Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Looking at the “who’s responsible … ” document, it says that the Owners Corp is responsible for repainting when the damage is caused by their repairs to common property but not if the damage is caused by the failure of common property in the first place UNLESS the common property failed due to Owners Corp negligence.
OK, define negligence. Failure to properly maintain common property when they know it’s in bad condition would be a definite runner but what about failure to carry out proper checks frequently enough?
As with so many things in strata – it’s more a question of whether it’s worth going through the grief of challenging your Owners Corp or EC rather than what’s legally or morally right or wrong.
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:
However, it is not a good practice, and I don’t think the CTTT would be happy if the resolutions were more substantive ones, such as a resolution to carry out major building works, a resolution to engage a lawyer and commence legal proceedings, or a resolution to make a special by-law.
I agree – if you have big decisions on the agenda, make sure everybody knows their vote is important. I must say I like aspects of the Victorian system where decisions made at a non-quorate meeting are provisional and owners have 28 days to object before they become effective. However, I wonder if that will make owners even less likely to attend.
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:
Going back to the original query, the manager has got it completely wrong. There was no quorum, so unless enough people attend in person at the adjourned meeting there will again be no quorum and no meeting, which is what JGOWI said at the outset.
Hate to do this but I don’t think that’s what the Act says. According to my reading of the relevant clauses, if there is no quorum the meeting is adjourned for seven days. When the meeting is resumed seven days later, whoever is present and entitled to vote constitutes a quorum. This is what the Act says:
12Quorum
(1) A motion submitted at a general meeting of an owners corporation must not be considered, and an election must not be held, unless there is a quorum present to consider and vote on the motion or on the election.
(2) There is a quorum for considering and voting on such a motion or at such an election only if:
(a) at least one-quarter of the number of persons entitled to vote on the motion or at the election is present, either personally or by duly appointed proxy, or
(b) at least one-quarter of the aggregate unit entitlement of the strata scheme is represented by the persons who are present and entitled to vote on the motion or at the election, either personally or by duly appointed proxy.
(4) If a quorum, as provided by subclause (2), is not present within the next half-hour after the relevant motion or business arises for consideration at the meeting, the meeting stands adjourned for at least 7 days.
(5) If a quorum, as provided by subclause (2), is not present within the next half-hour after the time fixed for the adjourned meeting, the persons present personally or by duly appointed proxy and entitled to vote constitute a quorum for considering that motion or business.
On the matter of the proxies given after the meeting has been adjourned not being valid, I think we have to look at the pragmatics of the situation. In other words, has anyone ever heard of a decision being overturned because the meeting was adjourned and the people present offered poxies. I ask this because CTTT Adjudicators have a lot of leeway to reject applications to overturn decisions that aren’t unfair or unjust.
Remember, there are no StrataCops running around issuing infingement tickets. Decisions have to be challenged and technicalities don’t hold as much sway in the CTTT as they do in courts of law. Here’s what the Act says:
163 Dismissal of application on certain grounds
(2) If the ground for an application for an order under this Part is:
(a) the absence of a quorum at a meeting, or
(b) a defect, irregularity or deficiency of notice or time,
an Adjudicator may, by order, dismiss the application if the Adjudicator believes that no substantial injustice has resulted.
Sounds to me like any challenge to an AGM decision based on the fact that proxies were presented after the initial meeting was adjourned, even though technically invalid, wouldn’t hold much water at 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.
@kiwipaul said:
The Strata insurance covers the rebuilding cost of the whole lot common and lot property and so just because the insurance accepts reasponsibility dosn’t mean that it’s Strata reasponsibility to cover the excess.
OK, the second part of that statement isn’t entirely correct, as we have established previously elsewhere in this forum. Strata insurance is there to cover repairs to common property, not just the rebuilding cost.
Secondly, if the Owners Corp wasn’t liable for the repair, why did the strata manager put in a claim? And why did the insurer cover it (notwithstanding Whale’s comment below)?
The question of how the damage occurred is kind of irrelevant, if neither the insurer nor the strata manager is prepared to question it. If the strata manager believed Lefty wasn’t entitled to the money, they shouldn’t have made the claim in the first place.
The Owners Corporation negotiates an excess on its insurance claims so that it can save on premiums – that means it accepts that it will have to pay a fixed amount of any claims that are made.
