Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
The simple answer is that you must, by law, allow the network carriers to access your building but you can do it on your terms. These would include provisions that they don’t disrupt or damage common property, especially in a way that would prevent other providers from accessing the block. Talk to your strata manager or lawyer.
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 might try a vote of no confidence (can you do that?)
It’s going to make very little difference if the strata manager knows they’re not wanted but is determined to hang on anyway. The only way you can sack a manager mid-contract is by invoking one of the clauses in their contract and since the standard strata management contract protects managers to a ridiculous degree, anything short of a physical assault on a committee member won’t do it. (By the way, assaulting owners being a sackable offence used to be a clause in Queensland management contracts and maybe still is.)
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.
That’s an all-too common story. Even Fair Trading has never disciplined a strata manager for incompetence or dishonesty, so why would we expect their professional body to be any different?
However, SCA’s newly minted Professional Standards system comes with a code of conduct which also means that later this year their new standard contract will be issued and it should be a lot less one-sided.
And, I am told their highly dubious “Owners Section” will become more about education and information, rather than the somewhat fatuous notion that it was there to represent owners in any way that cut across their major role which is and was to look after strata managers.
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.
Take the owner to NCAT under section 132. NCAT can then order the structure to be removed, but the astute owner would accede to the OC and be more compliant.
Yes. Section 132 relates to orders where an owner has done work that has damaged common property.
Explain what happens if they don’t cooperate as well as the probability that they will have costs awarded against them if they are obstructive (as has just happened in the case about Acacia Gardens).
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.
However, first things first – the Owners Corporation cannot make an informed decision on the renovations until all of the renovation documents are provided. These need to clearly outline what renovations have occurred, the location of same and the details for the contractor(s) who performed the works.
Just a thought – what do you do if the owner refuses to hand over the documentation?
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 I needed my air conditioning fixed, why would I have to have the air condition technician report to the Facilities Manager, who really has nothing to do with my air conditioning?
Does your air-con pass through common property at any point? If so, the building manager, representing the owners corp, is entitled to check the bona fides of the people working on it (although this could be done with a phone call, and email or a text message).
There’s also the question of moving equipment through common property, parking, removal of rubbish and potential inadvertent damage to common property and other units.
Speaking as someone whose builder drilled through a hot water pipe while installing a towel rail, causing water damage 11 floors below, I can see why making sure contractors have appropriate knowledge and insurances could be important.
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 building manager is obviously employing the 3BS technique: Baffle them with bullshit then blind them with science.
I hope the OP has taken our advice and sought professional assistance.
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.
what you have described is that the OC limited the powers of the strata manager.
I agree with your subsequent comments that sacking a strata manager can be hard to achieve, thanks to the protections built into the strata strata management agreement, but I can’t see where the above narrative applied to limiting their powers.
It’s hard to tell from the original post whether the strata management contract was up for renewal in any case (which is required after three years) or whether this was an attempt to break the contract early.
Sad to say, the OP has witnessed just another day in strata where anger and disappointment have led to unnecessary conflict. If the strata manager had any integrity left, she would resign but her cronies on the committee seem determined to keep her for whatever reason.
I wonder what our friends at SCA, the strata managers’ professional body, would say if this was brought to their attention (not a lot would be my guess).
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 section of the act you are looking for is 132 … rectification of works by an owner
I don’t think so. Section 132 applies when “work carried out by or for an owner or occupier on any part of the parcel of the scheme has caused damage to common property or another lot.”
Where is the damage to common property or another unit? Removing carpet to lay down timber flooring is a minor renovation as defined by Section 110 (3)(c) of the Act, not requiring a special resolution (presumably because it doesn’t change or damage common property or another lot).
On the previous question of running both the claim for a penalty for breach of a by-law as well as seeking orders, section 232 (3) says …
A person is not entitled—
(a) to commence other proceedings in connection with the settlement of a dispute or complaint the subject of a current application by the person for an order under this section, or
(b) to make an application for an order under this section if the person has commenced, and not discontinued, proceedings in connection with the settlement of a dispute or complaint the subject of the application.
That seems to be saying pick a lane and stick to it. Once again, I strongly recommend you get professional advice.
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.
Just a thought, this is what the NCAT fact sheet says about applying for financial penalties:
[Applicants must] attach the Tribunal order that was contravened
• Evidence includes a statement of the contravention including dates and description of activities
• Note: Evidence must be in the form a statutory declaration, affidavit or expert report as appropriate, as the rules of evidence apply in penalty proceedings.To me, it sounds like getting a financial penalty imposed may be a higher bar to clear than seeking orders. So, if you don’t actually want a financial penalty, why burden yourself with going the extra distance and increasing that chances of failure on a technicality.
Again, seek professional advice, preferably from an experienced strata lawyer. I’m not sure that initially going for a by-law breach was the right tactic. Could have worked, but clearly didn’t.
A section 232 application covers a by-law breach in any case.
FYI, if you are seeking orders, you need to have at least attempted the mediation process first.
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.
Glenquarry Park Investments Pty Ltd v Hegyesi [2019] NSWSC 425
Our sponsors, Sachs Gerace Lawyers have provided a comprehensive summary of that decision HERE.
The suggestion that professional advice be sought is reinforced. The case is complicated and arcane.
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 may at the hearing find that not all the orders you listed are relevant. If that’s the case, then as Americans say: “no biggie”. You will not be penalised by listing more orders you seek than you actually raise in a hearing;
I am pretty sure that I have read in the past about Members rejecting cases because the plaintiffs appeared to be changing horses in mid-stream. It’s much better to go in with a clear objective of what you want and the best way to achieve that. And, yes, professional advice can only assist in that regard.
Don’t forget that while NCAT hearings are supposed to be at the parties’ own costs, the Tribunal can award costs if they feel either party has been deliberately obstructive.
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 is relatively recent Supreme Court authority which explains the extent of the duty to repair and maintain common property, the powers of the owners corporation to carry out repairs and maintenance, and discretionary works under s108. The test for what an owners corporation “must”do is spelt out. Coincidentally, the case also involved the replacement of an aged lift.
Any chance of a refence or document number?
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 am not hopeful and am thinking a compulsory admin can ensure work required is done while we all have a rest from the ongoing and relentless negativity. It is exhausting and becoming debilitating – but to resign would be handing the keys to the kingdom to 1 person – which we are not happy to do.
I agree with spmanager. But you could give this one last shot. Convene a meeting or a webinar or just send out a flyer and explain to all owners how they are in breach of the Act by not repairing the lift or raising the finances to do so.
Then explain that by not complying with the law, they are likely to have a compulsory manager appointed.
Then explain what that means.
For at least one year (probably two) they will have no say in the running of their homes, levies WILL go up, but by amounts over which they will have no control. The strata manager will be legally obliged to follow the letter of the law, which means that little flaws and repairs to common property that have been ignored WILL be fixed and, again, levies WILL go up.
Why? Because the strata manager has legal obligations and duties and the owners have no say in the matter. I’d feel tempted to add “Now, do you feel lucky punk?’ but that’s probably inappropriate.
Instead, I might suggest that you hire someone like our sponsors StrataAnswers to come along and explain the facts of life to your owners. And if that doesn’t work, by all means go for a statutory appointment.
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.