Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@watchman said:
After March 2018, will it be illegal to override the safety device & leave the window open by more than 125mm if there are no kids in your unit. If so will there be a Singapore style mosquito police to enforce the law, will there be fines, eviction of tenants, & spiteful neighbours dobbing each other in.No. All you will need is to have the lock in place and if it is unlocked, then it’s up to you. I would imagine, however, that if you are letting a unit, you would need to have the lock fully in place and functioning when you were showing the unit to prospective tenants and it would be up to the tenants to decide what to do with it once they were in situ.
There are no StrataKops (more’s the pity!)
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.
@Lady Penelope said:
It is my understanding that the water bills for each owner do not need to form part of the actual Sinking or Admin Levy. They can be billed separately.
Ask the Developer if the water utility bills have been included in the Admin Levy? If they haven’t been included then they can be charged separately.
There seems to be some confusion – but FarawayGirl says the developer has said the water bills were coming out of the Admin Fund. The building has only one meter so they have to be apportioned somehow and that would be according to the Unit Entitlements. And they have to be paid by a single account and that would be the Owners Corp Admin Fund.
So, yes, the water bills don’t NEED to come out of the Admin Fund but in this case they do.
Or am I missing something?
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.
‘Bumper’ said:
I have repeatedly requested the executive committee of the owners corporation to remove these bollards and relocate them closer to the wall but they claim it is a fire safety requirement.
What do you suggest?
Just as there are fire safety laws, there are minimum turning circle standards enshrined in your DA. Tell your EC to seriously investigate an alternative method of keeping the fire door clear – including signage, a painted area on the floor and re-positioning of the bollards to allow for easier and safer access for you. If they fail to do so, get your own opinion from your local fire department and then take them to NCAT.
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 this comes under section 87 and/or 90 (both below)
87 Orders varying contributions or payment methods
(1) The Tribunal may, on application, make either or both of the following orders if the Tribunal considers that any amount levied or proposed to be levied by way of contributions is inadequate or excessive or that the manner of payment of contributions is unreasonable:
(a) an order for payment of contributions of a different amount,
(b) an order for payment of contributions in a different manner.90 Contributions for legal costs awarded in proceedings between owners and owners corporation
(1) This section applies to proceedings brought by one or more owners of lots against an owners corporation or by an owners corporation against one or more owners of lots (including one or more owners joined in third party proceedings).
(2) The court may order in the proceedings that any money (including costs) payable by an owners corporation under an order made in the proceedings must be paid from contributions levied only in relation to the lots and in the proportions that are specified in the order.
(3) The owners corporation must, for the purpose of paying the money ordered to be paid by it, levy contributions in accordance with the terms of the order and must pay the money out of the contributions paid in accordance with that levy.
(4) This Division (other than provisions relating to the amount of contributions) applies to and in respect of contributions levied under this section in the same way as it applies to other contributions levied under this Division.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.
It’s eight. the Act refers to “not less than one-quarter” and seven would be less than a quarter.
However, bear in mind that under the new legislation, if a quorum is not present at the appointed time a general meeting is due to start, those in attendance only have to wait a half hour then declare themselves to be a quorum.
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 are three levels of checks that need to be done.
The first, by an inspector employed by the lot owner, should be a check of fixtures, fittings and finishes in their own lot that they can demand the builder fixes there and then.
They should also note issues with common property – ceilings, walls, floors, windows, balconies, front door etc etc – that they can report to the Owners Corps when it is formed.
The next level is non-major defects and major or structural defects and there will be an item on the agenda of the first AGM to ensure the Owners Corp at least considers having a professional inspection done ( and they would have to be totally insane not to do so).
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.
Yes but, no but …
OK, in writing that article I skated over one procedural step which is that the Owners Corp can put a by-law in place that allows the committee to approve minor renovations on behalf of the owners corp. Many schemes would have that as a matter of course.
And bear in mind that the owners in general meeting can still reverse or rescind decsions made on its behalf by the committee.
This is what the Fair Trading handbook Strata Living says:
The owners corporation can delegate approval for minor renovations to the strata committee by passing a by-law to permit this. The owners corporation can also make a by-law to define specific types of work as being ‘cosmetic’ or ‘minor’ renovations. This is as long as it doesn’t conflict with the categories of renovation as defined in the Act. For example, waterproofing would fall into the category of major renovations. The owners corporation could not decide that this is a minor renovation.
So you would need the by-law to be in place to avoid a general meeting but if you were going to have the GM, I would put the by-law on the agenda too, just for future reference.
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 going to go a step further than PS and quote the Hynes Legal article (and thanks for pointing it out):
What can a Queensland body corporate do about it [short-stay letting]?
We won’t keep you all in suspense. The answer is nothing.
It goes on to explain …
One of the most misconstrued aspects of strata living is the ability of a body corporate to come inside people’s front doors and impose rules.
A body corporate has no ability to dictate what happens inside a lot outside those parameters.
This is supported by the BCCM Act which very simply provides at subsection 180(3) that if a lot may be used for residential purposes, the by-laws can not restrict the type of residential use to which it is put. And yes – that catches all of those ‘no lettings under three months’ and ‘no schoolies’ by-laws. These are simply unlawful and unenforceable.
Now, I’m not the biggest fan of Queensland strata law. Any and all of the many good things are undermined by the built-in corruption of allowing developers to sell mangement rights over which the owners – who have to pay the bills – have no say. This is illegal in every other state in Australia for the very good reason that it serves only one purpose – to line developers’ pockets with money that they haven’t earned through contracts over which they take no responsibility. Scandalous!
