[Jimmy-T]

@SS said:
Every person should speak & vote for themselves on EVERY issue, relating to strata matters & everything else.

So you would call a general meeting every time there needed to be a decision on whether or not to spend money to fix the lift, or repair a water leak, or ask someone to move their car out of visitor parking, or stop playing loud music all day and night?

And when someone just wanted approval for minor renovations such as putting in a new kitchen, you’d want a general meeting for that too?

Ironically, if you actually did that, pretty soon only the committee members would turn up … so what then?

People who do not have the mental capacity to speak/vote for themselves, have legal guardians – either the NSW Guardian & Trustee or a relative.

Yeah … apart from those who aren’t so great with the reading and writing … or feel uncertain about expressing themselves publicly … or didn’t even get the  notice from the council because their tenants didn’t pass it on … or don’t realise that they are allowed to express an opinion … or think there’s no point, either because someone else will do it or nobody listens anyway.

Get real or get off the Forum.

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]

@Austman said:
Does simply sharing a driveway, and absolutely nothing more, give an OC committee the legal right to represent all the lot owners on matters that don’t directly relate to the common property in that strata plan?  I sure hope it wouldn’t!

I am getting a bit weary of this “legal right” argument.  Do I have the legal right to express an opinion in public?  Yes, I think I do.  Is my “freedom of speech” defined in Australian law?  No, I don’t think it is.  By your logic, that means I don’t have the legal right to express an opinion

I have friends living in strata Plans of Subdivision where only some of the lots are members in an OC … to me, the above demonstrates the reason an OC is created is very much to do with common property maintenance and not much more.

In that specific instance you might be right. But those are very specific instances. They certainly don’t apply to all strata schemes.

I’m not so sure that I agree that a committee should be allowed to automatically legally represent me on those issues. 

Again, the weasel words “legally represent”. How is expressing an opinion to a public body (or, indeed, the media) legal representation?

They can speak out if they want, as residents and ratepayers but I’m still struggling to see how they can legally say they represent the views of 190 owners (as is the case in one of my OCs where I am a committee member) on matters not defined by law as a committee’s function.   

And again … “legally say”.  If we are going to go full Rumpole on this, the NSW Fair Trading factsheet on what a strata committee does says this right at the top: “The strata committee of the owners corporation represents owners or owners’ nominees.”

That’s it.  No exclusions, qualifications or definitions of “represents” (although it does go on to specify other duties, which include the secretary “doing all administrative and secretarial duties for the owners corporation and the strata committee.”)

In your nightmare scenarios of owners who only share a driveway but find they are, let’s say, supporting a high-rise brothel on the street corner, the solution is simple – you hold a meeting, you instruct the committee to write to the council and say “we have no opinion on this.”

Except you wouldn’t.  You’d say, the views expressed previously were not representative of the majority of owners and this is what we actually feel.

I find it astonishing that, given the checks and balances referred to several times before, we are still discussing this as if strata committees were issuing edicts like Stalinist propagandists and owners had no recourse to correcting the situation.  Neither of these situations pertain anywhere that I know of.

And if they did, the mechanisms are there to put things right.  Expressing an opinion is not legal representation – except, for instance, when the committee attaches the strata seal to a development application.

I am often called upon to express the opinions of Flat Chat readers – I do my best to give the general consensus but I and the people I’m talking to know that I don’t represent every one of the readers of this website and, indeed, that some readers disagree with my views quite vehemently.

And here’s the other thing – if you don’t want your committee to get involved in any local issues outside the strata scheme, there’s a mandatory motion (in NSW) in every AGM agenda where owners are invited to instruct the committee not to even discuss certain matters. 

Try running a ‘no comment’ motion at your next AGM – you might be surprised by how many people want to be represented by the strata committee – and there is absolutely nothing in the law that says they can’t 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]

@Austman said:

Puddn said
Without consultation with the wider community, this committee is acting without ‘authority’ – in my view.

Most strata committees are given the authority to act on behalf of the Owners Corporation except on specific matters that require a special resolution or a unanimous vote.  

Is expressing an opinion “acting without authority”?

Does this prevent individual owners from expressing their opinions?

