[Jimmy-T]

jelvis47 wrote:

My question is this. This lift would be for the sole benefit of 3 units, no other owner has any reason to use this lift therefore should our strata fees be used for this purpose? All other amenities are used by all owners.

That is a valid question. If the top-floor owners bought in with no lifts present and no commitment by or obligation on the scheme to provide one, then I would think this could be considered a misuse of strata funds as it only benefits a small minority of owners.  It would be different if a lift had always been part of the plan but not installed or delayed for financial or other reasons.

I am not a lawyer but I would think the extent of the Owners Corp’s obligation here would be to allow the lift’s installation and operation at little or no financial cost to the rest of the scheme, while imposing conditions on its operation and maintenance on the three owners who want to have it.

As for the owner who doesn’t want to pay, the use of the lift could be restricted electronically to those who have contributed to its installation and running costs (which I realise might mean the other three couldn’t afford to install it).

It should not be forgotten that the installation of the lift will considerably increase the value of the top floor flats. If I were an owner in one of the apartments that won’t benefit from the lift’s installation, I would be digging through the legislation to find grounds for preventing the OC from paying for any of it.

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]

It’s not up to the strata manager to decide what is or isn’t a minor renovation, but your committee will be guided by them. Your only option is to take your lawyer’s advice and if that is to  push ahead and go to NCAT, make sure they have structured the claim so that your costs are covered.

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]

kaindub wrote:

When you bought your lot, you acquired the living space, which comprises the space between your walls, and a designated parking space, the dimensions of which are onthestrata plan.

It’s not necessarily as cut and dried as you suggest. If the parking space is common property, he bought the right to be able to park his car on common property, and he could make a convincing argument that the space allocated is not fit for purpose.

He might discover, for instance, that the committee allocates the spaces and they have snaffled all the usable ones when the previous owner left.

However, if the parking space is part of his lot, that’s a whole different story and then it’s the hassle of buying or leasing more space from the owners corp.

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]

Is there any space to expand to the side or another area of common property that one of the cars could occupy? Forget regulations from days of yore. A reasonable approach to trade space on common property should be considered by the owners corp.

And are the car spaces allocated areas of common property or are the part of your lot or even separate lots?

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]

If the sliding doors are double glazed then you can have them considered as a minor renovation. But seriously, I think this has been going on for so long you either need to get lawyers involved – and hope you can recoup the costs – or ignore the committee and just get the work done and let them pursue you, or let it go.

You could even hire a lawyer to come to the meeting and (as our scheme did recently) scare the owners with stories of having to be cross-examined by a barrister as to why they voted against the motion.  That said, that tactic annoyed everyone so much that they turned against the committee and rejected the proposal anyway.

FYI: It is absolutely legitimate for a committee to explain what the motions are and how they think owners should vote – provided the information they are presenting is truthful and in the interests of the strata scheme.

The new strata laws require strata committees to be honest and fair and if you can prove they haven’t been than you might have grounds for having the committee or individual members of it sacked.

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’m not a lawyer but it strikes me that the vendor has been less than open and honest about significant factors that, had you been aware of them, would have made you decide not to buy the apartment – at least at the price you offered. Speak to someone who IS a lawyer and find out what your chances of success would be if you pulled out and asked for your deposit back.

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]

Have a look HERE and HERE for gateways to the parking space rabbit holes.

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]

dy wrote:

So suppose now we will be just charged a flat fee of $2,500 to ‘manage’ the insurance renewal.

I’m guessing that means, if the SM is claiming they have done work that deserves remunaration, then they have to show that a) the work was done and b) their efforts made a difference in getting the best policy for the owners.
It certainly opens the door for strata schemes to organise their own insurance cover then ask the SM to remove that fee for service charge.

Just be aware that this only applies to members of SCA-NSW and to contracts signed after January 1.  You may have trouble convincing aa non-SCA-NSW strata manager to waive commissions and you will probably have a struggle getting some SCA members to adjust contracts that still have a couple of years to run.

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]

This may be more complicated than it seems.  Basically you will be paying for two lots of electricity – one for common property through your levies and the other for personal usage. The personal usage charge could include an element for the hot water that you have run through your taps. Or not.

And the common property charges could be locked into a long-term embedded network contract that can’t be changed for a few years. Or not.

Everybody has a slightly different set of circumstances so the best thing you can do is talk to someone on your strata committee and ask them what all the charges mean and how much flexibility you have with changing energy providers.

You could be free to go to whomever you like for personal power, and your common property deal could be coming up for renewal.  You might even be getting a better rate for that through your strata manager.  Like I said, it’s complicated and the set-up in your block could be very specific.

As for getting a broker, it might be just as good to do a quick trawl through the comparison websites. Simples, as the annoying meerkat says.

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:

As I noted in the thread about the Strata Matters forum, Property Commissioner Angus Abadee is well worth your readers’ attention.

We had Angus on our podcast a while ago but we may go there again soon.

tina wrote:

58 tickets available to online participants.  I would have thought on-line audiences could be unlimited in size.

