[Jimmy-T]

If I can jump in here, there are a lot of very informal arrangements going around whereby the Admin fund borrows from the Sinking fund and then pays the money back withing the deadline, only to “borrow” it again.

This can continue ad infinitum until
a) a new EC is elected and goes WTF?
b) an owner wants the books in order before they sell
c) the sinking fund is needed and the biscuit tin is empty.

This is obviously not a good situation but there are those (like Lannocks, sponsors of this website) who think the correct mix is a minimal sinking fun for emergencies and either strata loans or special levies for work as and when its needed.

I think the question of where money from special levies gets paid is moot. If the admin fund has a debt owed to the sinking fund then you pay your special levy or strata loan into the admin fund and transfer it to the sinking fund.  It’s not rocket surgery.

And as for the legality of all this – the StrataKops (Forensic Accounting Division) is currently overworked analysing the links between developers and the NSW Labor Party.  As my friends in the criminal fraternity love to say, it’s only a crime if you get caught. 

 

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]

@KayJ said:
Who writes this cr..
Do some research!
‘Partygate” is no more, the bad operator who allowed the parties in Melbourne has closed down.

If you think short-term lets are warts on the face of residential apartment living and it’s time the government and local councils got together with the CTTT and burned them off, you should find another profession.

If there was no problem do you think the City Of Melbourne would be spending tens maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars to eradicate it?

I live in Australia a democracy not some dictatorship that forces developers to build specific buildings for the fly-by-night tenants or did you mean people who prefer to stay in an apartment rather than a hotel, because they have a choice.

Maybe you should do some basic research – like looking up the word “democracy”, for a start. Your idea of a democracy is where the vast majority of owners in an apartment block don’t want short-term lets but they can’t stop them because a few greedy bastards have found a loophole in the law that allows them to exploit their neighbours while destroying their peace and quiet.  

Then you have the temerity to squeal when the loophole is closed, allowing the majority to prevail.  

What kind of democracy is it when the vast majority of residents have to put up with all the crap from “the few” short-term tenants?

And if there is such a huge demand for short-term rentals why wouldn’t you build special blocks for them?

But that would defeat the point, wouldn’t it?  You like well-maintained buildings where the excessive wear and tear of your high-rent tenants is shared by all the people who have to pay for the privilege of having them running riot in their homes.

Wrap yourself in your Aussie flag if you like, it still doesn’t give you the right to  destroy other people’s homes in the name of making a quick buck. That’s not democracy – it’s stratafascism.

 

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]

A couple of points:

Noise is noise and it doesn’t really matter what they say they’ve done and what thickness of which brand of insulation they have installed.

The BCA references to floor insulation in apartments are contingent on so many other issues that they are virtually meaningless and will have little bearing on a CTTT decision – the ONLY factor is if there is a noise problem that breaches by-laws (unless there’s a by-law that forbids hard floors and that’s a whole other issue).

The gold standard for under timber insulation is 11mm Regupol – and even then it isn’t always enough.

There is no mediation required for a Notice To Comply – they either fix it or they go to a tribunal where a fine (maximum $550) is imposed.

However, the Owners Corp may decided to go for an order at the CTTT which does require mediation but the fines for breaching that are up to $5500.

You’ll find the options and links to various information pages and forms HERE. 

Meanwhile, gather as much evidence as you can about the levels and type of noise – recordings on your smartphone are acceptable evidence, as are stat decs from friends and neighbours – and be glad that your EC are running with this.  So many drop the ball and say it’s a dispute between neighbours.

 

 

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]

As you will discover elsewhere on this site (and just in last week’sFlat Chat column, HERE) – we support pets in apartments generally and the concept of assistance animals too – including those that provide therapeutic emotional support.

This story is highlighting the very loose interpretation of the definition of an assistance dog and how that could be abused in the same way people managed to get disability stickers and used them to give themselves free parking, thereby undermining the whole system to the detriment of people with genuine disabilities. 

The guidelines need to be clearer so that people with genuine issues that are alleviated by companion animals can keep them, even in otherwise ‘pet-free’ buildings.  Right now, the system is open to abuse and that is likely to harm genuine sufferers in the long run.

I wonder, however, what will happen when a bona fide assistance animal puts its owner in breach of other by-laws relating to noise and 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.

[Jimmy-T]

Saying there are no other animals in the building is not a reason – it’s a simple statement of fact.

If the owners in this building felt strongly that they didn’t want pets in the building they could and should have passed a by-law to that effect.  Any reasonable person viewing their by-laws before purchase would assume that pets were allowed, not that they weren’t.

You need to write to your EC and say that they are in breach of their own by-law by unreasonably refusing permission and therefore their decision is invalid.

Tell them that you are prepared to make sure the cat is not a nuisance to other owners and does not damage or stray on to common property.  However, failure to provide you with written permission will force you to take them to the CTTT to get an order compelling them to abide by their own by-laws which say they must not unreasonably refuse permission.

I would do this promptly before you discover there is a rush to change the by-laws.

You’ll find the process of getting an order at the CTTT explained HERE . Don’t worry that this is about taking complaints about by-law breaches .. the process and, indeed, the forms are the same.  Just scroll down to the section about CTTT orders.

The first part of the process is that you will have to go to mediation and it really should be resolved at that stage.

Your biggest problem is that the by-laws also say that you can’t bring a pet into the building without written permission – but if you have the cat already, I would just wing it and hope for the best.  One breach of by-law doesn’t cancel out another but you are the one who’s being denied your rights.  