Does it prevent a majority of owners from saying “hang on  – we are rescinding that decision to offer that opinion”?

The answer to all of those is No.  The way strata committees work is to allow the community to get on with running itself without having to stop and hold a general meeting every time there is a decision to be made.

There are checks and balances there to allow the strata committee to make decisions that need to be made with the final say always resting with the owners if they feel the committee has made the wrong choice.

To limit the committee to only decisions that are specified in the law is to create massive loopholes through which the unscrupulous can exploit their neighbours.

Should strata committees even discuss short-term letting?  It doesn’t say in the Act that they can or should.  How about installing solar energy? Can’t see that anywhere in the Act.

OK, that’s all stuff inside the building so it would come under management. But let’s say the council is about to change a bus route and move it away from the building to somewhere less convenient? Is the strata committee expected to stay silent?

Or how about if a developer wants to put a sign on a crane that will shine into apartments all night.  If I were an investor and my tenants had decided it was easier to move out than complain, and my strata committee hadn’t bothered to raise an objection, and my new tenants complain about the light from the crane … I would be mightily annoyed at my committee for doing nothing.

The crane sign is a real and recent example in my building.  The committee objected to a proposal to install a brightly lit sign on a crane just across the street, they also encouraged owners to write with their own objections. Council refused permission for the lit sign.

Was the committee exceeding its authority by doing what it did?  Or would it have been derelict in its duty by doing nothing? 

Finally, regarding previous comments about strata committees using their power to support developers, the problem there is a stacked, pro-developer committee and that can be solved relatively easily with a little organisation and a lot of determination.

But if owners can’t be bothered to protect their own interests, that’s no reason for denying that option to everyone else.

A correctly run committee with proper agendas and minutes is totally accountable to the building’s owners.  If the committee is not properly run, then that’s a whole other issue.

Expressing an opinion in good faith on behalf of the majority of residents – not just owners – is not exceeding the committee’s authority … it’s recognising that committees have responsibilities that are neither defined nor restricted by the Act.

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]

@Austman said:
And we haven’t been telling our residents for years that we know best on neighborhood issues.

That was a generalisation and I was speaking figuratively.  But the fact is that committees are there to represent the views of the owners corporation – that is all owners.  And generally most people will accept that … until you decide something they don’t like.

I question if a strata committee alone is even legally allowed to represent all OC owners on neigbourhood issues. Is it overstepping its authority?  I suspect it might be.  

I really don’t think so.  It’s certainly not breaking any laws or even accepted protocols.  It’s up to individual committees.  But our committee makes representations on everything from the flower beds outside the building to the spread of Airbnb.  Are they wrong to do so?

If enough owners disagree, they can have the decision overturned.

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 doesn’t have to be one thing or the other – both an official OC response and individual owners’ responses are appropriate and helpful.  

But for a strata committee to say that this is beyond their responsibility, because there is nothing in the law that says it IS their responsibility, seems like the easy way out.

That said, there’s nothing to stop a committee discussing an issue and deciding not to get involved.

But say it wasn’t lighting but, say a new late night bar or a brothel on the corner?  Would you leave it in the hope individual owners had heard about it and wanted to object?

A few years ago there was a major development planned for the building across the road from the one next to ours.  The committee next door decided it wasn’t their job to say whether or not it affected their residents – it was up to individuals to respond.

It would have affected a lot of residents, mostly those on the lower floors. And what do you know – all the committee members owned flats on the higher floors and it wouldn’t have affected them.

Also, the investors didn’t even know because the tenants didn’t pass on the “junk mail” from the council.

When our committee raised the issue with the council (some of our residents would have been affected) they were told that nobody in the building directly opposite had complained so what where we complaining about?

It was only when we alerted residents in the building next to ours that they got themselves organised.  Meanwhile we put together a very strong argument with letters from individual owners and objections from our committee and they cut the proposed development by about 10 floors (if I recall correctly).

You would be astonished how many people think a problem they are confronting is so bad that someone else must be complaining too.  The number of people who are too busy, or don’t want to get involved, or don’t know what to do or say soon mounts up.

If there is an issue that affects your neighbourhood, I believe the committee should write on behalf of all owners (some of whom aren’t residents) but also encourage residents – owners and tenants – to write to the authorities too.

