or some, but not all, of the lots affected by the owners corporation from the lot owners.
(2) The amount payable by the lot owners is to be calculated on the basis that the lot owner of the lot that benefits more pays more.
(3) The works referred to in this section may be to the common property or a lot.
Your best bet here may be to argue that while the repairs directly benefit your lot, they would also benefit the building as a whole and therefore the costs should be shared.
Having said that, there are many elements of Victorian strata law that are a total mystery to me. Put a call into Consumer Affairs Victoria or talk to a strata lawyer to get a definitive answer.
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.
In the ACT, at least, don’t know for NSW, the chair of the committee has a vote as a member of the committee and also a casting vote if a committee vote is split 50:50.
The chair doesn’t have a casting vote in NSW but they do in Victoria.
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.
The active word is “may” – there appears to be no compulsion to do so.
However, any owner could raise an action at Fair Trading/NCAT to seek orders that the committee fills the vacancy under Section 232 (2) “Failure to exercise a function”.
Perhaps a vague threat that this option might be open to owners, including existing committee members and candidates, might focus the committee’s thoughts on a compromise. Whether it would fly or not is another matter, but concerns about the mediation and Tribunal process might dislodge one member from an entrenched postion.
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.
Assuming this is in NSW, Section 35 (2) says this
A strata committee may appoint a person eligible for election as a member to fill a vacancy in the office of a member of the strata committee … or a vacancy in the office of an officer of the owners corporation. Any person so appointed holds office, subject to this section, for the balance of his or her predecessor’s term of office.
Which bring us to who is eligible and who isn’t and for that you need to refer to Section 31 and Section 32 of the Act.
But basically the committee decides on who it wants to fill the empty seat. The owner of the two units would only have one vote in this regard and it doesn’t have to be an owner, although other restrictions apply as per sections 31 and 32. There is no strict nomination procedure here. The committee should call for volunteers (although it doesn’t have to, especially if there are agreed candidates) and then select the person they think is best suited to the role.
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.
There you go. I searched high and low for the info “Just Asking” provided above but couldn’t find it anywhere. Just shows how hard it is for ordinary strata residents and, dare I say it, how valuable this Forum and the input from Flatchatters can be.
The one thing I would add is that if the committee ignores the invitation and lets it run out, then no meeting has taken place but the invitation has been effectively declined.
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.
… is there a process required by the Strata Committee to decline mediation?
Generally the secretary and/or strata manager will receive a notice from Fair Trading asking them if they are planning to attend the mediation. There is an expectation that they will respond one way or another.
Do they need to hold a meeting?
I don’t think they need to hold a formal meeting but they can.
Am I meant to be on that meeting?
If there is a formal meeting, with an agenda issued, you are entitled to be there. Otherwise it could just be a ring-around.
Are all the owners required to respond?
No, the committee represents the Owners Corp which represents the owners.
Is there any paper work required?
If you are talking about the response to the invitation to mediation, there would need to be an email or letter, even if it’s to say that mediation has been declined. I don’t know what Fair Trading does if they get no response. But all you have to do is prove that you attempted mediation then (and only then) you can move on to seeking orders at NCAT.
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.
All the chairman needs to do is reiterate the conditions that allow him (or her) to rule the motion out of order. However, I can’t see how any of those conditions would apply.
The comment that it would be like banning backstroke, is irrelevant. Banning “bombing” in the pool might be closer to the mark, or taking glassware into the pool area – these are innocent pursuits on their own but with potential health and safety implications.
This may be an occasion where a quiet word before the meeting may be the best approach. If the chair thinks the by-law is wrong, he should explain why to the meeting then let them vote. The fact is that yes, you can take this to a higher authority – Section 232 is all about disputes between the owners corp and owners, and section 245(5) says this:
An application to the Tribunal for an order authorising a motion for submission to a general meeting may be made by any person who, at the time of the application, could have applied for the order to which the proposed motion relates.
I’m not entirely sure what that means, but the main point is that the chair should allow the vote to go ahead if only because not doing so is going to lead to a lot of unnecessary strife. If the anti-anglers are in a sufficient majority, and they are thwarted on a dubious technicality, then there is no way the matter will end there and the ensuing strife will cost the scheme financially and in its community spirit and cohesion.
If the by-law is “incompetent” under strata law, then it can be allowed fail at the registration stage. But declaring a vote on it “out of order” is highly dubious, undemocratic and unnecessary and will fast-track the scheme to a world of pain.
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.
Ziggy shouldn’t really have started a new thread on this issue without referring to the previous posts. You can’t expect readers to remember every other discussion on this. Starting another thread is perilously close to double-dipping.
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.
… if you go to NCAT which costs a fortune in lawyers the adjudicators don’t necessarily have legal training.
Did your lawyers file for costs? They should have.
There’s also no law against an OC not allowing the quiet enjoyment of a property to a resident. The law only mentions a resident not allowing quiet enjoyment from memory.
There are double negatives in the above but Section 232 of the Act allows owners and residents to take action against the Owners Corp for failure to enforce the scheme’s by-laws. Have a look at sections 1(b) and (2) “Failure to Exercise a Function”.
According to Victor Dominello, whose policy people drafted the Act, the intention is that owners corps can be required to enforce their by-laws.
Even if you didn’t get your costs, I hope you have made sure that the Owners Corps raised a special levy (from which you were excluded), to cover their expenses charged in defending the action.
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.