Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
The dust has not quite settled, but it is close. Tell ’em what you like Jimmy.
If you listen to this week’s Flat Chat Wrap podcast, which goes up later today, you’ll hear strata lawyer David Sachs explain the legal situation as it stands. To some extent, The Hood is correct, technically at least.
The no-pet by-laws that exist can stay on the register until such times as they are removed by the Owners Corporation, and the strata committee or strata manager could theoretically issue notices to comply based on them.
However, this would be done in the almost certain knowledge that the tribunal (NCAT) would reject the NTC because of the Court of Appeal ruling. Which leads to the question, why would any strata committee bother pursuing a complaint that was bound to fail?
Anyone looking to buy into a building with a “no-pets” by-law might face some resistance but it would not mean they’d lose the pet. In FlossyB’s case, that resistance has already gone and she can happily move ahead with confidence.
For other schemes, though, you might consider how strongly feelings are running against pets, especially if the block has recently reconfirmed its objections to them. Do you really want to start your life in a new home as its most-hated resident?
Meanwhile David reckons that a High Court appeal is far from guaranteed, partly because of cost – “more than the Appeals Court but less than a defects claim” – and partly because the High Court might decline to rule on an issue that only relates to one state.
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 way that parking spots could be allocated? Surely that would resolve the problem for all time?
I assumed there were more apartments than car spaces, otherwise, yes, this is the solution.
Currently here in VIC, I can go a week and not move my car. Would I be forced to drive away every day for at least 30 minutes? Also, as a shift worker, when possible I use public transport, so again it can be several days between car movements.
Hence the mention of “written permission”.
Do I have to wait until the 30 minutes is up? Or even if I forget something and have to return home to collect it?
That assumes there is someone standing with a stopwatch (which there wouldn’t be). This is really to stop people like the black-belted neighbours pulling out of one slot and straight into another.
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 either of the strata managers concened members of SCA. If so, how about contacting them?
The simple fact is that the Melbourne strata managers are illegally keeping money that isn’t theirs. The technical term for this is “stealing”. Perhaps SCA could remind them of that.
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.
Efflorescence is caused by the absorption of salt from the sand underneath tiles. One it has started, you can’t easily stop it and all cleaning does is draw more salt to the surface. The reason there is too much salt in the sand is because the committee (in this case) used a cheap contractor who didn’t used treated sand (there’s a chemical you can buy) because … guess what … it’s cheaper. In new buildings, efflorescence is a defect that must be fixed by the developer or builder.
Given that the committee 10 years ago “saved” money on a cheap job, there is no way they are not liable for fixing this now. If they say they need an expert opinion, tell them you will take them to NCAT and they can try to find an expert who says it’s not their problem.
When I complained to my committee about the problem on my balcony, the chairman sent me a long-handled scrubbing brush. It took a team of proctologists 12 hours to remove it from the pompous ass.
But seriously, rather than endure the disruption (not to mention the cost) of digging up the tiles and doing the job properly, we allowed the strata committee to seal the existing tiles and lay new ones on top. It’s a compromise that costs a lot less that a full replacement, is effective and doesn’t require surgery.
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 best way to deal with this is to establish a by-law that sets the rules that allows the fair use of the parking area. They could include clauses like:
- Only one vehicle per household can use the parking area at any one time.
- Vehicles may not be left in the parking area for more than 24 hours at a stretch without written permission of the committee.
- Re-parking cars is forbidden. Vehicles vacating a space may not return to the car park any sooner than 30 minutes from the time they leave.
- Vehicles may not be left unattended on common areas, including adjacent to parking spots.
- No owner has the permanent right to park on any parking spot.
Once you have a by-law in place, then everybody knows exactly where they stand and you have documentary proof so that over-zealous estate agents know they can’t sell or let units with a promise that they have a dedicated parking space (although that may not stop them).
The Owners Corporation can set any rules it likes for common property. But if you don’t have a by-law in place, whatever it actually says, then you are going to have nasty squabbles like this and things will only get nastier.
As for the neighbours being told by the real estate agent that they had the right to park there, that’s something they need to take up with the agent. It is not you or your committee’s problem.
Our sponsors StrataAnswers or Sachs Gerace Lawyer would certainly help with drafting such a by-law (for a fee).
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 this is significant enough to warrant at least reassigning my parking space, indefinitely. or until the issue with the gate is rectified.
You have Buckley’s chance of this being “rectified”. The simplest solution is for your landlord to politely request a temporary arrangement whereby your space is swapped for a visitor parking space or a loading bay.
Getting heavy-handed with this and claiming your “rights”, real or otherwise, is not going to resolve this any time soon.
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 strata can’t assign you a different car space. Any other car spaces are either lot owner property or common property.
I can think of plenty of examples in cases like this where the committee has agreed to allow the owners to use a visitor space and swapped with the “awkward” space. Sure, it’s not strictly legal but there are no stratakops coming round to check. A friendly arrangement can be made on the proviso that there doesn’t need to be any by-laws or any legalistic over-management of a simple situation.
It’s a victimless crime and grown-ups should be able to sort this out themselves without running off to lawyers. There are very few strata schemes that are 100 per cent compliant with the law, yet we survive.
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.
My point was more that the agent and SC both seem to have a rather limited and incorrect understanding of the Act so does one wish to buy into that?
Yes, the Horizon could, with the support of other anti-pet and pro by-law strtata schemes, appeal to the High Court. And we might see moves in the next week or so in that direction.
My concern with your previous posts were that you seemed to be advising FlossyB not to buy into a block because there is confusion over a pet by-law, despite the fact that the by-law has effectively been trumped by the Court of Appeal and there is a willingness within the strata committee and its managers to accept the pet in any case.
That’s what I was referring to as “alarmist”. If we stopped buying apartments because strata committees and strata managers were a bit shaky on the law, the real estate industry would collapse overnight.
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.