There may not be anything in strata law that says you should do this – but there isn’t anything that says you shouldn’t. It’s all about being part of your own community and the larger community around you.

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 take a different view for two reasons. The first is that the strata committee represents a powerful and considered opinion.  The matter has been discussed and a consensus reached so it can’t be so easily dismissed as the rantings of your run of the mill, common or garden, loony grumbler.

Secondly, after years of telling your residents that you (collectively) know best and that you will look after the best interests of the building and it’s residents, it’s not helpful to say that anything outside the front door but in the immediate vicinity is no concern of the strata committee’s.

In most council areas the opinions of strata committees are taken very seriously at council (although they are by no means the deciding factor on issues).  The corollary of that is that the absence of an opinion may make the local authorities feel that it’s not such a big problem after all (see previous references to individual rantings).

The strata committee is not a law unto itself.  It is representative of ALL owners (or it should be).  It is not an executive – which is why they changed the name – it is supposed to be representative.  

The voice of a powerful body can say a lot, but its silence speaks volumes.

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]

For a variety of reasons – most of them legal – we try to avoid naming names on this website.  Also there is always the opportunity for either a disgruntled client or rival to trash a reputation unfairly, or for a business to ask Dorothy Dixers (closely followed by a torrent of supportive posts).

So please pass on your comments to newlsie via PM (personal message).  It’s the button with the little envelope, above right on the panel with their post in it. 

Both negative and positive posts that are sent directly to the Forum will be deleted.

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]

@tharra said:
“Buildings with non-compliant cladding may not get insurance, industry warns”

Here is a thing that isn’t law – developers and builders must make good all the dodgy work they’ve done just to save (i.e. make) more money.

Here are two things that are law – owners corporation MUST have insurance and MUST repair and maintain common property, regardless of the costs.

Would anyone care to join the dots?

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]

Considering that some strata committee members don’t even want other owners to know their contact details, making them public would lead to even fewer residents volunteering for the job.

There is a secretary who should pass issues on to other owners and, if the issue you are concerned with is important enough, then surely you can find one owner who will give you permission to view strata recoirds on their behalf.

If not, I have to ask why you are getting involved in a building in which you have no stakes.

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]

Maybe you could ‘reverse engineer’ this.  Get your tenants to send you a letter asking for a rent holiday to compensate for the noise and dust.  

Arrange a mediation through Fair Trading or the Community Justice Centres and agree to a fair rent reduction.  Then you can take that figure to the Owners Corp and let them argue why they shouldn’t pay 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]

Being a bit of a numbers geek, I spotted a discrepancy in the announced figures and the actual figures in the report.

The Press release says the survey “interviewed 1,001 people including apartment tenants (56%), owner-occupiers (38%) and investors (8%).”

These figure are drawn straight from Table 2 (page 8) of the survey.  However the same table shows the raw figures (the ‘n’ numbers) of surveyed residents being 455 tenants and 486 owner-occupiers.

Shouldn’t the percentages then be closer to 46% tenants and 48% owner-occupiers? A simple accidental transposition of a couple of digits?

Actually, no, says a City of Sydney spokesperson who explains why the raw numbers are less accurate than the published figures: 

The City of Sydney commissioned Woolcott Research and Engagement to conduct an independent survey of strata owners, occupiers and investors within the City of Sydney local government area.

More than half of City residents are under the age of 34 but only around one-third of survey respondents were under 34.  Consequently, in this research, younger respondents were weighted up in the final data tables to take into account their under-representation of younger people.

Woolcott Research advised it is standard practice to weight responses from under-represented demographics to ensure the overall figures accurately reflect the survey population but also to report the raw base sizes (as opposed to weighted base sizes) so readers can see the actual numbers. The n= figures quoted in the question … are the raw figures.

As younger residents are more likely to be renters, the number of renters surveyed has been weighted up when the age weighting is applied. The weighted base sizes are n=577 tenants, n=379 owner occupies, and n=76 investors.

The survey also reported results by different age-groups and by owners and tenants.  One of the key results is that there are significant differences in attitude towards short-term letting between younger and older residents and tenants and owners.

