Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Who would get this “late fee”, the OC or the agent? Wouldn’t you only be deemed “unfinancial” if you have not paid the levy and any interest accrued?
The penalty interest goes to the owners corp admin fund. The strata manager may subsequently charge reasonable costs for recovery of debts but that would end up back in their coffers, one way or another.
My understanding is that your bill is not “unpaid” until the 30 days following the date of the invoice have expired but once that has passed, the statutory interest accrues from the date of the invoice.
In the case of loss of voting rights, this occurs if the owner has unpaid levies when the meeting agenda is issues and doesn’t pay them before the meeting is held.
Many strata managers deem payment to have been received when the money is in their bank accounts, to avoid ugly scenes such as unfinancial owners turning up at an AGM with personal cheques and demanding the right to vote.
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 right strata manager can work wonders in the case of the neighbour from hell.
Agreed, 100 per cent. If you have a strata manager and they are from a large company, ask the company bosses if they can appoint someone who’s more of a trouble-shooter/head-kicker until this is resolved.
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.
… than have this middle aged crook take it
What does age have to do with anything?
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.
When I ring strata they ask me to come through my real estate agent and real estate says it is common property and strata have to sort out.
As a tenant you are an “interested person” under strata law (Section 226), which means you can ask the owners corporation to do the job they should be doing anyway. They shouldn’t keep fobbing you off like that. If they want to get shirty about it, ask them if they are also aware of section 232 of the Act which allows an “interested person” to take them to NCAT to force them to fulfil their responsibilities.
Also you have certain rights as a renter, including that you have paid for the right to use the laundry. So you ae entitled to tell your rental agent to pressure the strata committee on behalf of the owner or organise a substantial rebate on your rent.
So it shouldn’t be a case of neither of them doing anything, it should be both of them doing something.
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.
Compulsory management (which is what I assume you mean by “administration”) is one of those “be careful what you wish for” options. Satutory managers don’t have to consult the committee or the owners. They do tend to do things by the book and there have even been allegations of them getting work done at inflated costs by their mates.
A less radical alternative would be to petition NCAT under Section 238 (below) to have this owner permanently removed from the committee. I’m not sure what the burden of evidence for this would be but if you could put togehter a convincing case, with supporting evidence, testimony and stat decs, it might be worth a shot.
In any case the first step would be mediation where the agitator might get a sense that his days were numbered and start to behave.
If you do go down the route of removal of the offending owner from the committee, as I said before, the bar is quite high. I could only find a couple of cases where this was attempted and both failed. In this case (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/17d6edc72ea4f562136fcef9) the tribunal appointed a strata manager for a year, just to break the cycle of conflict, and didn’t rule on the S. 238 application as the targetted member had already left the committee.
I think the critical factor would be if you could prove that the agitator “engaged in serious misconduct”, especially if you could show how that was a barrier to the smooth running of the strata scheme. If you can show that it had financial implications, so much the better.
238 Orders relating to strata committee and officers(1) The Tribunal may, on its own motion or on application by an interested person, make any of the following orders—
(a) an order removing a person from a strata committee,
(b) an order prohibiting a strata committee from determining a specified matter and requiring the matter to be determined by resolution of the owners corporation,
(c) an order removing one or more of the officers of an owners corporation from office and from the strata committee.
(2) Without limiting the grounds on which the Tribunal may order the removal from office of a person, the Tribunal may remove a person if it is satisfied that the person has—
(a) failed to comply with this Act or the regulations or the by-laws of the strata scheme, or
(b) failed to exercise due care and diligence, or engaged in serious misconduct, while holding the office.
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 don’t disagree but when you look at the criteria for establishing Royal Commissions in the past – obvious abuses and continuing public displeasure – I don’t think we’d get one. The abuses aren’t obvious to anyone but the people suffering them and the majority of people don’t give a damn.
However, there is an election just over a year away and if you can get enough supporters, you could register a Strata Party (hey, if Shooters and Fishers can do it …) and get someone into the Upper House to cause a stir.
BTW, I was asked many years ago if I would be interested in running as the leader of a new Strata Party but the proposer and I disagreed on the first item of policy that came up. Bullet dodged.
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.
Thanks for reminding me that this had not been answered.
