Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@SMO said:
Can somebody explain how Section 162(3) and section 183B(1) are operated by CTTT?Hey, if you can’t be bothered to cut and paste them for everyone to read, I can’t be bothered to answer.
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, does the Strata Act allow for recalcitrant owners to be seized, shackled and dragged to the mediation? Does it state penalties for non-attendance? How about non participation – turning up but saying nothing?
I expect the new laws to say that there is a positive view of those who genuinely attempt mediation and a negative perception of those who don’t. That could change everything.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.
To avoid it looking like you are conducting a vendetta against these tenants, it would be better to get your Owner’s Corp to run the case, especially if you have the support of other owners. Otherwise, as the person most directly affected, lead the charge by all means but make sure you have statutory declarations from the other owners to back you up, The CTTT rarely declares complaints as vexatious – they are much more likely to hammer an owner or tenant who defies the spirit of orders they have issued.
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.
@ccbaxter said:
I think I just have to give it a go at the CTTT for the princely sum of $78 without OFT mediation which I think would be a waste of time and another $78.Have a look at KiwiPaul’s posting below. If you initiate an action at the CTTT and choose not to follow the prescribed procedure (mediation) you won’t get past square one. This issue may seem “cut and dried” to you and if that’s the case then the matter can be resolved at mediation with agreement on a binding resolution. But if the other party feels they have a valid case, the money you are wasting is the cost of making an application for mediation without going through the proper channels.
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.
@kiwipaul said:
Your SM is just ripping you off by getting a property manager to do his job for him (he has been able to get away with it whilst your couple did his job for him) now he wants you to fork out for a building manager who will charge for his services and then employ someone to do the work (which strata will also pay for).I totally disagree. The building manager has a specific role in his relationship with the Owners Corp and that should be defined in the Owners Corp’s contract with him or her.
Most contracts do not run to basic maintenance and those that do will often charge extra for this.
Maybe KP is talking about how it works in Queensland – that’s not always (by any means) how it works in NSW.
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.
[Edited due to subsequent information received]
Like KiwiPaul, I’m not sure what the law was when this by-law was agreed upon but I would say it would certainly be worth a phone call to an experienced strata lawyer to see if this land grab holds up.
The fact that the beneficiaries won’t pay any additional levies makes the whole thing even more suspect. You could apply for a revision of Unit Entitlements on those grounds alone.
Any individual or group of individuals can challenge the status quo at the CTTT. I would get together with like-minded people, tell the free parkers that everything is about to change, whether they like it or not, and they can sit down and negotiate a reasonable compromise now or risk losing their car parking entirely when the by-law is bounced out by the CTTT.
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 only area in which i think you are being idealistic is thinking you will get a reduction in fees from the strata manager. Their attitude will be that they now have to deal with another professional instead of a couple of volunteers – that doesn’t represent a significant reduction in their duties. If, however, the strata manager has been charging you for work done on a job-by-job basis, then you could save money buy having that covered by someone doing it on a retainer basis.
Why wouldn’t you get a strata manager to come round once a week and check the lights etc and have a mobile number that’s issued to committee members so they can contact them in an emergency.
Those people who think it should be left to the strata manager need a crash course in what an SM actually does and how much they charge for performing tasks that are not part of their core responsibilities.
If your committee is looking to continue the free ride provided by departing owners, they are going to be disappointed. You are make some smart choices – just don’t make the mistake of going for the cheapest option – it is rarely if ever the best choice.
As far as good managers go, I can’t go past Eric Francis management, but i don’t know if they would take on this kind of job. There are other good people out there but as a general rule I would avoid the big operators for small jobs.
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 write this with a heavy heart. The fact that I able to do so from a hotel room in Vientiane, Laos, is a testament to Struggler and his fellow StrataGurus who allow this website to continue seamlessly while I am off on my occasional overseas jaunts.
Struggs was one of the original StrataGurus and his solid advice has helped hundreds if not thousands of fellow strata dwellers. Two things occur, however.
I hope he keeps a watchful eye on us (even if it’s only motivated by schadenfreunde). Those years of hard-earned experience should not be lost to the next generation of strata dwellers.
And I think it’s worthwhile remembering that if we ever end up in a shitty situation with awful people who shouldn’t be living in strata in the first place, we can, like Struggs, sell up, move on, and regroup. Eventually we may be ready to try again with a better choice of neighbours and armed with all our knowledge and strata-smarts.
Go well Struggler, and may your only struggles be choosing between good and better. And I am passing on Whale’s email address, as requested.
JimmyT
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.
Has anyone read the heated discussion on this in the Herald’s Online Property pages? Issues like this really bring out the morons and strata-haters. It would be a very different story if the spa parties were happening in the garden tnext to their homes, methinks.
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.
@AH1.Cobra said:
Are my questions here out of order? Or is everyone on holidays or something?Well, it’s only three days since you posted and we have had a long weekend in NSW, so maybe … yes.
It’s very hard for us to judge at arms length whether or not your EC is dysfunctional since there are always people who are unhappy with decisions that are made (and the means by which the decisions are taken).
My definition of dysfunctional would include the following:
- The common property is not being properly maintained
- The owners are not beiing informed about what’s going on.
