Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Under the same provisions of NSW strata law that mean the Owner Corporation is, by default, responsible for changes by an owner to common property under a special resolution by-law (albeit with the clear intention that the owner should be required to take responsibility under the by-law) OCs are responsible for changes to common property that were not permitted by a special resolution by-law (e.g. changes to common property that were not totified to the strata committee or allowed on a nod and a wink). See S.108(4) below.
The thinking behind this is that someone has to be responsible or a building could literally be falling down while previous and current owners chased each other around the courts.
However, that doesn’t need to rest there. The owners corp can demand that the current owner takes responsibility or reinstates the common property. The current owner can (theoretically) pursue the previous owner for failure to inform them that there were unapproved works.
And then there’s the local council who may well demand that an illegal structure be removed. Who will they demand that from? Probably the Owners Corp in the first instance … and so the carousel starts spinning again as the OC pursues the owners through NCAT.
SSMA 2015 Section 108
(4) If a special resolution under this section does not specify who has the ongoing maintenance of the common property concerned, the owners corporation has the responsibility for the ongoing maintenance.
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.
Technically, yes, the owners corp is responsible for the alterations – but that also means that theoretically you can remove them.
The new owner can say it has nothing to do with her – and you can say well, make it something to do with you or we will reinstate common property to its original condition.
In an ideal world, with your support, she could pursue the vendor for not fully disclosing the situation with the changes.
But what you really want is to get this all shifted to her responsibility so that the Owners Corp isn’t constantly being asked to pay for fixing work that should never have been 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.
@steven strata said:
So do we need the approval of the Body Corporate, and what type of meeting and resolution is required? to enable us to lodge application with Council on behalf of the Body Corporate.It depends how extensive the changes are but soomner or later you will need either Strata Committee approval (for non-major changes) — if your scheme has delegated these responsibilities to the committee – and by-laws from a general meeting for major changes.
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.
A neighbour of ours pulled a real swifty on this.
He wanted to remove one bedroom and extend his lounge so that he could “have room to have bigger parties”.
In so doing his lounge room would now be above, below and adjacent to three neighbours’ bedrooms.
This is exactly the kind of thing that DAs are specified for – changing the configuration of the layout of the unit.
However, being prominent in the real estate industry, he had no trouble getting his builder to say that what he was doing was a “complying development” (requiring no DA).
Once council had accepted that, the owners corp went along with it, wrongly (but understandably) assuming that everything must have been OK or the council wouldn’t have accepted it.
To make matters worse, the estate agent is an a**hole – coming home at 12.30 am and cranking up the music to maximum volume – then gets very nasty if neighbours complain.
When I pointed out to the mostly useless City of Sydney Council planning department that they should have blocked this right from the start, they said “take it up with the builder who signed off on the complying development”.
Like that would do any good …
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 it now seems this is not a regular residential tenancy but instead a 99-year lease (which is a form of temporary ownership). Thus, if the lease says they have to pay levies, I would think that would include special levies.
But this is a very unusual set of circumstances that would require a strata lawyer giving their opinion. It’s way beyond my limited knowledge or experience.
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.
She can threaten all she wants – let her. If she can’t attend a meeting without bringing a proxy with her, and then can’t conduct herself reasonably when she does attend, I don’t fancy her chances at NCAT.
She doesn’t have much of a case anyway. She was invited to leave to compose herself before she got into further trouble – but even in the unlikely event that she could have run a case for being denied her right to be at the meeting she had her proxy there to make sure she didn’t miss anything. If both she and her proxy left, that was their decision.
Owners have the right to attend meetings but they don’t have the right to constantly disrupt them to pursue their own agenda.
Perhaps next time you could have the Standing Orders adopted as a by-law then send her a Notice To Comply so that any further disruption can lead to her being fined.
You could raise the issue for mediation at Fair Trading with a view to seeking orders at NCAT (under Section 232) that this owner agrees not to disrupt meetings and to only send a proxy to vote on her behalf when she is not there to do so herself. She will probably ignore the mediation but that’s an obligatory first step. The penalties for breaching NCAT orders are pretty severe.
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 manager can have one proxy vote and only one. Otherwise they don’t have a vote at a general meeting at all. They may not use it in any vote related to their contract.
There are no proxy votes allowed at strata committee meetings although, with the approval of the committee, members can represent absent members.
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.
IN NSW, you only have to bring structures up to code if they are dangerous or if related building work is going on that affects them. I suspect the ACT is similar (but Sir Humphrey will know best).
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 agree with Scottie. If the tenant is paying levies, they need to be part of the rent (so special levies would not apply). Tenants Union and Fair Trading would be my next port of call.
And the strata manager can only carry one proxy (and can’t vote on matters relating to their contract).
The levies issue is between the Owners Corp and the liquidator. The tenant shouldn’t even be remotely involved.
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.
@artarmonite said:
I am very passionate about the need for locks on windows but before I go into why please, please, please check the quote. In our block we halved the quote because a lot of the windows were not high enough from the ground, some were actually doors opening to balconies, and the bathroom windows were more than 1.7m above the floor.Firstly, well said on the need for window locks. The evidence is irrefutable and anyone who puts personal expense before the safety of children needs to take a long hard look at themselves. You’ll find like-minded individuals over there in the corner, muttering about how having fences round swimming pools is part of the ‘Nanny State’.
That said, there seems to be a lot of confusion and plain ignorance about this and along with that comes people who are happy to make a quick buck at our expense, as well as those who don’t mind spending your money.
We have had posts from people whose windows were being permanently restricted (not required by the Act but cheaper than window locks) and others from people who didn’t need locks in the first place.
There is a pretty comprehensive page on the regulations here on the Fair Trading website. Have a look and you will see how simple and relatively inexpensive it can 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.
@Pamster said:
Another reason for the increased water bill could be residents washing their cars, and inviting non residents / friends to wash their cars on your property as well. This could especially be the case if your complex has a designated car wash bay.Sounds like some personal experience here. Beware the Carwash Crooks!
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’s a strange little quirk in the law relating to the installation of NBN and other communications services.
The owners corp can’t refuse to let the installers have access but they can set the times and under what circumstances they have access, as well as put limits on their work and charge them fees for electricity etc.
However, some NBN installers – especially those on a tight schedule to do a number of buildings in a certain limited time – think they can just turn up and if there’s no one there to let them in, they can break in.
They can’t without a court order – that’s trespass and property damage.
Get in touch with the installer and demand they repair the door and replace the lock or you will report them for criminal damage.
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.
@Clayton6 said:
Do I have grounds to complain they are not meeting their obligations?You can complain but it’s not really your strata manager’s job to monitor water usage in your building (and with only six units, they aren’t going to be making too much out of your scheme anyway).
Yes, they may well hit the scheme with extra charges for sending you copies of the water bills. But it’s an issue for a number of reasons so you need to get on top of it. You might start with a mail-out to residents asking if they have any problems with water leaks or have noticed any unusual activity.
Increased water bills could be signs of sub-letting and over-crowding, or even hydroponic drug cultivation. It may be time to have a sniff around and find out what’s going on
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.