Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Even as an ordinary owner you are entitled to view the strata roll and it must have the email addresses of the other owners on it. See section 178 and section 183 of the Act. However you may have to attend the strata manager’s office to do so.
The strata manager only has to supply the strata roll to the secretary of the committee – but there is nothing stopping you from asking for the strata roll and reminding the SM that you are on the committee, if only to save you the hassle and expense of going to their office.
A couple of other points.
- What do you mean when you say you don’t think you have a quorum? A quorum is established when at least half of the members are in attendance. The number of members is established by a vote at your AGM. Even if you voted for seven members, four in attendance would be a quorum.
- The committee can only invite owners to join it if there is a vacancy. This could occur when a member quit and wasn’t replaced or the OC voted to have more members on the committee than volunteered to join 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.
So who is entitled to vote other than owners?
Non-owners can vote if they have valid proxies from owners. But owners and their proxies can’t vote if they are not financial when the meeting is called and haven’t paid their levies before the meeting. This is what the Act says:
23 Persons entitled to vote at general meetings(1) Persons who have right to vote Each owner, and each person entitled to a priority vote, has voting rights that may be exercised at a general meeting of the owners corporation, but only if the owner or person is shown on the strata roll and, in the case of a corporation, the company nominee is shown on the strata roll.
(2) Exercise of voting rights by joint first mortgagees or joint covenant chargees Voting rights may be exercised at the meeting by joint first mortgagees or joint covenant chargees only by proxy (who may be one of them) duly appointed by all of them jointly.
(3) Exercise of voting rights by owner, first mortgagee or covenant chargee The voting rights of an owner or first mortgagee or covenant chargee of a lot (other than a co-owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee) may be exercised—
(a) unless the owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee is a corporation—in person or by proxy, or
(b) if the owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee is a corporation—by the company nominee in person, or by proxy appointed by the corporation.
(4) Exercise of voting rights by co-owners to be by proxy The voting rights of co-owners of a lot may not be exercised by them individually but may be exercised—
(a) by a proxy (who may be one of them), or
(b) as provided by subclause (5).
(5) Other circumstances in which co-owners may exercise voting rights If, on a vote at a general meeting, the rights of co-owners of a lot are not exercised by a proxy as referred to in subclause (4), one of them may act as such a proxy—
(a) if the other co-owners are absent or those who are present give their consent, or
(b) if paragraph (a) does not apply—if he or she is the owner first named on the strata roll as one of the co-owners.
(6) Exercise of voting rights by owners of successive estates in lot If there are owners of successive estates in a lot, only the owner of the first estate may vote at a general meeting.
(7) Exercise of voting rights where owner holds lot as trustee If the owner of a lot holds it as trustee, a person beneficially entitled may not vote at a general meeting.
(8) Voting rights cannot be exercised if contributions not paid A vote at a general meeting (other than a vote on a motion requiring a unanimous resolution) by an owner of a lot or a person with a priority vote in respect of the lot does not count if the owner of the lot was an unfinancial owner at the date notice of the meeting was given and did not pay the amounts owing before the meeting.
(9) Effect of failure to give strata interest notice This clause does not confer a right to vote on a person deprived of the right by failing to comply with the requirement to give a strata interest notice.
When does the strata committee not become an SC? At the beginning or end of an Annual General Meeting? That is, can they still act as committee members when voting on motions takes place?
Owners can vote with their committee or against it as they please. There is no law that says all the members of a committee have to vote en masse or prevents them from doing so. Committee members are only acting as committee members in a committee meeting. Unless theyare office-bearers they have no function or privileges beyond being ordinary owners.
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 think you need a by-law.
Section 153 of the Act specifies cigarette smoke as a potential nuisance.
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—
(a) use or enjoy the lot, or permit the lot to be used or enjoyed, in a manner or for a purpose that causes a nuisance or hazard to the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not), or
(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.Note: Depending on the circumstances in which it occurs, the penetration of smoke from smoking into a lot or common property may cause a nuisance or hazard and may interfere unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of the common property or another lot.