Basically, the owner with the largest unit entitlement has the most votes and they would prevail except in issues that require a special resolution – where the votes must be unanimous – or where they result would be illegal.
For instance, if the majority owner pushed through a decision that benefitted them, at the expense of a minority owner, that could be considered a fraud against the minority. One example would be if the majority owner gave themselves exclusive rights on visitor parking, ot took over common ptoperty to build a deck.
That’s why so many small scheme disputes end up at NCAT, where schemes can be ordered to rescind or enact decisions that are palpably unfair..
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 there low cost alternatives available that allow an SP to pay periodically. Thank you for your comments.
This is a commercial matter and different insurance companies may have different approaches. Ask your insurer. If they won’t, ask your strata manager to find one that does then compare the rates.
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 the over-riding principle here is that all (financial) owners can vote on anything to do with the strata scheme.
However, if there was a dispute over the minutes, you could ask anyone who did not attend the meeting to abstain from voting. Failing that, you might register an objection to the minutes, possibly as an amendment to the motion of approval. In a very extreme case you might even take a case to NCAT under section 232(1)(a) and (e) (below).
The Act requires OCs to keep a “full and accurate” minute of proceedings at their meetings. The definition of “full” is open to interpretation – does it mean every word spoken, or just a list of all the items discussed? But accurate is quite clear – they can’t minute that they agreed to do one thing when the vote went the other way.
So, if your strata secretary has prepared minutes that are significantly inaccurate, and their cronies and passive supporters are likely to vote with them, you should ask yourself how serious the breach is and whether or not you can prove it.
If it’s a relatively minor irritation and/or you have no evidence, speak up at the meeting then let it go.
232 Orders to settle disputes or rectify complaints(1) Orders relating to complaints and disputes
The Tribunal may, on application by an interested person, original owner or building manager, make an order to settle a complaint or dispute about any of the following—
(a) the operation, administration or management of a strata scheme under this Act,
(e) an exercise of, or failure to exercise, a function conferred or imposed by or under this Act or the by-laws of a strata scheme.
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 it’s a strata scheme then the owners corporation (aka body corporate) exists by default. The strata committee comprises both owners (or their representatives) although it sounds like they may never have met.
Two-lot strata schemes are different and can be tricky, and I’m not sure about their obligations to hold meetings and issue minutes but I imagine they would be the same as other small schemes (less than 100 lots). Otherwise to answer your questions:
How are the cost of repairs divided?
The costs are divided according to the unit entitlements.
The roof tiles need replacing who pays?
Unless there is something on the strata management plan to say otherwise, the roof is common property and the costs of repairs are decided according to unit entitlements, in this case, 70-30.
Voting rights ?
Same. In this case 70-30 although anything that requires a special resolution would need a unanimous vote
What does the legislation require ?
Much the same as for other strata schemes, except that owners in 2-lot schemes can agree unanimously not to have a maintenance (sinking) fund and not to have collective strata insurance provided they are separate buildings (which would not apply in this case).
There are only 2 by-laws?
In the case of the scheme having no by-laws for specific issues that are covered in the Model By-laws for NSW, the model by-laws would prevail (although they might have to agree on which of the pet by-law models to adopt).
You might find that a lot of disputes in 2-lot strata schemes end up in the Tribunal, especially over issues about repairs and maintenance. One example might be, where the minority owner wants the owners corp to fix common property and the majority owner doesn’t want to pay for it, despite there being statutory duty to do so.
Have a look at Fair Trading’s Strata Living Guide for more information.
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.
Bark collars are painful and cruel and banned in many states and territories in Australia .
Isn’t there a collar that issues citronella spray, rather than an electric shock, when the dog barks. But you’re right, this is all about the bad owners rather than a bad dog, but if they don’t give a damn about their human neighbours, can we really expect them to care much about their pet.
Training is a possible answer – how this can be compelled I am not 100% sure as I’m no legal expert – however it is up to the owner to get off their backside and do it already.
Section 158 of the Act (below) refers to animals that have been allowed into a strata scheme but which then prove to be a nuisance or disturb neighbours. It allows the Tribunal to order the owners to take the pet out of the apartment or “take such action as, in the opinion of the Tribunal, will terminate the nuisance or hazard or unreasonable interference”.
Just as a side note, this section of the Act is overlooked in all the huffing and puffing as schemes try to create by-laws that would pre-empt nuisance pets from being brought into schemes.
