Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I know that Sydney Water have ageing infrastructure but they should be required to upgrade it so that residents on higher levels have enough water to wash their hair properly (at the very least)!
Which reminds me of this Seinfeld episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyZ41rgC07o
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.
Instead of taking action against the trouble maker, I would approach the issue differently.
This is not about the key, it’s about the behaviour of a resident who thinks he can do as he pleases in the building.
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 first need to look at your by-laws and see if there is anything there that might be used to curb this miscreant’s activities. There probably isn’t in the standard by-laws, but yours may have something.
Then I think you need to look at introducing by-laws that would curb their activity, such as a by-law that says residents can only enter another level if invited by a resident of that level to do so.
Then have a look at Sections 153 (b) and (c) of the Act, which say:
153 Owners, occupiers and other persons not to create nuisance(1) An owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession, tenant or occupier of a lot in a strata scheme must not—
(b) use or enjoy the common property in a manner or for a purpose that interferes unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of the common property by the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the common property, or
(c) use or enjoy the common property in a manner or for a purpose that interferes unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of any other lot by the occupier of the lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the lot.
Now, as we have discussed many times in these pages, it’s very hard to nail down what “nuisance” is in strata law terms. And it certainly isn’t merely something that annoys neighbours – it has to do actual or potential harm or prevent residents from enjoying the rights that come with owning and renting in a building.
And then there is another aspect to this, which comes under the general heading of “assery”- a non-legal term that I have just invented which I would say applies to someone pushing the boundaries and occasionally crossing the line for no better reason than to annoy their neighbours.
One option open to you might be to effectively “name and shame” this resident by publicly confronting them with the general disapproval of their behaviour. And one way to do that would be to hold a general meeting to propose new by-laws to curb specific behaviour, as suggested above, and to .a proposal to to take legal action against this resident. (The legal action doesn’t have to be a real prospect – the meeting is the key).
At that meeting – which would have to be chaired by a confident and forceful presence – you would set out how much distress this person has caused in the past and what you options might be for the future.
Part of this meeting would include a rundown of the costs this person’s behaviour has incurred both in financial terms through additional management costs and in personal terms through the unnecessary stress his actions have caused.
You would invite the miscreant to explain their actions and give an undertaking to stop harassing committee members and to make their issues known though normal channels and procedures.
You might also canvass other options such as Personal AVOs, more by-laws and seeking orders at NCAT. You might then lay out the financial costs to the strata scheme of pursuing these actions and how unlikely it would be to get any of the costs returned as NCAT does not award damages.
Finally, and I would actually make this your priority, you could contact our sponsors Strata Answers who can intercede on your behalf and have a stack of experience in dealing with strata assery in many, many forms.
Does anyone else have any other thoughts.
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.
We’ve had another email from a person I suspect is in the same block (the email addresses are different but the circumstances are very similar). This is what the second email said:
We have a problem owner in our building who thinks he has run of the place.
In the most recent breach, he grabbed the access all areas key from the concierge desk (when the concierge wasn’t there) and helped himself to all floors to drop anti-committee letters under doors. This happened about 2-3 months ago.
I’m so appalled at the owner’s actions and other things he has done. He was once caught moving a security camera (the same camera recorded him doing it) and he then took over a storage cage belonging to someone else.
He is repeatedly breaching our building’s security and I wonder what can be done about it, and whether these incidents are also police matters?
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.
… was wondering if a more obvious solution can be considered; Like installing a flashing or a low profile gutter on the ceiling of the affected balcony.
I think you’ll find the strata committee is a lot quicker to jump on physical changes to common property that they are to deal with bad and selfish behaviour of residents.
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.
Okay, if I am reading this correctly, you have a polycarbon shading that was approved under a 2008 by-law and you want to replace it and you want to know if it would fall under the 2017 by-law.
If the original by-law wasn’t revoked when the new by-law was approved, then technically it still stands.
Normally in this situation, the new by-law would say “this by-law revokes by-law number XXX” or “this by-law amends …”
An amendment to a by-law requires the same level of approval as a new by-law (a special resolution).