Section (a) covers people smoking on their lot, sections (b) and (c) would cover people smoking on common property.It seems to me that your majority could hold a committee meeting to agree to initiate proceedings at Fair Trading (which is free) then go to mediation and then, if need be, press for orders at NCAT.But bear in mind that some smokers can be among the most selfish and antisocial people you will ever meet. So don’t expect to prevail without a fight.Have a look at this blogpost from last year, where two smokers in a block tried every nasty, bullying tactic to avoid having to stop smoking on their balcony, despite evidence that their smoking (and probably the stress) was exacerbating their neighbour’s asthma.The good news is that they eventually lost, but this will give you an idea of the lengths they went to, trying to show that they were the victims.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 there’s a huge difference between saying “give me your vote and I’ll do the thinking for you” and a form that lists the motions want you tick boxes for Yes, No and Abstain. Better the devil you know is a principle that looms large in strata, that’s why incompetent and self-interested chairs are able to stay in power for so long.
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 thought owners had access to all common areas of a site, including the roof as need be, when having a reasonable reason to access them, with or without committee permission?
Not really. For instance, your scheme might not want all owners to have access to your electrical power board or communications room, at their own behest. However, there should be a good reason for refusing a reasonable request for access. Ask the committee again and request a reason for refusal in writing (should it be refused).
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’m reading it that since the Regulations have taken up the option allowed in 28(3) and specified a way of voting for someone not present at the meeting then that is the way that must be used.
Indeed. And I would go further and say if the committee or OC HASN’T approved an alternative method of voting, then no other method of voting can be used.
In any case, here’s the critical issue – the Tribunal will not overturn a decision in which informal voting or discounted votes played a part unless it can be shown that those informal or discounted votes would have affected the outcome. That said, it’s worth clarifying the processes in your scheme, including having an approved non-attending, non-proxy voting paper, available for anyone who wants 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.
The initial question was how do you insure it. Firstly, there is no obligation on your part to insure lot property. If you are concerned about damage to common property from leaks from your roof, that may be covered by strata insurance in any case. The question remain, would the insurers come after you for the cost of the repairs? I think there are so many grey areas here that your real question is “do I choose to worry about this or not?”
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.
There is a deck. The deck itself looks like it is fairly new.
That might explain why the responsibility for the roof has devolved to the lot owner. It was probably a condition for the installation of the deck.
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.
… as this meeting has a time and place where people will attend, any sort of form can be used by someone who is not attending.
Schedule 1, S28 says strata schemes can decide on “another way” of voting and what that other way of voting should be.
In other words, the secretary can provide a voting form that has been agreed on by the committee and that vote would be allowed (provided everyone has access to it).
But an individual can’t invent their own form. The secretary only has to ensure that anyone who is entitled to vote can do so. They don’t have to accept hand-knitted forms from all and sundry.
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.
Also a special , or any other, resolution can be carried on a zhow of hands or majority of votes carries the motion. Only if a poll note is called [do] unit entitlements come into play
Are you sure.? Section 5(2) says this: In determining a special resolution, the value of a vote for a lot is equal to the unit entitlement of the lot …
Sounds like all special resolutions have to be decided by poll votes whether an owner calls for one or not.
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 advice would be to focus on one issue at a time. You may think your weight and spread of complaints adds to the strength of your case but it might only detract from and dissipate it. For instance, invoking S260 (personal liability) is a stretch. You really need to talk to an experienced strata lawyer, otherwise you risk having your case ripped apart at the Tribunal without the core issues even being discussed.
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 you read between the lines on the Bannerman report, the original plaintiff had set out to get a finding against both the strata committee and the upstairs neighbour but then abandoned the case against the strata scheme and concentrated on what the respondent HAD done and not on what the committee hadn’t.
It seems logical to me that if you forget the history and what the committee has or hasn’t done, and focus on the upstairs neighbour, you could then legitimately ask why the strata scheme is paying their legal costs. When you involve the strata committee you are opening the door for them to hire lawyers.
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.
Have a look at this, from Bannermans: https://diybylaws.com.au/noise-coming-from-above-tribunal-orders-lot-owners-to-remove-or-replace-flooring/
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.