Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@FNL said:
We are using these locks: Doric DS255 Sliding Window Limiter. They are currently being installed throughout the building.I wonder if these actually comply with the regs as they allow the lock to be completely removed.
In fact, in the ad it says “…however there may be a requirement for a combination of hardware items to meet requirements as set in the National Construction Code.”
However, the regs say this:
A screen, lock or any other device is a complying window safety device for the purposes of section 118 of the Act if it:
(a) is capable of restricting the opening of a window so that a sphere having a diameter of 125 millimetres or more cannot pass through the window opening, and
(b) is capable of resisting an outward horizontal action of 250 newtons, and
(c) has a child resistant release mechanism, in the case of a device that can be removed, overridden or unlocked.That suggests to me that the lock may well be OK – but if a lock that can be unlocked and tossed in a drawer is compliant, what’s the point?
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 wonder if VeeDub might not have already let the cat out of the bag by telling the building manager exactly why she wants a screen door.
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.
Your front door is common property. You can’t change common property without permission either by application to the OC or contained in a by-law.
The Act doesn’t say anything about locks specifically so you have to assume they come under this section
Part 4 Property management
111 Work by owners of lots affecting common property
An owner of a lot in a strata scheme must not carry out work on the common propertyunless the owner is authorised to do so:
(a) under this Part, or
(b) under a by-law made under this Part or a common property rights by-law, or
(c) by an approval of the owners corporationIf 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.
Sorry PS, but the document specifically says that locking the screen door and leaving your front door open is a breach of fire regulations (as well as being dangerous).
The fireys are OK with screen doors – provided people don’t use it in precisely the way VeeDub intends to.
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.
@Fey Knows said:
The By-Law being proposed where I am, doesn’t mention the Owners Corporation or those who will be granted Exclusive Use needing to ‘provide maintenance’.Then it will be invalid. The by-law must state who is to maintain the common property. Failure to include that means the owner would lose the exclusive use rights if it was challenged.
Section 144 (extract below) gives the option of maintenance being the responsibility of either the OC or the lot owner.
Any sensible OC would choose option (b), but one or the other has to be chosen or the by-law has no legal standing.
144 Common property rights by-law must provide for maintenance of property
(1) A common property rights by-law must:
(a) provide that the owners corporation is to continue to be responsible for the proper maintenance of, and keeping in a state of good and serviceable repair, the common property or the relevant part of it, or
(b) impose on the owner or owners of the lots the responsibility for that
maintenance and upkeep.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.
You can apply for a ruling at NCAT under section 232 if the strata committee has failed to respond within two months or has responded unfavourably within that period.
The other respondents are right in saying that you have put yourself at a disadvantage by getting the pet before you got approval but you could respond that the SC’s failure to reply made you think it was OK.
Regarding the proposed by-law there is a stack of evidence that restricting pets lowers the value of properties, if only because it removes 30 percent of potential purchasers and tenants.
Also, the law says that no by-law can be “harsh, unconscionable or oppressive.” A by-law that banned pets in a building that already had them would probably fall into that particular pothole.
Once you have sorted out your own position, you would be well advised to let other owners know of the potential problems with a no-pets by-law – it could be very expensive for all owners even trying to get one in place.
Finally, I have never heard of a specialist strata pets lawyer – but the first legal eagle to put that on their shingle will make a motza.
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, that read more harshly than intended. The law establishes that levies have to be set and owners have to pay them according to unit entitlements (with a couple of variations on that general rule). The nitty gritty of invoices is not addressed.
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 have normal home and contents insurance, you should be OK.
But you might also want to check (via your strata manager) if the builder renovating upstairs is licensed and insured.
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.
This question begins and ends with the terms of her lease. What does it say? It’s a legal contract and she is bound by its conditions.
However, if she is so valuable to the property, the landlord needs to start thinking long term, rather than take it or leave it.
Perhaps the landlord could offer her another larger property within the complex – or a satellite space.
Failing that, I’d be tempted to talk about sub-letting or expanding the business to include a tattoo parlour and “dope” shop while moving the core business elsewhere.
Maybe that would focus the landlord’s thinking.
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 is possible to ask for and if necessary provide information without necesarily provoking conflict.
I would be asking your committee to provide some fact sheets to all owners detailing future plans – or maybe hold an information night.
If that wasn’t forthcoming, I would set up my own website and/or facebook page where all these issues could be discussed without needing to go through the committee. Setting up a web page is a lot easier and less expensive than you think.
And as a general observation, I would be keeping personal attacks to a minimum. People get very quickly turned off by them and you don’t do yourself any good.
Get the information out there, and make it a discussion about good and bad ideas not good and bad, or old and new, people.
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 are looking for a levies holiday, you aren’t going to get one. All it means if you didn’t get a levies notice is that they can’t reasonable charge you interest on the unpaid amount.
Your objections to “Attila” should be dealt with in the correct forum – your strata committee – and not through trying to starve the Owners Corp of funds.
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 first thought was that you really need a new strata manager as their “too-hard” basket seems to be getting way too much traffic.
The following is advice that competent strata manager would give:
By- law breaches:
These are things like noise and abusive behaviour – depending on your specific by-laws.
Document any breaches of the by-laws and agree at a properly constituted strata committee meeting to issue notices to comply on the prescribed form – one for each of the breaches – listing the by-laws that have been breached and how and when this occurred.
If the breaches continue, go straight to NCAT (no mediation required) and ask for penalties (fines) to be issued.
