Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@PeterC said:
@SMO said:
@JimmyT said:
There is no limit on the number of proxies any one person can hold, provided they are on the correct form and the proxy holder and providers are entitled to vote at the meeting (ie, their levies are paid up to date and in the bank before the meeting starts)…..I think you might find the following interesting, its on the net so there should be no copyright issues…
The extended quote was interesting. I would not assume that anything on the net is free of copyright! The quoted text appears to have been published on Facebook and I did not find it elsewhere in a search. Normally I think it would be better to summarise the key points and provide a link to the original work.
PeterC is absolutely right. Just because something appears on the net, doesn’t mean it’s free to be posted elsewhere. You are usually OK to quote a line or two and may even get away with re-posting someone else’s work if you are sure they are OK with that. But copyright exists by the simple act of publishing something, either in print or on the Net, and lifting someone else’s work wholesale is not something we encourage. I have edited out the huge amount of material lifted from a Facebook page and replaced it with a link to the page so that the originator of the material will get the traffic they have earned. Please don’t cut and paste other people’s work here, especially unattributed. It’s not free and it’s not fair.
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 we have to take Daphne’s attention-seeking posts with a pinch of salt … or snuff.
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.
@Dragandeewhy said:
This whole smoking thing is kind of the result of manipulated mass psichology. Nobody ever mentioned smoking marihuana. In my previous post I have mentioned all the other examples where “if you can smell it, it is dangerous for you” but nobody took it seriously.So, “manipulated mass psychology” is the cause of cancer, heart disease and emphysema? Get real.
People who smoke stink enough to take the smell with them when they walk into a room. Doesn’t that tell you something about the lingering effects of smoke.
People who lived in apartments 100 years ago had other things to worry about – that doesn’t make smoking OK.
I will cheerfully set fire to the next person who tells me “you breathe in pollution all the time so what difference does cigarette smoke make?”.
It’s called harm minimisation – it’s why we have speed limits and road rules and asbestos laws … to protect ourselves against idiots who don’t care about their own health and expect everyone else to suffer as a consequence.
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 am getting very tired of DD’s sarcasm. If you want to make unhelpful and provocative statements in the guise of humour, please go and do it on a wbsite that doesn’t care about the level of discussion.
Nanny State is a phrase used by tselfish morons to cover their own idiocies.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.
@Queenslander said:
Smelling smoke isn’t the same as breathing smoke. People have a right to smoke and the body corporate cannot prohibit this.
I can’t really see how someone can smell smoke without breathing it.
An owners corporations can prevent people from doing anything that breaches by-laws, and that includes smoking on common property (like balconies) or in a way that interferes with another persons’s health or peaceful enjoyment of their lot.
The legal precedent has been set in NSW that if you can’t prevent smoke from travelling from inside one person’t unit to another’s, then the only way to do so is for the smoker to stop smoking or move out.
Arguing about degrees of distress caused get us nowhere. It’s either a problem or it isn’t. Smoke kills people and affects their health in other ways. As ever, Queensland finds a way of letting the selfish do what they want at everyone else’s expense
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.
@daphne diaphanous said:
There appears to be no exemption for childless households in the amendment. We live in a townhouse with no resident or visiting children. Does this mean we can’t sleep with windows open all the way on hot summer days? I can’t find any specific information on the net.Exemptions would make no sense since you can’t guarantee that no children will ever live in or visit the lot. However, some of the approved locks are two-stage and allow windows to be opened wide by adults who can master the mechanism.
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.
From HarryP
Great column in SMH – I have been reading it for years. Just an enquiry regarding the number of proxies one person can have at an annual general meeting. I remember reading about it in your column and I think it was 2013 – it was a percentage. We are in NSW and have someone on our EC who had garnered 10 proxies as well as his own vote out of a total of 41 attendees. Is this legal?
One of the many ways that the government has let us down with the delay in strata law changes is the issue of proxy votes. There is no limit on the number of proxies any one person can hold, provided they are on the correct form and the proxy holder and providers are entitled to vote at the meeting (ie, their levies are paid up to date and in the bank before the meeting starts).
Demand scrutiny of every proxy to make sure they are OK.
Meantime, collect as many other proxies -or get owners to attend your AGM – and ask this owner why they thought proxy harvesting on this scale was necessary. It’s immoral and it’s about to become illegal, just as soon as our MPs get their acts together.
One other thing, anyone who has given their proxy and now has second thoughts (because they didn’t realise they were giving one person too much power, for instance) just has to fill in another form and that supersedes and rescinds the previous proxy. They don’t have to cancel the proxy directly.
FYI: The proposed new laws will not be presented to Parliament until after the election in march next year and will not come into effect until 2016. Then owners will be limited to five proxy votes or five percent of votes in schemes smaller than 20 lots.
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.
@Cosmo said:
I would say that after fair warning that if the relevant owners doesn’t rectify the problem not only could the OC remove and dispose of them but charge the costs back to the owner. Fair warning, to my mind, would need to include reference to the relevant sections of the Act and set a reasonable time deadline.The problem is that the strata Act doesn’t specifically refer to abandoned goods – – but the Residential tenancy Act does and I would use that as a guideline (even though it has no legal status beyond tenancy).