Now before we even quote the line about “lies, damned lies and statistics” (oops, I just did) I accept the reasoning and don’t doubt the result.

It does show you, however, how figures can be manipulated and often are. Airbnb tells us that because they are in less than 1 percent of homes in Sydney, they can’t possibly be affecting housing availability or affordability.

But hang on, how many people actually want to come from the USA and Europe to holiday in Bankstown or Mount Druitt?  

When you skew the figures only to take in areas of the city where Airbnb has a significant presence, suddenly you find rents have shot up by two or three times and availability has plummeted.

And at the same time they are claiming that they are barely a blip on the radar, Airbnb are boasting that they have the highest penetration in Australia in the world. The key is, how close do you stand to the radar.

Raw figures are just the ingredients, not the cake. Better to trust figures that have been interpreted by organisations with credibility rather than the distorted views of vested interests for whom numbers are just another weapon in their war of words.  

By the way, does anyone know who funded the recent Tenants Union survey that “proved” Airbnb has no effect on rents or availability? I always thought the Tenants Union was strapped for cash and, in fact,  have used this website to support their fund-raising efforts.

Anyway, would you trust that result more than the recent findings from Sydney University that online short-term letting has taken 6000 homes – or 30 decent-sized apartment blocks – out of the housing market?

Hmmm … I thought 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.

[Jimmy-T]

@Question said:
… the agent said on august 11 that she would contact strata regarding the repair, but then kept refusing to contact them a second time because “it’s entirely up to strata, I cannot push them”. 

That is a dereliction of duty, by any measure.  If the agent won’t push them, who will?

I think I would escalate this by saying to the agent that you have no choice but to pay for the repairs yourself and that you will then charge them for the repairs.

Under Section 106 (5) of the Act, the landlord can demand compensation from the owners corp for the repairs that they (the OC) should have done.

I would try not to get stuck in the vortex between an incompetent agent, a lazy strata manager and an uninterested strata committee.  Get it done, send them a bill and charge them through Fair Trading if they refuse to pay it.

But first, read this fact sheet from the Tenants Union website and in particular the comments on emergency repairs and security. 

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]

@Beth99 said:
When raising a complaint with fair trading..we can do it as an EC right ? Don’t have to involve the SM ? I don’t want him to charge us fees when it will be us doing the hard work !

You can raise it as committee or as an individual and you can do so online here. Click through to the various pages of the form and you will see it couldn’t be easier, with drop-down menus covering most aspects of the complaint.

And there’s more information about disciplinary action against managers on the facsheet HERE.

Having said all that, there’s a very good chance that once you show that you are prepared to take action, and initiate the process, that money will miraculously appear in your accounts.

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]

@Beth99 said:
What bugs me is why are the other EC members so callous about this. Don’t we have any avenue of pursuing this money?  

You have two issues here – an uninterested EC and a string of deadbeat strata managers.

The first is probably more worrying – what other issues have the allowed to drop into the too-hard basket?

The second could be as simple as a claim at your local court for a debt, a complaint to Fair Trading, or both.

The strata manager’s duty to hand over documents under the strata Act does not specify the transfer of funds, so taking them to NCAT may only result in establishing that they owe you money, rather than forcing it to be paid.

Personally, I would be raising a complaint with Fair Trading who will … wait for it … have a chat to them. But that might do the trick and get you round the simple arithmetic that pursuing $8k may cost more in time and fees than you get it return. 

By the way, I would be more concerned that you are only missing $8k?  Where’s your sinking fund?

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]

@scapegoat said:
Lady Penelope – again, thanks for your help. But can I be sure that owner contact details are available?  

This is atrata – you can’t be 100% sure of anything.  However, the strata manager must show you the strata roll and the strata roll SHOULD have contact details for the owners.

If they don’t, you can ask the Owners Corp to get the strata manager to update the strata roll and if either party declines to do so, you can raise a complaint with Fair Trading, then NCAT.

You could even ask for a refund on your strata documents inspection fee if the records are incomplete (not that you would get anywhere – but it might get them moving).

That said, the details that owners have to give can be sketchy – they can name an agent and that agent can refuse (or “forget”) to pass on any communications. And strata is self-policing … you may have to do the leg-work and hit the phones yourself to get anything done.

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