Strata law breaches:
These are things like damage to common property and using the premises for an a non-permitted business.
First apply for mediation with Fair Trading, then apply for orders from NCAT.
You should also consider taking action against the owners for failure to control the behaviour of their tenant.
Unpaid levies
You are allowed by law to pursue unpaid levies as a debt at the debtor’s expense. There are several levy debt collection experts who will do this all for you at no expense to the owners’ corp. You can pursue debt recovery through local courts and even garnishee the rent collected until the debts are cleared.
A concerted effort on all fronts may, quite possibly, drive both drug-dealing tenant and deadbeat landlord out of the building.
Then all you have to do is deal with your do-nothing strata manager.
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.
No valid by-laws are changed by the model by-laws issued in the new strata regulations. Your Owners Corp has to actively adopt any new by-laws to change them.
The exceptions are the by-laws for pre-1996 schemes – they are automatically updated. But the automatic changes only apply where there is no by-law in place that is different from the original model by-laws.
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 the fence is designate on the plan as a thick black line then it is common property, according to the “Who’s Responsible?” document (Note 16 – see below) and should be dealt with at the Owners’ Corp’s cost.
However, the decision can only be made by a majority at an committee meeting and they should be at least offered a couple of options and quotes on cost.
By the way, going back to the original problem, owners have a responsibility to maintain anything on their lot that can be seen from outside. Rather than moving the fence, the original OC should have sent owners a letter demanding they tidy up their planters or paid someone to do it and charged them for it.
Who’s responsible – Note 16
If [fences] are shown as a thick line on the strata plan then they are deemed a common wall and the responsibility of the owners corporation.
However, if they are shown as a thin, dotted or no line on the strata plan then they are treated in accordance with the Dividing Fences Act and are treated as follows:
1. Divides two lots. Each owner is responsible 50/50
2. Divides one lot from common property. The owner is responsible 50% & the owners corporation is responsible 50%
3. Divides one lot from the adjoining property. The owners corporation are responsible for 100% of its share.
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.
@Fey Knows said:
Could some kind, clever Flat Chat expert please tell a newby where to find rules about Common Property and Exclusive Use By-Laws in the new Strata Schemes Management Act 2015? Hope it’s an easy question.That is a very non-specific question and so we can give only a general answer – and that’s contained in these sections of the Act, below.
Otherwise, you will find links to all the relevant legislation HERE.
112 Owners corporation may grant licence to use common property
(1) An owners corporation may grant a licence to an owner or occupier of a lot in the strata scheme or another person to use common property in a particular manner or for particular purposes if the owners corporation has approved the granting of the licence by a special resolution.(2) A licence may be granted subject to terms and conditions.
Note. Division 3 of Part 7 enables owners corporations to make common property rights by-laws granting exclusive use rights and special privileges (including licences) in relation to common property.Part 7, Division 3
By-laws conferring rights or privileges over common property142 Common property rights by-law
For the purposes of this Act, a common property rights by-law is a by-law that confers on the owner or owners of a specified lot or lots in the strata scheme:
(a) a right of exclusive use and enjoyment of the whole or any specified part of the common property, or
(b) special privileges in respect of the whole or any specified part of the common property (including, for example, a licence to use the whole or any specified part of the common property in a particular manner or for particular purposes), or that changes such a by-law.143 Requirements and effect of common property rights by-laws
(1) An owners corporation may make a common property rights by-law only with the written consent of each owner on whom the by-law confers rights or special privileges.
Note. Any addition to the by-laws will require a special resolution (see section 141).
(2) A common property rights by-law may confer rights or special privileges subject to conditions specified in the by-law (such as a condition requiring the payment of money by the owner or owners concerned, at specified times or as determined by the owners corporation).
(3) A common property rights by-law may be made even though the person on whom the right of exclusive use and enjoyment or the special privileges are to be conferred had that exclusive use or enjoyment or enjoyed those special privileges before the making of the by-law.
(4) After 2 years from the making, or purported making, of a common property rights by-law, it is conclusively presumed that all conditions and preliminary steps precedent to the making of the by-law were complied with and performed.144 Common property rights by-law must provide for maintenance of property
(1) A common property rights by-law must:
(a) provide that the owners corporation is to continue to be responsible for the proper maintenance of, and keeping in a state of good and serviceable repair, the common property or the relevant part of it, or
(b) impose on the owner or owners of the lots the responsibility for that
maintenance and upkeep.
(2) Any money payable under a common property rights by-law by more than one owner to the owners corporation or to any person for or towards the maintenance or upkeep of any common property is payable by those owners proportionately according to the relative proportions of their respective unit entitlements of their lots unless the by-law otherwise provides.
(3) To the extent to which a common property rights by-law makes a person directly responsible for the proper maintenance of, and keeping in a state of good and serviceable repair, any common property, it discharges the owners corporation from its obligations to maintain and repair the property under this Act.145 Common property rights by-law binding on owners for time being
(1) A common property rights by-law, while it remains in force, continues to operate for the benefit of, and is binding on, the owner or owners for the time being of the lot or lots specified in the by-law.
(2) If a person becomes the owner of a lot when, under a by-law or under this subsection, a former owner is liable to pay money to the owners corporation, the person who becomes the owner is jointly and severally liable with the former owner to pay the money to the owners corporation.
(3) Any money payable by an owner to the owners corporation under a common property rights by-law or under subsection (2) may be recovered, as a debt in a court of competent jurisdiction, by the owners corporation.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.