[Jimmy-T]

OK, so who is the strata manager to whopm you referrred as giving you exemplary service?

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.

[Jimmy-T]

It reads to me that a strata manager who stuffed up with a building previously has now joined the company that came in a cleared up the mess.

If that’s the case, all you can do is arrange a meeting with one of the principals of the new firm and tell them that you are uneasy about this arrangement and why.  You could certainly ask them to make sure that strata manager never has anything to do with your building and they will probably get the hint that you aren’t impressed with the calibre of their employees.

But it’s not a conflict of interest unless someone has competing responsibilities and fulfilling one would mean defaulting on the other.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

@OverIt said:
Everyone is protected under the Privacy Act, sensitive information includes your name, if you are concerned there has been a reputation damage I would be lodging a complaint https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/making-a-privacy-complaint

I beg to differ.  There is no constitutional right to privacy under Australian law although there are specific legal restraints on, for instance, recording people’s conversations without their knowledge or passing on their email addresses to others.

The Privacy act alluded to basically only applies to government handling of your information plus organisations that have agreed to a set of privacy protocols.  This is what the website you have quoted says:

The Privacy Act does not regulate the way that personal information is handled by individuals and some small businesses. Additionally, different privacy regimes exist in some states and territories, which regulate the way state and territory government agencies handle information.

And this is what the NSW Information and Privacy Commission website says:

The Government Information (Public Access) Act 2009 (GIPA Act) applies to NSW government agencies. It does not directly apply to organisations in the private sector…

ALSO

Private sector organisations are not covered by the NSW Privacy and Personal Information Protection Act 1998 (PPIP Act),…

ScotlandX is absolutely right.  By writing to the strata manager you are effectively writing to the Owners Corporation and its members – ie, all owners – are entitled to know what you are saying.  It’s like writing to your bank manager and thinking they won’t pass it on to head office.

That’s not to say the Strata Manager couldn’t have handled this better but when it comes down to it, they have a duty to report to the EC any correspondence to them regarding the strata scheme.

As I said, there are certain areas that are covered by specific legislation – like health records, tax files and email addresses – but general correspondence is not.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

EDITOR’S NOTE:  I was so confused by the punctuation in the original of this posting that I stopped reading it.  Then it occurred to me that others might have done the same – hence the lack of any replies – so I have gone back in and edited it.  The problem, if you are interested was cause by putting a full stop after numbers, meaning the software started another sentence.  Here is how I think the posting was intended to read.

@OverIt said:
So now you are all aware I am having some building maintenance issue with let’s say invest 1.

Invest 1 & invest 2 were under the same SM lets say SM 1. Invest 2 is now under SM 2 and what a excellent SM. never seen a SM work this way before, no nonsense and for the first time in over several years invest 2 owners are working together and getting on.

Invest 2 when managed by SM 1 was under compulsory strata management,  whilst under compulsory strata management SM 1 undertook illegal building works and the property ended up subjected to council orders and fines.

 

SM 1 did not take any liability and the Owners ended up resolving the issue, paying the fine and negotiating with the council. We would have liked to claim back from SM 1, however no Strata Lawyer would represent us at the time. Common comment from lawyers was “will not seek indemnity from a strata management company as we have a reputation to up hold”.

 

Now SM 1 is employed by the same strata manager person as invest 1. Isn’t this a conflict of interest? Any suggestions on what I should be doing?

 

This situation has no concern to the EC under invest 1, it’s a personal issue so I have not raised it with them but should I? 

 

 

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.

[Jimmy-T]

poppy said 

It appears to me that airbnb is giving the FAIRFAX owned stayz.com some competition as that site is not mentioned in any commentary on this topic and it is a major contributor to this rental problem

It is not up to the people who run Airbnb or, indeed, Stayz, to police short-term rentals in strata buildings.  The powers exist to fix this problem if the Owners Corporations (or even individual owners) have the desire to do so.

 

And I resent the implication that I am involved in a plot to bag Airbnb because it affects part of Fairfax. That is contemptible. 

 

My partner uses Airbnb all the time and swears by it when, for instance, she has to do research trips to Melbourne.  She has already made a very good friend there just by spending a few nights in this person’s house.

 

I recently planned a trip overseas and intended to rent an apartment using Airbnb.

 

The problem isn’t Airbnb or, indeed Stayz; it’s the selfish bastards who think they are entitled to rent out their apartments as short-term lets with no regard for their buildings’ by-laws, council zoning or their neighbours’ quality of life.  