- The owners’ concerns are not being addressed by the EC or office bearers
- There is corrupt behaviour
- the EC is run by a combination of an autocratic chair and apathetic owners.
- Illegal activities (such as short term lets) are big permitted or even encouraged.
Incompetence is not necessarily ‘dysfunction’ as it can be easily corrected. And excessive holding of proxies is never a good thing but it doesn’t always lead to bad or corrupt decisions (it just makes them easier).
But if a minority had control of an Owners Corp and they maintained that control by virtue of deceptive behaviour and misinforming the other owners, then I would say that was dysfunctional.
The easiest way to test this is to run a case at the CTTT to have whatever you think has been done wrong changed.
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 strikes me that unless the EC of this building is prepared to take your complaint in good faith, you may be facing an uphill struggle to get anywhere with it.
Without proof that the accident happened as you described (and that’s where a picture taken with your phone would have been invaluable) it’s really down to whether or not they feel obliged to make a contribution to the repairs.
If you could find any evidence that the gate had malfunctioned with someone else under it, it would be an entirely different story.
I’m not saying you don’t have a right to feel aggrieved, just that you could be entering a world of frustration if you choose to pursue this without anything to back up your allegation.
As for the conduit in your garage, unless you can show that they have damaged your property, it’s really not worth pursuing. You could write them a letter complaining about their high-handed attitude and warning that if there comes a time when they require your cooperation, you will show them precisely the same level of consideration that they have shown you. And you could warn them that if they enter your property again without permission, whether or not it is locked or otherwise, you will pursue them by all legal means available.
But seriously, what’s to be gained by that? Just be glad you don’t actually live in this building.
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.
Owners have to “opt in” to email notices from the strata manager. But how do you think people would react if they were charged an additional service fee for snail mail distribution of minutes and levies notices? And would it be legal?
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 lot of issues here and a lot of different steps to get to a solution.
First, start with your Owners Corp Rules. What do they say about noise. In the absence of a specific rule about the ‘peaceful enjoyment of your lot’ then the standard or model rule applies (I have reproduced it below). That’s your starting point for a complaint.
You’ll find the Model Rules for Victorian strata HERE but remember, they only apply if your own scheme’s rules don’t cover the specific issues.
Under strata law in Victoria, if you make a complaint to the owners Corp or Executive committee and they decide to do nothing about it, they have to send you a letter explaining why.
There is a three-stage complaints procedure in Victoria, which is spelled out HERE. It requires using the scheme’s internal dispute resolution process (if you have one) but let’s assume for the sake of argument that the spa-loving chairman is disinclined to help, in which case you would take your complaint to Consumer Affairs Victoria using THIS FORM.
The first step with CAV is conciliation but if that fails, only the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal can issue orders telling residents to change their behaviour (at the risk of being fined). You’ll find all the information you need for pursuing this at VCAT HERE.
And there is another way. The idea that the spa party can disturb their neighbours until midnight is so old fashioned it sounds like it came from a re-run of Number 96. In fact, they are breaking the law.
Under Victoria’s Environment Protection (Residential Noise) Regulations 2008 the spa pump should not be operating after 10pm and before 7am Mondays to Fridays and before 9am on weekends and public holidays.
Also, your neighbours should not be yakking away during those hours either, as you will see from reading this webpage published by the Victoria’s Environmental Protection Authority.
It spells out that any noise that can be heard inside a habitable room may be breaking the law and, specifically, that includes “a group of people talking outdoors late at night, keeping neighbours awake …”
Have a look at EPA Victoria’s leaflet Annoyed By Noise, which explains how you can involve your local council, the Police and the courts to deal with persistent noise.
Finally, the question of how to get rid of your chairman and owners corporation is political. The most obvious way is to convince the majority of other owners to elect a different bunch of people at the next AGM. Usually, telling them that these guys are costing the building money (in legal fees, perhaps?) is a good start to a revolution. However, given that Victoria still allows proxy farming, whereby the chairman uses his or her position to hoover up enough absentee votes to retain power, that could be easier said than done.
VCAT can issue orders removing the chairman or appointing a strata managing agent to take over specific powers of the Owners Corp but I don’t know if splashing around in a spa at night is sufficient grounds for dismissal (however, blatant disregard for their duties to obey strata law and uphold the by-laws might be).
I also have to ask where your strata manager is in all this? If you don’t have one, you can apply to VCAT to have one appointed.
Finally, when it comes to finding a lawyer, our sponsors Makinson d’Apice will point you in the right direction (click on the ad above) or you could try Colin Grace at Grace Lawyers who also have an office in Melbourne.
Best of luck but start with the by-laws and work your way from there. If you don’t get an immediate response, print this out and hand it to them – apparently the Spanish Inquisition got great results just by showing their victims the implements with which they intended to torture them.
5.1 Behaviour of owners, occupiers and invitees on common property
An owner or occupier of a lot must take all reasonable steps to ensure that guests of the owner or occupier do not behave in a manner likely to unreasonably interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of any other person entitled to use the common property.
5.2 Noise and other nuisance control
(1) An owner or occupier of a lot, or a guest of an owner or occupier, must not unreasonably create any noise likely to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of any other person entitled to use the common property.
(2) Subrule (1) does not apply to the making of a noise if the owners corporation has given written permission for the noise to be made.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.