However, just to complicate things, your shading may qualify as a sustainable installation for which the by-law would only need a 50 per cent vote.
This is what it says in the Act:
sustainability infrastructure means changes to part of the common property (which includes the installation, removal, modification or replacement of anything on or forming part of that property) for any one or more of the following purposes—
(a) to reduce the consumption of energy or water or to increase the efficiency of its consumption,
(e) to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
(g) a purpose prescribed by the regulations.
The obvious question is, if you want to replace the roof on the pergola, why do you not want to comply with the new by-law? Or did you get approval for the roof back in 2008 but not get round to installing it until now?
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 your strata managers said ignoring renovation by-laws was OK, they are idiots and should be replaced at the first opportunity.
Significant work on bathrooms is almost impossible to be done as either a minor or cosmetic renovation. As soon as you remove tiles on the floor or a common wall, you are in by-law territory.
The main reason you have by-laws for renovations is so that the renovator has to agree that the owner of the lot, henceforth, will take responsibility for the work done.
And that avoids the all-too-common situation of people renovating their bathrooms (especially), selling their flat, the bathroom leaking and the new owner asking the owners corp to fix it because it’s common property and there is no paperwork to say otherwise.
That’s why Section 108 (below)is there in the Act, declaring that unless the renovator accepts responibility for the renovations, then common property flaws fall to the owners corp.
Despite its wording, it’s not there to shift responsibility to the OC, it’s there to make sure the OC thinks about the implications and puts appropriate by-laws in place.
If your strata manager doesn’t understand that, they should hand in their ticket right now.
In your specific situation, you should ask your committee to immediately demand that the rogue renovator sign up to a retrospective by-law or restore the common property to its original condition. The by-law will fix the problem. Doing nothing is planting landmines for your scheme’s future and neither the renovator not the strata manager will be held responsible.
But if the committee does make the claim now, then the renovator will find it very hard to sell their unit until they have complied.
108 Changes to common property(1) Procedure for authorising changes to common property
An owners corporation or an owner of a lot in a strata scheme may add to the common property, alter the common property or erect a new structure on common property for the purpose of improving or enhancing the common property.
(2) Any such action may be taken by the owners corporation or owner only if a special resolution has first been passed by the owners corporation that specifically authorises the taking of the particular action proposed.
Note—If the special resolution is a sustainability infrastructure resolution fewer votes may be needed to pass it. See section 5(1)(b).(3) Ongoing maintenance A special resolution under this section that authorises action to be taken in relation to the common property by an owner of a lot may specify whether the ongoing maintenance of the common property once the action has been taken is the responsibility of the owners corporation or the owner.
(4) If a special resolution under this section does not specify who has the ongoing maintenance of the common property concerned, the owners corporation has the responsibility for the ongoing maintenance.
(5) A special resolution under this section that allows an owner of a lot to take action in relation to certain common property and provides that the ongoing maintenance of that common property after the action is taken is the responsibility of the owner has no effect unless—
(a) the owners corporation obtains the written consent of the owner to the making of a by-law to provide for the maintenance of the common property by the owner, and
(b) the owners corporation makes the by-law.
(6) The by-law—
(a) may require, for the maintenance of the common property, the payment of money by the owner at specified times or as determined by the owners corporation, and
(b) must not be amended or repealed unless the owners corporation has obtained the written consent of the owner concerned.
(7) Sections 143 (2), 144 (2) and (3) and 145 apply to a by-law made for the purposes of this section in the same way as they apply to a common property rights by-law.
Note—A new by-law or other changes to the by-laws for a strata scheme must be approved by a special resolution of the owners corporation (see section 141).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 first answer that springs to mind is another question. Was the number of visitor parking spaces part of the Development Approval? If so, they need to go back to council and get approval first.
As for “giving” the space to the owner of an adjoining space, that is giving away common property. You should find out the average cost of a parking space rental in your area and the benefitting owner should be offered the space at that rate or just below, calculated proportionately.
Otherwise the OC could create motorbike and scooter parking which they could let to residents.
And finally, yes, it would require approval at a general meeting.
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.