 

However, Airbnb is a little different from Stayz and other rental sites because of the social networking element that might lead people to believe everything is above board when, in fact, their landlords may be flouting the laws.  

 

If you read enough of the comments on the website, you will eventually come across phrases like “the landlord asked us not to tell the neighbours we were renting …”

 

Even so, blaming Airbnb and Stayz for short-term lets is like blaming car salesmen for drunk driving.  

 

The point of my article was that Airbnb has opened up another avenue for short-term letting strata parasites.  That’s enough of a problem without introducing irrelevant (and, frankly, insulting) conspiracy theories into the picture.

 

 

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.

[Jimmy-T]

I agree with Scotty. The recent Thoo case established in the Appeals Court that the Owners Corp only has to repair and replace to the same standard – but surely that implies repairs have to be to at least the same standard.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

@dougdeap said:
Council were aghast that we would ask. Could we find out in a strata search or from the strata managers?

When you say ‘council’ – did you mean your local council.  Or are you in one of the states where the executive committee is called the strata council?

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.

[Jimmy-T]

In NSW any owner is entitled to view the strata roll at the Strata Manager’s office, although there is a charge for doing so. First identify any spaces that are unused, then find out their lot numbers and then you will find the name and address of the owners on the strata roll.

However, bear in mind that while owners may not use their parking spaces themselves, they are aware of their value should they ever sell which tends to be more than the actual value of the car space. 

And alternative may be to rent the space for an extended period.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

If you are in NSW, a quorum is one quarter of owners entitled to vote, ttending in person or by proxy. But it’s not a simple as a head (and proxy) count.  All the proxies have to be on the prescribed form and all the people voting have to be up[ to date with their levies.

Even then, it’s not as simple as that because you can count unit entitlements instead of simple votes.  and een if that doesn’t get you over the line, all you have to do is hold the AGM again exactly seven days later and whoever turns up for the rerun forms the quorum.

This is what the Act says:

  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.

THEN

(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.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

If this were my building, I’d ask the EC to send a notice to the people who allow the door to slam to comply with whatever bylaw that exists that says you may not use common property (the door) in such a way that it interferes with the peaceful enjoyment of other residents. 

Or there’s section 117(c) of the Act:

An owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession (whether in person or not), lessee or occupier of a lot must not  use or enjoy the common property in such a manner or for such a purpose as to interfere unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of any other lot by the occupier of the lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the lot.

As for the protest slammer, he or she should be sent a letter telling them that the original miscreants have received a Notice To Comply and that they should cease and desist immediately so that there can be no doubt who is doing the door slamming.  They should be warned that if they don’t stop the deliberate slamming, they too will get a NTC and face possible fines, since their front door is also common property.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

I am shutting this discussion down for the simple reason that the facts have been established and continuing debate about who’s right and who’s wrong helps no one and simply adds to confusion.

So here are the facts as supported by Section 65 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 1996 (quoted at length in my posting below).

In NSW, the Owners Corporation of a strata scheme can seek orders at the CTTT demanding access to an owner’s lot for the purposes of maintaining or repairing common property, or even just to investigate whether this work is required.

Owners can be fined for obstructing the Owners Corp (or its agents) in pursuit of these repairs.  If there is any continuing doubt over this, consider the fact that, under the same section, any damage caused by the OC in gaining access is the liability of the owner if they have illegally obstructed or hindered access.

That’s the law.  The actual process of enforcing that law is a lot less direct and requires mediation, adjudication, possible appeals and fines for non compliance.  Where the situation gets serious for the obstructing owner is when a CTTT order is issued and they ignore it.  That’s when potential fines go from $220 to a maximum of $5,500.

That said, sensible owners, executive committees and strata managers would negotiate access in a way that was mutually acceptable. That’s what should be happening in this case.

However, I would make this point – any owner who ends up being taken to Fair Trading and the CTTT to have access ordered is going to get a lot more sympathetic hearing if they show willing to compromise than if they turn up claiming the law is wrong and they are right.

That’s just my opinion, of course, but with that I declare this issue closed.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

@leif said:
Two things

First

AS long as the site mixes professional comments with public comments unless you know treat them all as public comments.

Not sure what you mean by that.  We take opinions based on the law, common practice and readers experience.  You said “don’t trust anyone” – why even bother with a website like this if none of us are to be trusted?