Queensland strata law is based on holiday letting whereas NSW and Victorian law is based on residential ownership. Even so, I’m surprised that there is nothing in Qld law to protect bona fine holiday lets or residential tenants. Perhaps I shouldn’t be.
I was talking last year to Garry Bugden – the ultimate authority on strata law here and overseas – and he told me he had devised the basis for what is now Qld strata law.
However, he had proposed a two strand legal system for Qld strata. One strand was for holiday lets (with the pre-sale of management rights) and the other was residential, where owners could choose their managers and negotiate their contracts. The government caved in to developer pressure and went with the former system and ditched the latter.
So, if as we suspect, unit prices are pushed up in holiday areas where Airbnb are most active, how do you think the Sunshine State’s developers are going to feel about it? The phrase ‘bring it on’ springs to mind.
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.
All strata schemes must review their by-laws before the end of the year. It sounds like you should at least have a discussion in your scheme about what kind of pets by-law would be appropriate.
There’s no point in having a by-law that’s ignored – it leaves the door open for an inconsiderate owner with a troublesome pet to ride roughshod over the rules. Better to have a by-law that reflects the reality of your situation … and the rest of the strata world 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.
The tiles on a wall adjacent to common property are owners corp responsibility, according to the “Who’s responsible …” document.
Note 11: The tiles on the floor or on a common wall that separates 2 lots or the lot from common property are the responsibility of the Owners Corporation. This includes the shower base.
According to section 106 (4) of the Act the owners Corp can delay fixing common property until after a dispute over responsibility has been resolved provided “failure to comply will not affect the safety of any building, structure or common property in the strata scheme.“
I would say that not fixing the shower tiles affected its safety.
Lack of funds is not a reason for not effecting necessary repairs and your strata manager should know this. A special levy or, preferably, a strata loan should be raised to get the building fixed (if the builder refuses to fix it) then deal with getting the money out of them later.
This is Strata Management 101. If your strata manager doesn’t understand this, they maybe should go and get a job selling real estate where their lack of knowledge or absence of a sense of duty won’t do any harm.
Section 106
Duty of owners corporation to maintain and repair property
(1) An owners corporation for a strata scheme must properly maintain and keep in a state of good and serviceable repair the common property and any personal property vested in the owners corporation.
(2) An owners corporation must renew or replace any fixtures or fittings comprised in the common property and any personal property vested in the owners corporation.
(3) This section does not apply to a particular item of property if the owners corporation determines by special resolution that:
(a) it is inappropriate to maintain, renew, replace or repair the property, and
(b) its decision will not affect the safety of any building, structure or common property in the strata scheme or detract from the appearance of any property in the strata scheme.(4) If an owners corporation has taken action against an owner or other person in respect of damage to the common property, it may defer compliance with subsection (1) or (2) in relation to the damage to the property until the completion of the action if the failure to comply will not affect the safety of any building, structure or common property in 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.
Assuming that the cats arrived on the scene AFTER the by-law was registered, the worst thing the strata committee has done was to officially make and minute a decision to defy their own by-laws.
The smart thing to have done would have been to have a quiet word with the owners and tell them not to worry.
By putting this on the minutes they have left it open to any owner who objects to pets to take the SC to NCAT and challenge their decision, which could theoretically lead to the cats being evicted.
There are certain fundamentals in strata law, and one of them is that strata committees can’t change or override by-laws. They have to have a general meeting and get 75 percent of the vote to do so.
There’s something else worth noting here. There is a ratchet effect with by-laws.
If you blunder into by-laws on a “suck it and see” basis, you can find that badly thought-through rules can be very burdensome when the 25 percent of owners who bullied everyone else into accepting them refuse to change them when they don’t work out.
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.
Firstly, just to save my editing fingers, there is a difference between a naturalist and a naturist. David Attenborough is a naturalist – he seems to get by without succumbing to the urge to remove all his clothes.
He would only be a naturist if he frequented nude beaches or did his TV shows in the buff. So far there is no evidence of either of these things having occurred.
The gentleman in this post may well be a naturalist but, in threatening to expose himself to the world, he is a potential naturist.
And getting back to the question, I did what everybody else does in these situations and consulted the Interweb. Here is the response on JustAnswers:
If you are in your private home it is not an issue.Backyard will depend on whether you can be seen by your neighbours and whether they complain. It is not a criminal offence but if they complain they can get an order from the court that you stop.Outdoors and in public other than nude beaches it is a criminal offence and all states have their own laws.It also comes down to intent. If you are doing it deliberately to offend people or for some weird kinky sexual pleasure, it comes under the Crimes act and it is an act of indecency.According to this website, Obscene Exposure is defined thus: “A person shall not, in or within view from a public place or a school, wilfully and obscenely expose his or her person.”
“Obscene” is defined as something that would offend a reasonable person.
In the circumstances outlined above, the greatest danger is that the local council will dismiss the objection as bogus, flippant and mischievous, undermining legitimate and well-founded opposition to the plan.
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 Fair Trading document Strata Living says this about committees:
“Strata committee members must act with due care and diligence and must disclose any conflict of interest at a meeting, which must also be recorded. If a strata committee member does not disclose a conflict of interest, this may result in them receiving a penalty of up to $1,100.”
“Due care and diligence” covers a multitude of sins. There is probably a very good reason or not being more specific – every time you specify unacceptable behavior, some people take non-specified behaviour as implicitly acceptable.
There are plenty of options for dealing with committees that act dishonestly but unless you are more specific in your complaints, there’s not much point is asking us for advice.
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.
What does the by-law actually say?
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 guess they don’t want to be ‘nanny state’ about it. If you have window locks, remove them and chuck them in a drawer, then your kid falls out of the window, you have no one to blame but yourself.
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.