158 Order for removal of an animal permitted under by-laws(1) The Tribunal may, on application by an interested person, make an order against a person who is keeping an animal on a lot or common property in accordance with the by-laws for a strata scheme, if the Tribunal considers that the animal causes a nuisance or hazard to the owner or occupier of another lot or unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of another lot or of the common property.
(2) The Tribunal may order that the person—
(a) cause the animal to be removed from the parcel within a specified time, and be kept away from the parcel, or
(b) within a time specified in the order, take such action as, in the opinion of the Tribunal, will terminate the nuisance or hazard or unreasonable interference.
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 normal process would be that the miscreants would receive a Notice To Comply which may include a deadline for them to comply.
Failure to abide by the by-law would then normally result in the owners being taken to NCAT by the owners corp/strata manager/committee who would apply for a penalty to be imposed. The maximum fine is $220. You might want to keep on top of this as the committee will have to instruct the strata manager to take this to the next stage, which offers another opportunity for dithering and delay.
If the problem continues after the fine has been issued and paid, the OC can possibly move on to having the dog either removed from the building or effective measures being taken to quell the barking.
You have to go with your strata manager’s judgement on this as they are likely to be the ones prosecuting the case. So keep on good terms with them and make sure that when they apply to NCAT (if the NTC is ignored) that they apply for costs. That not only increases the financial hit on the dog owners but reassures the committee and other owners that strata funds aren’t being “wasted” on “personal disputes” between owners.
Another reason for acting swiftly and keeping up the momentum on this is that NCAT is currently understaffed, underfunded, overworked and has a backlog of cases. Justice delayed is justice denied.
And the committee really needs to get moving on getting the strata roll updated, not least because of the pandemic. And continually receiving several NTCs is just as much an indication the residents refuse to behave properly with respect for strata law and by-laws as it is a sign of alleged harassment.
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.
Agree with all of this.
Coincidentally, I am just noodling over a column about how by-laws that wouldn’t stand up to a challenge at NCAT can work in other ways to signal more clearly the “culture” of the community.
Illegally parked cars will be towed at the owners’ expense, noisy residents will have swimming pool keys deactivated, people who don’t separate their rubbish will be photographed and named and shamed …
None of these would survive a challenge at NCAT (apart from maybe the last one) but they might make residents stop and think.
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.
With most ( but not all )records being held electronically, just bring your usb and copy away. You are not allowed to remove material, but you certainly can copy it.
If that’s your plan, take a fresh USB stick still in its packaging as the strata manager might (quite rightly) be concerned that a used stick could contain a virus (or just use that as an excuse for not allowing it to be used). Probably better to call ahead first, just to check.
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 OC failed to attend, so I was offered the opportunity to go to NCAT. But at NCAT I want to approach this matter differently.
I think you’ll find that if you try to change the specifics of your action at NCAT, the Tribunal may not accept it as this is not what you went to mediation about (even though the other side didn’t turn up).
What you are now seeking seems to be to punish the strata committee for deceptive behaviour. Your options in that regard are limited to seeking removal of some or all of the office-bearers from their roles on the committee, seeking their removal from the committee as a whole (Section 238, below) or seeking the appointment of a strata manager to take over the roles of the committee Section 237.
If that’s what you want, then you may have to start again with another application for mediation. Or you could ask the Member at the Tribunal to exercise their discretion to apply Section 238 “on its own motion”.
I wouldn’t bet on you being successful with either motion unless you can show how the actions of the committee members have materially harmed the strata scheme and I think you have zero chance with a section 237 appointment on those grounds alone.
238 Orders relating to strata committee and officers(1) The Tribunal may, on its own motion or on application by an interested person, make any of the following orders—
(a) an order removing a person from a strata committee,
(b) an order prohibiting a strata committee from determining a specified matter and requiring the matter to be determined by resolution of the owners corporation,
(c) an order removing one or more of the officers of an owners corporation from office and from the strata committee.
(2) Without limiting the grounds on which the Tribunal may order the removal from office of a person, the Tribunal may remove a person if it is satisfied that the person has—
(a) failed to comply with this Act or the regulations or the by-laws of the strata scheme, or
(b) failed to exercise due care and diligence, or engaged in serious misconduct, while holding the office.
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.