Second
The NSW law is clear you cannot enter a private property without permission, the strata act intention is equally clear you can only enter to maintain common property that is accessible from inside the lot.

Well, if nothing else, this proves that some opinions can’t be trusted since this one is utterly wrong.  This is what the strata Act actually says: 

65 Can an owners corporation enter property in order to carry out work?

(1) An owners corporation may, by its agents, employees or contractors, enter on any part of the parcel for the purpose of carrying out the following work:
(a) work required to be carried out by the owners corporation in accordance with this Act,
(b) work required to be carried out by the owners corporation by a notice served on it by a public authority,
(c) work required to be carried out by the owners corporation by an order under this Act.
(2) An owners corporation may, by its agents, employees or contractors, enter on any part of the parcel for the purpose of determining whether any work is required to be carried out by the owners corporation in accordance with this Act.
(3) In an emergency, the owners corporation may enter any part of the parcel for those purposes at any time.
(4) In a case that is not an emergency, the owners corporation, may enter any part of the parcel for those purposes with the consent of any occupier of that part of the parcel or, if the occupier does not consent, in accordance with an order of an Adjudicator under section 145.
(5) A person must not obstruct or hinder an owners corporation in the exercise of its functions under this section.
Maximum penalty: 2 penalty units.

(6) An owners corporation is liable for any damage to a lot or any of its contents caused by or arising out of the carrying out of any work, or the exercise of a power of entry, referred to in this section unless the damage arose because the owners corporation was obstructed or hindered.

You only quoted the opening line presenting that as proof of your argument

65 Can an owners corporation enter property in order to carry out work?

But, as you can see above, the Act quite clearly does not say any of the things you extrapolated from that one line.

As the work is not carried out or need access from inside the lot no entry is allowed.

This is clearly not true

Or in plain English he is not entering to carry out work in the lot or from inside the lot

This is irrelevant – it’s not even mentioned in the Act.

The fact that the easiest access to the location is through the lot is irrelevant especially as there are other options.

And that, as Whale has pointed out, is something to be discussed at or before a mediation.

You cannot disparage the entire output of this website because someone disagrees with you.  Contributors may not get it right first time but there are plenty of people here who will put them on the right track.  In that process we not only find out hat’s right but why they got it wrong – and that’s an important step that other advice websites often miss out.  The law, accepted practice and actual experience come together her to provide answers that can be depended on- and that’s something you can trust.

 

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.

[Jimmy-T]

@leif said:
… no one can force you to let them have an easier access by going through your lot.

That’s not true (see Whale’s posting below). If the circumstances demand it, the CTTT certainly can issue an order forcing owners to allow access to common property through a lot in order to effect repairs.

We all on this site have opinions do not trust anyone seek qualified advice if you do not want them walking through your lot.

Some of us have more informed opinions than others. You have absolutely no grounds for saying readers shouldn’t trust the opinions on this site. Some of our contributors are lawyers, strata managers and other professionals. I have been writing about strata for nine years so I have picked up the odd bit of info here and there too.

We would recommend seeking legal advice when appropriate, but hardly ever as a first resort. 

Whale’s advice is spot on, Ongoingissue should negotiate the kind of access he’d prefer and if the EC get shirty, point out that it will probably cost them more to get an order at the CTTT than to hire a scissor lift (and even then there’s a very good chance that the CTTT will say that’s a reasonable demand).

 

 

 

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.

[Jimmy-T]

@shelley said:
The parking spaces were originally designated visitor spaces however that was changed at the AGM.

And there’s your problem.  As Whale explained, if those spaces were designated for visitors under your Development Approval, then your building is in breach of its DA.  A call to your local council planning department could fix this immediately. Your Owners Corp can’t pass by-laws that contravene superior laws (like planning regulations). Once the spaces are re-designated visitors parking, then you can move people on.

By the way, your Owners Corp can still define what a visitor is, in terms of the length of time they are allowed to park there.  But they can’t just open them up to general use for 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.

[Jimmy-T]

@GraemeLG said:
Three pair of aluminium sliding doors to balcony are also very old and increasingly difficult to move – the accompanying fly wire screen doors are currently held together with rivets.

The irony here is that there’s a very good chance that those doors are common property and the owner could have them fixed at the Owners Corp’s expense.

Your problem is that if you insist on the repairs, the owner might want to put the rent up.  But you are paying top dollar anyway so they should be glad that you want to stick around.

Talk to them and try to reach an amicable solution.

 

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.

[Author]

Replies