[Jimmy-T]

Imprex wrote:

My biggest complaint is that the training is compulsory even though there appear to be no sanctions readily available for non compliance. It has the potential to deter owners from being part of a committee.

I think the Fair Trading thinking is that putting sactions in place for committee members who don’t complete the course would deter even more owners from joining.  Apart from anything else it would be very hard to police.  All it would take is for a savvy strata secretary to call a meeting and tell everyone to bring their laptops and then hold their hands while they did the course (although even that would be an improvement on committee members who don’t have a clue and don’t listen to advice.)

This may change as a majority of committee members complete the course, although the very last date for compliance would be December next year, to pick up members whose AGM isn’t until September next year.

I would imagine that the first step of future enforcement might be the mandatory inclusion on strata committee agendas of a check on who has and hasn’t done their training. This could lead to committee meetings being inquorate, which would be a major hassle. After that, Fair Trading might say decisions that depended on the votes on non-compliant members would be invalid.

In other words, FT could push enforcement back to the strata schemes and let us deal with the consequences of not taking this seriously enough.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

tina wrote:

Sometimes I type a long post, hit submit and there is no “waiting for moderation” message. The post is lost and I am annoyed! Also, I check the “Notify me of follow-up replies via email” and I have NEVER received a notification.

Thanks for that. It may be more to do with the servers that the software.  My current one is based in the USA (because the local support system would take days to respond to problems whereas I get an instant connection with the Americans). I will look into the notification issue … this is the first I’ve heard of that problem.

By the way, I value Flatchatters picking up on issues with the site and letting me know. As Admin for thw website, I have certain computing prioivileges that hide problems that exist in the real world where you guys are.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

On the question of long complicated passwords, on this or any other website, most browsers will suggest one that you only have to accept and then, if you let it,  the browser will store it for you for the next time you are on that website.

If you don’t want to do that, copy the password offered and email it to yourself so there is a record of it.

Or just wait until the next time you are on the website and click on the Forgotten Password button and the site will contact you and allow you to type in or select a new one.

The only passwords you probably need to remember on a daily basis are those for your phone and computer and even then you can now log in with your face,  fingerprint or a PIN.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

tina wrote:

I personally find the flatchat interface more challenging.

I’m sorry to hear that.  I am constantly trying to make the website more accessible to more readers while maintaining security over email addresses and passwords.

To give you an idea of how challenging achieving that balance that is, according to the Wordfence plugin, in the past month there have been 77,222 attempts to log into the website illegally, including  more than 150 “brute force” attacks, where hackers try to swamp the website with multiple logins to try to overwhelm the security.

If this little website attracts that level of interest from the baddies, imagine what a juicy plum Fair Trading’s platform must be.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Setting aside the inevitable flaws on the FT website, wouldn’t this be an opportunity for someone on a committee who is computer-savvy to sit with members who are deterred by this and walk them through the process?

And am I being harsh in thinking that anyone these days who doesn’t have basic computer skills and refuses to acquire them probably shouldn’t be on a strata committee anyway. Ouch! Mr Cat, meet the pigeons.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

The first thing that occurs is that your AGM is long overdue.  The limit set in the Victorian Act is 15 months between meetings.  Apart from that, your strata manager is obviously not functioning and you might consider approaching an alternative manager then raising an action at VCAT under Section 165, to remove the committee and appoint the manager you have identified.

Victorian Flatchatters may have a better idea of what to do next.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

I think you are being over-considerate of neighbours who clearly are taking advantage of your better natures. I’d be buying a hefty chain and a strong padlock to secure the gate and printing posters (to be tucked under wipers) warning of potentially dire consequences, over which the strata committee has no control, if they continue to park on your common property without written permission.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Blueman wrote:

One thing I’d avoid doing is posting the certificate online with the UID visible.

Good point.  Now redacted but it did make me wonder if slack committee members will just spend 5 minutes cloning others’ certificates rather than spending an hour on the website.  After all, it’s only the committee secretaries who will be checking.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

woodg62 wrote:

I’m sure people who are more experienced in this will be along to confirm.

And here I am.  Section 82 of the strata Act allows strata schemes to charge owners more that their normal levies if their use of their lot means  insurance costs are increased.  They can either do it via mutual agreement or  seek orders at the tribunal.

82. Individual contributions may be larger if greater insurance costs

(1)  If the use to which a lot in a strata scheme is put causes an insurance premium for the strata scheme to be greater than it would be if it were not put to that use, so much of a contribution payable by the owner of the lot as is attributable to insurance premiums may, with the consent of the owner, be increased to reflect the extra amount of the premium.