Hold that thought – apparently you now have to be registered with an online property transaction service called PEXA to be able to submit documents.
Stiil, you should be able to find someone to do it for less than $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 notice some “budget” instant by-law agents are charging $500+ to register and consolidate by-laws. One is demanding up to $750 plus another $200 for “disbursements”.
It actually costs $147.70 in government fees to register a change in a by-law. If you feel confident, you could do it yourself online using THIS FORM according to the instructions on THIS PAGE.
To be fair, the “fronts” for legal firms offering the $500+ service may be checking the by-laws are kosher and making sure it’s done properly. But more than tripling the registration fee and then charging extra for converting to PDFs is a bit steep.
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.
It’s not just expensive, it’s a rip-off. Woodg62’s suggestion that you do the PDF conversion yourself but retain the Word version for future amendments is spot-on.
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.
Owners in our apartment complex are worried that one committee member may have an agenda that could have negative consequences on us all. The person concerned … has bought five units in this complex (of fewer than 50 lots) in recent years.
She has openly abused and denigrated other committee members at a general meeting, calling them “deplorable”. The meeting turned out to be a complete waste of time and one committee member resigned because of anxiety issues.
Personal abuse should not be tolerated. Have a look at my suggested standing orders for committee meetings (below). Get this or a version of it adopted as a by-law at your next general meeting and that will give you a framework for curbing abuses. Note items 14 and 15, about “naming” members who are persistently disruptive. You could also adapt the standing orders for general meetings.
Don’t expect your strata manager to change the way they do things just because you have suggested it. This formalises the way meeting should be conducted an the SM works to your rules, you don’t have to work to theirs.
NB: Most of the items in my suggested standing orders simply codify what is already in the Act. Once they have been adopted as a by-law, then you can refer to and enforce them.
“Naming” of disruptive elements this way would mean that the committee and its members would have a sanction against owners without being subject to concerns about defamation. There is a lot of leeway allowed for strata committees in the cut and thrust of discussion, provided criticism is not made maliciously (i.e. the main intent was to defame them and damage their standing in the community).
A vote by the committee would be protected in this way and minuting that the named person had breached such and such a rule at the meeting lets everyone in the block know who this person is and what they are up to.
I have contacted the Department of Fair Trading to ask them about committee member integrity. However, it seems anyone (irrespective of past transgressions) can be a committee member.
True, unless the member has been subject to orders from NCAT removing them from that specific committee.
Is there anything under strata law that states members of the committee must be of good character / have integrity? Is there anything to ensure that a person of questionable character should not be considered a committee member? Is there some forum that owners can check the integrity of committee members?
No. But there’s nothing to stop people asking questions at the general meeting at which the owners stands for election. “You were named in Paliament in 2001 for alleged misdeeds in relation to strata management. Could you explain what that was all about?”
Some of the owners suspect this person is seeking to have the current strata management company ousted. There are other considerations such as that she may be part of a development company. Can you suggest avenues we can explore to uncover what this owner is up to and have her removed from the committee (an opportunity that may be available at the next AGM)?
What suggestions can you make for the strata committee and owners corporation to ensure integrity, transparency and collaboration going forward?
The critical issue here is to get people involved, either directly or through getting their proxies. Right now this person has 12.5 percent of the vote. They only need to rustle up another five owners to block by-laws.
So before the next AGM organise your “ticket” of committee members, make sure they are all financial and, when you get to the election, make sure the number of seats you decide on is fewer than the number of candidates.
You can have a mixture of existing members and new ones, the main thing is to make it very hard for this person to get herself elected. You don’t even have to confront her at the meeting – just quietly get your numbers organised in advance and she will be “blind-sided” as they say on Survivor.
If the election is conducted according to the rules, after the chair announces the nominees, the meeting is invited to decide on the number of seats on the committee, to a maximum of nine. Make sure you select a number one less than the number of nominees.
You can’t hand out voting papers – votes must be written on blank sheets of paper – but you can hand out information sheets, telling people who your candidates are and even why they should vote for them.
If the multi-unit owner challenges this at the meeting and again abuses the committee, have someone prepared to stand up and say that this is the kind of behaviour you are trying to remove to allow for the smooth running of the block.