If the EC can’t be bothered to read their own by-laws and understand the implications of them, it’s hardly your 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.

[Jimmy-T]

Here’s a video of Fair Trading Minister Anthony Roberts answering the original question raised by MP for Sydney Alex Greenwich.  Warning: this video contains parliamentary shenanigans, blatant politicking and a prop. Click 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.

[Jimmy-T]

Just a thought – is this one of those dual window systems wher there is an outer and inner window (usually to cut down noise)? If that’s the case, this would make sense – otherwise I’m stumped.

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 that ICW has the right to the same access as any other resident, owner or tenant.  If there is a code, she should have it.  If there are spare remote controls and other households have them, then she should have access to them too.  If they have to pay a deposit, then so should she. The EC or strata manager can’t assume that she wants access to the garage for anything other than entirely legitimate purposes. There can’t be one rule for owners and another for tenants – that’s not how strata works.

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]

As PeterC said, it depends a lot on the facilities that a building has plus the number of units that share them.  For instance, apartment blocks converted from hotels often have fewer units per lift that purpose built flats – and sharing the considerable expense of additional lift maintenance will push levies up.

But judging by a discussion we had on this website a while ago, in apartment blocks with facilities, annual levies should range between 0.7 and 1.2 percent of the value of the apartment. Townhouses and apartments with no shared facilities  would be about 0.4 to 0.6 percent.  That’s not to say that these are hard and fast rules but if your levies are a lot higher or a lot lower than this, you should ask why that is – too low can be just as bad as too high because it often means that not enough is being spent on the building so the value of your property is being damaged in the long term.

Peter is right that you can’t really fix the levies to the values of the property but if your levies are in the middle of the very broad ranges quoted – and remember it’s referring to annual levies – the figures should not be a cause for alarm in themselves.

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]

Sorry, I’ve drawn a blank too. Anyone else? You could always write to the secretary of the Owners Corp – if you can find their address.

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]

Just in case anyone is interested, this story appeared on the Herald’s online pages yesterday and immediately went nuts. It was read by 123,500 people there and more than 6000 readers were then inspired to look here – a record for a single day for us – and more than 10,000 pages were downloaded.  We also have a new record for the number of people accessing the website at any one time.

If nothing else, it proves (as if we needed proof)  that parking is a ‘hot button’ issue in strata and so is the idea of fair play when it comes to using our shared resources.  At the time of writing, the comments are still going strong on the SMH website HERE. Chip in and have your say there 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.

[Jimmy-T]

This sounds very much like a common property problem and the Owners Corporation has to fix it – even if the ‘damage’ is only aesthetic.

Why not get a quote for what you actually want done – redirecting the pipes or capturing the water – and aks them which solution they prefer.

If they don’t respond or come up with any BS about it being non-structural or non-functional, direct them to section 62 of the strata Act:

62   What are the duties of an owners corporation to maintain and repair property?

(1)  An owners corporation must properly maintain and keep in a state of good and serviceable repair the common property and any personal property vested in the owners corporation.

(2)  An owners corporation must renew or replace any fixtures or fittings comprised in the common property and any personal property vested in the owners corporation.

(3)  This clause does not apply to a particular item of property if the owners corporation determines by special resolution that:

(a)  it is inappropriate to maintain, renew, replace or repair the property, and

(b)  its decision will not affect the safety of any building, structure or common property in the strata scheme or detract from the appearance of any property in the strata scheme.

If that doesn’t get their attention, take them to the Fair Trading and the CTTT where they will, at the very least, have to get involved in mediation. You’ll find the forms and links on how to pursue a CTTT order 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.

[Jimmy-T]

@scotlandx said:
If someone else also nominates, then strictly speaking it should go to a vote of the OC.  There have been discussions about this before, this is very unwieldy, and personally I think a vote of the EC should suffice.

I agree – if someone feels they have been unfairly excluded because they have more support in the general population of the strata scheme than they do on the EC (it’s called the ‘Rudd-Gillard” effect), then they will have enough support to call a general meeting to rectify the matter.

 

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]

Who says you can’t have an even number of members?  It’s not a good idea but it’s not illegal in NSW. Where are you writing from?

Regarding the now vacant seat, all you have to do is to co-opt a new member at your next EC meeting and I would think the person who stood down to allow the numbers to be odd would be a candidate.

The procedure for the election of and EC at a general meeting in NSW is that you must vote to decide howe many seats you want on the EC, then you call for nominations, then you have a vote if the number of candidates exceeds  the number of seats.

You shouldn’t have been in the position of taking nominations before you decided on the number of seats.

At the risk of insulting yu and your colleagues on the EC. the SCA (strata managers) run an excellent online EC members training course which all of you would do well to undertake.  You’ll find it 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.

[Jimmy-T]

I agree with pretty much everything Whale and KP wrote except for this:

The EC have to apply the rules fairly to everyone they cannot apply them selectively, so if other have been allowed to you have the same rights. 

ECs change and they often get turfed out because they have made bad decisions and allowed things that shouldn’t have been permitted. You can’t use previous bad decisions to apply to your case just becasue it’s not fair.

I would say precedent might apply if you felt you had been the victim of a bad decision and the EC had interpreted its by-laws and strata laws properly on a previous occasion.

But you can’t use a precedent of a previous wrong decision to allow you to make the same mistake. That won’t fly at the CTTT. There are no “rights” conveyed by precedent in strata.

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