If the refusal to pay the excess is merely a way of sidestepping their responsibilities, then they need to be pulled into line. You can’t be half-pregnant (except, it seems, in Queensland).
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.
In very simple logical terms, if the OC’s insurance covers most of the claim then the OC is responsible for the excess.
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 agree with DaveB (mostly) According to Strata Community Australia’s “Who’s responsible for what …” document, tiles fixed to common walls or walls adjoining common property are the OC’s responsibility. I too think a splashback should be treated as if it were tiles.
However, when you refer to “our strata insurnace” do you mean your own home contents insurance or the Owners Corporation insurance?
Also, FYI, the Who’s responsible memo is not law and it may not even be part of your by-laws but it is referred to by strata managers, Fair Trading mediators and CTTT adjudicators when considering cases.
Summing up, if the splashback is on an internal wall, it’s your problem. If it’s fixed to an external wall or a wall adjoining another unit, you have case to say it’s the OC’s pigeon.
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 Owners Corp needs to get a legal agreement in place asap that the owner who benefitted from these changes accepts responsibility for the ongoing maintenance of the windows and the structure surrounding them.
If they have changed common property without the written agreement of the Owners Corp then the windows are illegal and they could be asked to reinstate them – that’s the lever you use to get them to agree to take full responsibility for their 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.
I think it’s worth pointing out that local council noise restrictions – which apply to all homes, whatever their type – come on top of, or as well as, your strata by-laws.
So, for instance, you might have a mad-keen DIY home renovator hammering and drilling within the council’s permitted hours but they could be (and probably are) breaching your strata by-laws. The council noise laws don’t permit them to make a noise that breaches by-laws.
DIY home renovation in strata is one of those areas of great contention because it cuts across the clash of the home owners somewhat bogus ‘right’ to do as they please with their property and the genuine and legally enforceable right of everyone around them to have reasonable peace and quiet in their homes.
If your neighbour turns his flat into a building site at the same time as you are relaxing in the evening or at weekends, you can put a stop to it by asking your EC and/or strata manager to get involved..
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 agree. Just because a group of people has the power to push through a bad proposal it doesn’t mean all the proposals they push through are all bad.
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 agree. Just because a group of people has the power to push through a bad proposal it doesn’t mean all the proposals they push through are all bad.
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 thing about apathy is that … well, nobody cares.
But seriously, this is a special resolution and if you can’t muster 25% of ‘no’ votes from the generally disgruntled, parsimonious, bilious and disaffected in your scheme, maybe the majority of people who do care think it’s a good idea.
But direct contact, flyers, posters on the noticeboard and letters to owners can work wonders – and make sure to include proxy forms. Any new proxies you get will supersede any existing proxies the EC has from those owners.
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.
An apology is the very least you are entitled to. I am sure there are ambulance-chasing lawyers out there who would love to give your EC members a run around the paddock in an attempt to get damages out of them too. It’s not a course of action I would recommend and I would point out that there is no obvious remedy under strata law (it would be a civil matter).
There’s also the fact that you could at any point have taken your Owners Corp to the CTTT to force them to fix the ceiling. That option was always open to you although I accept that it may not have been obvious to you that it was.
I think if i were in your shoes I would send them a polite letter asking for a public apology, their resignations, the dismissal of the strata manager (who is either incompetent or dishonest) and a payment of several thousand dollars to the charity of my choice.
I feel better already for just having written that.
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 know i said i was shutting this down but a friendly strata manager has just informed me about a case decided recently where access was ordered and the obstructing owners was fined the maximum $5,500 for not complying with the order.
In very basic terms, water was flooding from one unit into the unit below. The owner of the upstairs unit refused the Owners Corps fixers access to the unit so the strata manager and OC went to the CTTT and asked for an interim order – a kind of emergency measure – allowing them access, plus a longer-standing order for the same.
The obstructing owner still refused so they went back to the CTTT and got a penalty notice served.
There are two interesting aspects to this. Firstly, the penalty was ordered to be paid to the owners Corp, not the CTTT. Secondly, the case was conducted at minimal cost by the strata manager and the owners corp without a lawyer.
I think this should finally put to bed any nonsense about Owners Corps not being able to demand access to private property in order to fix common property.
You can read the Interim Order HERE and the penalty notice HERE.
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.