They are charging $27.50 for the streaming ticket, so it may be a demand-and-supply meets FOMO (fear of missing out) equation. This far out, they are probably trying to gauge numbers but, to be honest, I have no idea why they would limit streaming numbers (and maybe they 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.

[Jimmy-T]

I believe the changes are intended to apply to new SCA contracts signed after January 1 next year.  After that, if anyone signs a contract that includes such a free kick for their strata manager, then they only have themselves to blame.

Don’t take this as gospel from me, but in the meantime, a contract that allows any service provider to claim compensation for work that they didn’t do could, in theory, be challenged under Australian Consumer law which since July has applied to strata contracts in NSW.

SCA-NSW, the strata managers’ professional body, has already adjusted its standard contract to remove aspects that would have fallen foul of consumer protections.

The Australian Competition and Consumer protection website says that unfair contract terms are prohibited in standard form pre-formatted contracts where one party has significantly more bargaining power than the other, leaving the weaker party with little or no ability to negotiate the terms, and:

• Causes a significant imbalance in the parties’ rights and obligations under the contract.
• Is not necessary to protect the legitimate interests of the advantaged party.
• Would cause detriment (financial or otherwise) to a party if applied or relied upon.

If a court finds a term to be unfair, that term is void, meaning it is treated as if it never existed. However, the rest of the contract remains enforceable if it can operate without the unfair term.
Businesses that propose, apply, or rely on unfair contract terms may face penalties. Each unfair term can attract a separate penalty under the law.

If consumers believe a contract term is unfair, they can:

• Seek advice from consumer protection agencies or legal professionals.
• Report the issue to relevant authorities, such as the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) or the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC).

These are just general observations and if you are thinking of going down that road, you really should first speak to a lawyer. I don’t know of any strata scheme that has challenged the terms of a contract under consumer law so it’s hard to predict how that might play out, but it could be an option for any scheme that feels it’s being ripped off by any service provider.

Just bear in mind that contracts are an agreement between two parties and if your owners corp has agreed to a contract that turns out to be disadvantageous, that doesn’t make it 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.

1 user thanked author for this post.

WoodWalker

[Jimmy-T]

What do your rules say about the use of common property – if you don’t have specific rules about the use of common property, then the model rules apply.

I would be looking at

4.1    Use of common property

(7)          The owners corporation may impose reasonable conditions on a lot owner’s right or an occupier’s right to access or use common property to protect the quiet enjoyment, safety and security of other lot owners, including but not limited to imposing operating hours on facilities such as gymnasiums and swimming pools.

AND

6.2    Noise and other nuisance control

(1)          An owner or occupier of a lot, or a guest of an owner or occupier, must not unreasonably create any noise likely to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of any other person entitled to use the common property.

The strata laws on abandoned goods are likely to be superseded by the laws covering stolen property.

 

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]

Shortcrust wrote:

Perhaps what should be considered is to bolster regional centers by requiring or at least encouraging migrants to live there, this will certainly help with documented shortages of doctors nurses and paramedics in many parts of non metropolitan centers.

I wonder what the reaction would be if the authorities allowed health workers whose qualifications are not fully recognised in Australia to upskill and achieve full recognition while they were working in remote and rural areas.

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]

Unless you have something in your contract or agreement with your strata manager sying they have to get committee approval before paying bills, there’s not much you can do … except ask them why they were so quick to pay.

How should the committee members who did not approve the invoice proceed – ask Strata Manager if someone on the committee instructed them to pay? Ask for evidence of any instruction?

That would be reasonable, but they might turn around and say there was no instruction NOT to pay, so they just did their job.

If there is evidence that a committee member provided such instruction, without a majority vote, what action can be taken? Can they be removed from the committee?

They can be voted out of an executive role if they have one by a simple majority vote on the committee. They can be voted off the committee (for a year) by a simple majority at a general meeting.  And you can make a case against them being elected at your next AGM.

Can any action be taken against the Strata Manager?

For what? A tied committee vote means the status quo prevails.  The SM could argue that the status quo is to pay bills.  However, if you can find evidence of non-declared kickbacks and commissions, you can make a complaint to Fair Trading and, as well, get shot of the strata manager at the next opportunity, such as when their contract comes up for renewal.

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.

EyeRoll

[Jimmy-T]

This is borderline racist but I’m prepared to let it go for the sake of open discussion. Immigrants are an easy target, especially rich ones, but this doesn’t take into account the jobs that are created because of the wealth they bring into the country.

And then there are the people who do the crappy, low-paid jobs that Australians won’t touch.  And there’s the fact that we can’t get our new homes built because we refuse to recognise the skills and experience of overseas arrivals.

The immigration situation is far from perfect but shutting the door to new arrivals will almost immediately plunge us into higher inflation and possibly a recession. Have a read of this summary in the SMH – it contains actual facts and real figures – not kneejerk “simple solutions”.

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