You can read a Fair Trading fact sheet HERE but the essential points are:
Rubbish and perishable items
You can dispose of any rubbish or perishable items left behind by the tenant immediately. For example, a broken chair and a pile of old newspapers, perishable food left in a cupboard or dying pot plants in the yard. value.
Notice required
If items other than rubbish have been left behind you have to attempt to notify the former tenant. You need to try to tell them that you have their goods and they will be disposed of after a certain time if they are not collected. If after 2 days you have not been able to contact the former tenant you can leave a notice in a prominent position somewhere on the premises (e.g. stuck to the front door). If the goods are obviously leased you should also contact the rental company.
Storage of goods
Goods of value including furniture, electrical items and clothing need to be stored in a safe place for at least 14 days from the day you notify the tenant to come and collect them.
Personal documents
Different rules are in place when dealing with personal documents left behind by a tenant. Personal documents are defined under the Act as being:
- a birth certificate, passport or other identity document
- bank books or other financial statements or documents
- photographs and other personal memorabilia (e.g. medals and trophies)
- licences or other documents conferring authorities, rights or qualifications.
Personal documents left behind by a tenant need to be kept in a safe place for at least 90 days from the day you give notice to the tenant.
Disposal of unclaimed items
If the former tenant fails to reclaim the goods within the 14 days you can choose to:
- donate the goods to charity (e.g. leave clothes in a clothing bin or arrange for furniture etc to be collected), or
- dispose of the goods in a lawful manner (e.g. take them to the tip or organise a council collection if such a service is available in your area), or
- keep the goods in the property if they are useful fixtures and fittings (e.g. curtains), or
- sell the goods for fair value and give the proceeds to the tenant (less the occupation fee and reasonable costs of the sale) or send it to the Office of State Revenue after 6 years as unclaimed money.
Unclaimed personal documents can be disposed of after the 90 days in an appropriate manner, such as by returning to the issuing authority (wherever possible) or by shredding.
If you have followed the law correctly, you are protected if the tenant comes back to you later about the goods. However, if the law was not followed you could be ordered by the Tribunal to pay compensation to the tenant. This could include any damage to the items while they were in your possession.
As I said, this has no legal status but, in the absence of clear guidelines, following these steps show that you have at least tried to do the right thing.
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.
@daphne diaphanous said:
Talking about hazard reductions in the human body, we have adjusted our diet & lifestyles by various means to stave of cancer, heart attacks & strokes. What do we expect to die of, especially in strataland (sine we must); Alzheimer’s?Barbecue smoke – or fire!
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.
@Costa said:
And yes I agree! Barbecue smoke shouldn’t be shared either!Some genius on my building’s executive committee has suggested removing barbecue smoke from the list of toxic fumes – such as cigarette, cigar and tobacco smoke – forbidden on balconies and common property.
Sooner or later someone is going to lift the Aussie blinkers and ask if, given its volume and the number of carcinogens in it, barbecue smoke going from a balcony into someone’s home isn’t more dangerous than the occasional cigarette.
Of course, it’s un-Australian to suggest anything of the kind. However, this web page from the American National Cancer Institute makes sobering reading ,as does THIS, THIS and THIS.
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.
@audreygreenwood said:
… at the end of the day, what they’re the most concerned about is other people complaining about noise and pollution…You think? What they may be most concerned about is the likelihood of increased noise transmission from floors that may not have been properly acoustically insulated.
Be clear on this, it you lift carpets and lay down any flooring that impacts on your neighbours below, above and the to side, you could end up having to remove, replace or cover them up.
Your concerns should not be about how you get round the rules, but how you can avoid breaching them.
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.
@daphne diaphanous said:
Dragan forgot the clouds of methane vapour everywhere …Sailing close to the wind, DD?
I refer Flatchatters to this yarn .
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 question of breaking the speed limit is a breach of by-laws (if they were imposed by by-laws to begin with).
The question of fault and who pays – most insurance firms will treat this as an accident and it then depends on the terms of either driver’s insurance policies. If you have to pay an excess or lose your no claims discount, it’s up to you to prove the other driver was at fault.
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.
@daphne diaphanous said:
Back in the ’70s, almost all inner city terraces had enclosed balconies, adding an extra room to each property & they looked good.You are joking, right? They were and are hideous extrusions and it’s great to see them gradually be restored to their iron lace splendour.
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.
@scotlandx said:
To answer your question CharlieBoots, the current laws and regulations haven’t changed.I agree with everything else Scottie said apart from the above (kind of …). Not exactly on point, I know, but the Environmental Health laws were changed in January making it illegal for people to smoke outside the entrances to apartment blocks.
Back to this question, as Scottie said, by-laws are the answer and if too many object, point out that if you had a smoking ban and tried to rescind it, you would probably fall foul of the ACt that doesn’t allow you to pass by-laws that contradict provisions of the Act (such as the right to peaceful enjoyment and freedom from nuisance).
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.