Once you have the numbers, then concerns about the strata manager or any other nefarious agendas will evaporate. But you have to work at it. There are no StrataKops who will come to the rescue; you do and your fellow owners need to do the groundwork.
You might also be interested in an article about codes of conduct that I wrote for the AFR back in 2018.
Suggested Standing Orders for Strata Committees (based on NSW strata law)
NB: These are only a suggestion – they can and should be adapted for your circumstances and then must be registered as a by-law to have any effect.
- The meeting may not commence until the quorum of attendance (50 percent of the membership as decided at the previous AGM) has been reached. Acting members’ (proxy) votes may not be counted towards the quorum.*
- The meeting must be chaired by the elected chairperson unless they are absent or unable to do so, in which case the committee must elect a chair for the duration of that meeting.*
- Voting on committee matters is by a show of hands with each member carrying only one vote (unless they have been granted an acting member vote in writing by a member who cannot attend and the committee has agreed to it being allowed).*
- A simple majority of the committee in attendance can choose not to allow acting member votes if they so wish.*
- Members can be considered to be in attendance if they are present by telephone, video streaming or other electronic means.*
- The committee must allow non-committee members to attend the meeting but they are only permitted to speak if a majority of the committee agrees.*
- The committee may decide by a simple majority whether or not non-committee members should speak only on specific items on the agenda or on any or all agenda items.*
- In a tied vote, the Chairperson does not have a casting vote and any motion will be considered not to have been carried if it remains tied after a re-vote.*
- The chair should make it clear to non-committee members that they are bound by the Standing Orders.
- The committee will consider the items on the agenda in the order in which they appear unless a majority of the committee agrees to change the order at the meeting.
- The Chairperson will allow each participating member or attendee to speak only once on a topic until everyone who wants to speak has had a chance to do so. The same restriction will apply after each time an attendee speaks.
- After discussions, and before a vote, the Chair will call for anyone who wishes to raise a point that has not already been discussed, to do so.
- Once a vote has been taken and the meeting has moved on to the next agenda item, a previous motion may not be revisited.
- Attendees and members who interrupt, talk out of turn or talk over other members may be warned verbally that their behaviour is not acceptable.
- If the behaviour is repeated despite a warning, the chairman can call for a vote of the committee to ‘name’ the miscreant in the minutes of the meeting.
- The meeting will be called to a close after the final item has been discussed and voted upon.
- If there is persistent disruption, the chair can propose the meeting be adjourned at any point, subject to the approval of the committee, with the remaining items to be decided “on paper”.
- There is no “any other business”.* Any items not on the agenda can only be discussed informally after the end of the meeting and no vote should be taken or recorded.
*Items 1 to 8 plus 18 are already part of NSW strata laws or regulations.
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 is what the Act says about proxies:
(7) Limit on number of proxies that may be held
The total number of proxies that may be held by a person (other than proxies held by the person as the co-owner of a lot) voting on a resolution are as follows—
(a) if the strata scheme has 20 lots or less, one,(b) if the strata scheme has more than 20 lots, a number that is equal to not more than 5% of the total number of lots.
Since a proxy can be someone who isn’t even an owner, then I don’t think that multiple lot ownership allows mutiple proxies over the limit of one per 20 lots (in your case, that’s one). It’s per person, not per lot owner.
That said, with 15 other votes under their control, I guess they only need one proxy to be able to pass by-laws unimpeded.Do you think this owner is stacking up the ownership so they can redevelop the site? Or do they just like the building that much?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 are lucky. I own a unit in in a block of 21 where one person owns 15 and has proxies for 3 more from “absentee” owners.
If they are the original owner, then their holding is worth only five votes (because they own more than half the properties) and they can only carry one proxy. Making six votes in total (and I’m not sure if they can even count the proxy). Not a majority but a start. If you can get the others to vote with you, you’d have a majority.
First thing to do is to contact the proxy givers and tell them their vote is being wasted as, under NSW law, the person concerned can only carry one proxy.
Time to put the cat among the pigeons, I 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.