Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@Johnty said:
The unit entitlements are approx 30,26,24,20%. The lot owner with 26% bought 2% from the older owner who originally held 32% before the older owner passed away about 6 years ago.
Was this transfer of unit entitlement approved by the CTTT (as was) and registered at the Registrar-General’s Office (?). Was it approved unanimously by the other owners? I ask because this may be an informal arrangement that has no standing under strata law.
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.
@MaureenE said:
Thank you for your response JimmyYou say “And to answer the basic question, the advice given is that while the law doesn’t allow you to stop internet providers from checking your common property areas, you do not have to allow them to install their equipment on their terms”
I must say I did not quite take that implication from the two links you provided. The way I read it you could do things to slow down the process such as refusing access to electricity, but it was only a slow down of the process. Or perhaps you have further information?
Refusing electricity certainly sounds a good strategy, so that you.
Cheers
MaureenIt’s a bit more than slowing down but the principle is the same. A lawyer’s letter telling them that they can’t proceed without a clear understanding of what they plan to do and a written agreement will not only slow them down but bring them to the negotiation table. There are rival firms that may want to provide a similar service and a smart Owners Corp will play them off each other to get the best deal. Once one is in place, the others won’t be interested.
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.
While I have no problem referring to and even linking to aricles in other publications, reprinting them wholesale (as this poster did) opens us up to all sorts of legal issues, not least if the original article was in some way defamatory.
Also, we have covered most strata issues in this forum and its related newspaper columns and a simple search would have found this article http://www.flatchat.com.au/broadband-providers-bashing-on-doors/ and this one http://www.flatchat.com.au/nbn-coming-to-your-block-like-it-or-not/ which, together with subsequent posts answer most of the issues raised without having to trawl through local newspapers for possibly confusing information.
And to answer the basic question, the advice given is that while the law doesn’t allow you to stop internet providers from checking your common property areas, you do not have to allow them to install their equipment on their terms and certainly not at the exclusion of other ISPs.
There’s a search window at the top of the page – use it and you will be surprised what you will find.
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.
@Bongo drum said:
P.S. This Exec. Committee is running wild. They have introduced a By-Law to stop owners communicating by email.As non of the owners live at the property, this restricts communication between owners but again, I have to find a law this by-law contravenes and I can’t find a law that upholds people’s rights to communicate freely.
KP is right, they can’t tell you what to do and what not to do but the fact is that email communication is an ‘opt-in’ in strata schemes, regarding communications between the committee and/or strata manager. Also, strata managers are usually very careful not to provide email addresses to other owners, citing privacy legislation.
But if you already have the email addresses of other owners, the first thing I would do is to write to them and ask them if they are happy with the way their properties are being managed, specifically their efforts to stop owners communicating with each other.
It’s not up to you to find a lw that the by-law contravenes – it’s up to the EC to issue notices to comply and make them stick at NCAT (which I’m pretty sure would bounce this one straight back out the 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.
What does it say in your by-laws about rentals? If it’s in the by-laws they can’t have it whatever the council says. Next look at your zoning. Is the building zoned permanent residential only in the DA? Finally, you need to get the Owners Corporation or Executive Committee to object strongly to this application. If they say no, most councils will decline permission.
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.
Hi Ray
There are a lot of options you could look at, such as low energy lighting (which would require a change to the lighting units) and motion sensors to switch the lights on as soon as there’s movement in the area that requires lighting. They are more efficient than timers and don’t cost that much these days.
The way most owners corps look at this is to calculate how long it would take to recoup the outlay for a new system. It might take a couple of years but I’ve heard of buildings making their money back in 18 months … after that it’s all “profit”.
Willoughby Council is holding a seminar on Thursday night (Sep 18) and you can find out more about that HERE. or you could have a look at this PDF produced by Julien Freed, the guest speaker at the Willoughby seminar
Willoughby is one of several Sydney councils that have got together to suggest reliable suppliers for solar power units and you can have a look HERE where there are links to firms that can give you expert 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.
The simple answer to the “unanticipated” special levies and loans is to knock the potential for these off the purchase price. If a building and it’s sinking fund have been neglected, pay less for the apartment when you buy.
Anyone who doesn’t do this very basic homework is a mug and probably deserves all the “unanticipated” charges that come their way. It’s not rocket surgery. Caveat emptor.
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 seems like one of those “easy way or hard way?” discussions.
The owners corp has the responsibility, without limit, to maintain and repair common property. They can hum and haw all they like but they will have to do it sooner or later and that’s the argument that you could take to the EC.
They can do this the easy way – just get estimates and get it done – or they can wait for you to get so pissed off that you take them to NCAT for a section 62 order to maintain and repair, and then they have to do it anyway, only now they have legal bills too.
But bear in mind that you want them to be fair and reasonable when it comes to all the things you want. Anything that affects common property – like bathroom and kitchen floors and some walls – is the Owners Corps territory. They could hold up your renovations for months, if not years, if you come on too strong.
Also, you don’t want them to fix the bathroom at their expense and rip it up at yours. So offer a compromise – tell them you will renovate the bathroom provided they make a contribution towards the repair of the shower seal but you will take responsibility for its maintenance.
Then tell them what you want to do in the kitchen.
Offer them solutions rather than problems and you’ll probably get exactly what you want.
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 is a very simple solution to this. Add an item to the agenda that you no longer require the attendance of the strata manager. Let everyone express their feelings and then go with the majority. But if the chairman isn’t prepared to chair, the next item after that should be vacation of the chair and election of a new chairman.
Seriously, though, a civilised, private discussion about why the SM is there and why the chairman doesn’t want to chair the meeting could get to a solution without anyone feeling ambushed or blind-sided.
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.