(2)  The Tribunal may, on application, make an order for payment of contributions of a different amount to one or more contributions levied or proposed by an owners corporation on an owner if the Tribunal is of the opinion that the owner’s consent has been unreasonably refused under this section.

(3)  An application for an order under this section may be made by the lessor of a leasehold strata scheme, an owners corporation, an owner of a lot or a mortgagee in possession.

However, as the poster says, this is contingent on the gas station being part of the 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.

[Jimmy-T]

SaltyOne wrote:

That now requires asking a resident (who might not even know!) or dropping a note in the Secretary’s mailbox and hoping for a response.

Hope is the operative word.  There is no mailbox more stuffed that the one marked “strata”.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

First of all, it would be worth talking to an experienced strata lawyer, if only to find out where you stand.

Regarding the OC’s “plan” to bring lawyers into the issue, this is a classic Trumpian tactic to scare people off.

I can’t offer legal advice but in your situation, I would be writing to all the owners in the building telling them the following:

1. There is a problem with common property that has caused mould in our apartment.
2. The NCAT Tribunal ruled 18 months ago that the Owners Corproation (all of us) are legally obliged to fix it.
3. In NSW Owners Corporations (all of us) have a legal duty to maintain and repair common property (SSMA Section 9(3)(c).
4. Now your strata committee are planning to hire expensive lawyers to fight a clear-cut ruling against them.
5. When they lose (as they almost certainly will) YOU will probaly have to pay the Owners Corporation’s legal costs as a special levy, from which we will be exempt (SSMA Section 90 (2) and (3).
6. That’s right – the Tribunal can rule that everybody else has to pay for the lawyers but we won’t.
7. We will all still have to pay our share of the cost of the repairs. But you may very well also have to pay all the costs of a failed legal challenge.
8. If the Tribunal rules that the committee delayed proceedings unnecessarily or had a hopless case and knew it, you will probably have to pay all our costs too.
9. You can stop this now if enough people call for an Extraordinary General Meeting and instruct the committee to stop delaying this, stop wasting your money on lawyers, and get on with the repairs that they can’t avoid.
10. And at the next AGM election, you might consider whether you want the people who got you into this mess to continue on the committee.

As I say, I am not a lawyer  and this is not legal advice but that is exactly what I would do in your shoes.

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.

1 user thanked author for this post.

tina

[Jimmy-T]

sujenna wrote:

Flat Chat seems to have disabled the ability for posters to upload images? Is that the case Jimmy?

Not sure but that sounds likely. Images are a way hackers get into websites and we’ve had a few weird ones recently.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

There are basically two ways to deal with someone who simply decides their needs are greater that anyone elses – follow whatever legal procedures are available or use the same level of  disregard for normal behaviour.

In option one, you would contact an experienced strata lawyer about the possibility of taking the adjoining scheme to NCAT under section 233, seeking an order for settlement of a dispute between two strata schemes.  You would probably be asking them to repair the fence and warn them that you’d be seeking costs too.

Alternatively you could simply chain up the gate, or you could wait until they have parked illegally and then chain up the gate or you could put friendly warning notes on the vehicles, something like: “Just a friendly warning, some people in this scheme are so angry at you parking here illegally that they are talking about vandalising your cars.  Letting you know before this gets out of hand. A friend.”

By the way, you might want to check if the building next door has the same strata manager or building manager.  This is very odd behaviour for individuals to do unprompted.

Any FlatChatters with better ideas?

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.

[Jimmy-T]

You need to prose the installation in writing and you only need a 50% vote in favour.  The Owners Corporation (all the owners who vote at meetings) can’t unreasonably refuse an accessibility application – meaning they have to have a good reason for saying no, or face the expense of going to a tribunal which will probably overturn their objections if they aren’t valid.

This is from the NSW Fair Trading website: https://www.nsw.gov.au/housing-and-construction/strata/living/renovations#toc-major-renovations-for-accessibility

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.

[Jimmy-T]

You need to look at the block’s strata plan and see where the stratum line is (usually level with the slab of the next floor up).  Any trees higher than that level are probably intruding into common property and are therefore subject to the OC’s responsibility and control.  Have look at this website for a legal explanation but you could put pressure on the strata committee to do something about the trees if your neighbour won’t.

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.

[Author]

Replies