@Stevecro said:
Section 75A from my understanding applies to ALL strata schemes in NSW regardless of age and condition. I guess the reason for the implementation was to ensure that strata schemes start planning for the future and budgeting for any major projected capital expenses which many were not, and probably still aren’t.Stevecro is correct. For the uninitiated, here is section 75A which I reprint with no further comment other than to point out that there is no requirement to FUND the plan … just to have one.
75A Owners corporation to prepare 10-year sinking fund plans
(1) This section applies to owners corporations established on or after the commencement of this section.
(2) An owners corporation to which this section applies is to prepare a plan of anticipated major expenditure to be met from the sinking fund over the 10-year period commencing on the first annual general meeting of the owners corporation.
(3) The initial plan is to be finalised by the end of the second annual general meeting of the owners corporation.
(4) The plan is to be reviewed and (if necessary) adjusted no later than at the fifth annual general meeting of the owners corporation.
(5) An owners corporation to which this section applies is to prepare a plan as referred to in subsection (2) for each 10-year period following the period referred to in that subsection and is to finalise and review the plan in accordance with the requirements of subsections (3) and (4) at the corresponding annual general meetings in the relevant 10-year period.
(6) An owners corporation may engage expert assistance in the preparation of a plan under this section.
(7) The regulations may extend the operation of this section to all owners corporations or to such classes of owners corporations established before the commencement of this section as are specified in the regulations.
(8) A regulation referred to in subsection (7) may make necessary modifications to the application of any provision of this section to an owners corporation established before the commencement of this section.
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.
Loath as I am to challenge the mighty cetacian, I am not so sure.
The condition report is everything and the permission to hang something may only have avoided problems during the tenancy – e.g. being ordered to take down the pictures and repair and paint the wall.
A different rental agent at the same firm could come in, see the holes, check the condition report from the handover and ping you for repairs.
Honesty may be the best policy here and just let them know you are leaving the holes in place for the next tenant. Or you could take your chances and hope your bond refund doesn’t get held up by a claim for damage to the wall.
Either way, unless you have written permission to drill holes and leave them after you have gone, you may be on a sticky wicket. Whale’s advice to contact tenants NSW or just look at the excellent fact sheets on their website (www.tenants.org.au) is spot 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.
NCAT has the power to order an Owners Corp to allow work to be done. Have a look at section 140 of the Act (below). Note that it specifically mentions the previous behaviour of both parties, including taking into consideration whether or not the lot owner applied for permission.
Your best bet may be to canvass other owners before they have a meeting and let them know that, while you would rather settle this amicably and with all necessary protections for the Owners Corp in place, you plan to pursue this all the way to NCAT if need be.
Significantly, if they follow the chairman blindly, they could be up for tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees and still have to give you permission. You might also want to write to all owners and not just the EC, warning them of the unnecessary costs they might be facing.
At the same time, be as reasonable and accommodating and ‘legal’ as possible so that any objective assessment would reveal who was at fault here.
By the way, as a member of the EC, you can very simply propose a motion that the chairman be removed from office (though not from the EC) and replaced by someone else. If this guy is as autocratic as you suggest, then you won’t be the only person who is tired of his antics and all it requires is a simple vote by EC members to remove him from that role (provided you have someone else on the EC prepared to replace him).
140 Order relating to alterations and repairs to common property and other property
(1) An Adjudicator may order an owners corporation to consent to work proposed to be carried out by an owner if the Adjudicator considers that the owners corporation has unreasonably refused its consent and the work relates to any of the following:
(a) alterations to common property directly affecting the owner’s lot,
(b) carrying out repairs to common property or any other property of the owners corporation directly affecting the owner’s lot.
(2) An Adjudicator may make an order approving of alterations or repairs already made by an owner to common property or any other property of an owners corporation directly affecting the owner’s lot if the Adjudicator considers that the owners corporation unreasonably refused its consent to the alteration or repairs.
(3) An order under subsection (2) is taken to be the consent of the owners corporation to the alterations or repairs concerned and may be expressed as having effect from a day specified in the order that occurred before the order was made.
(4) An Adjudicator may specify in an order under this section whether the owners corporation or the owner of the lot concerned has the ongoing responsibility for the repair and maintenance of any additional property arising out of an alteration or repair to common property approved under the order.
(5) If an order makes provision for the owner of a lot to have the ongoing responsibility for the repair and maintenance of any such additional property, the order also has effect in relation to any subsequent owner of the lot.
(6) In deciding whether to grant an order under subsection (2) or to provide for the order to have effect from a day that occurred before the date of the order, an Adjudicator may take into account the conduct of the parties in the proceedings, for example, if an owner did not first seek the consent of the owners corporation before carrying out the alterations or repairs.
(7) An application for an order under this section may be made only by a lessor of a leasehold strata scheme or an owner.
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 answer to this is in your insurance policy, not the Act. If it’s a like for like, insurance, then you are covered. If it’s based on the valuation, then you may have to consider things like CPI but I don’t think that’s as relevant as having an effectively vacant site (in the event of a catastrophe) available to developers.
Policies differ. Our building is insured for a rebuild … but not necessarily on the current site. And bear in mind that while material and labour costs will rise, building techniques are constantly improving and you could conceivably end up with a better replacement building that cost less that the original.
But your first port of call should be the insurer who will explain exactly what you are being insured for.
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 don’t think you have much choice in the matter. The owners corp has an absolute legal responsibility to repair and maintain common property, regardless of the cost. What you should do is get competitive quotes for getting this all done in one hit then go and talk to someone like our sponsors, Lannocks, about getting a strata loan.
I know there are other ways of financing it but this is by far the least stressful, especially for people on fixed incomes.
The one thing you can’t do is nothing. Grasp the nettle and think about how much this is going to increase the values of your properties. By the way, if you were in Victoria, the people who benefitted most would pay more too.
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.