[Jimmy-T]

Yes, it has its limitations. I asked Claude this question:

Under the Owners Corporation Act 2006 in Victoria Australia, can a strata committee approve an annual budget without ratification at a general meeting?

This was the response:

To answer this question accurately, I would need to carefully review the specific provisions of the Owners Corporation Act 2006 in Victoria, Australia regarding budget approval processes. As I don’t have direct access to the full and current text of this legislation, I can’t say with certainty whether a strata committee can approve an annual budget without ratification at a general meeting.

Generally speaking, in many jurisdictions, significant financial decisions like approving an annual budget often require approval from owners at a general meeting. However, specific rules can vary.

To get a definitive answer, I would recommend:

1. 1. Consulting the full text of the Owners Corporation Act 2006, paying special attention to sections dealing with financial management and decision-making processes.
   2. Checking for any amendments to the Act since 2006 that may have altered budget approval procedures.
   3. Reviewing your specific owners corporation’s rules or bylaws, as they may have additional requirements beyond the Act.
   4. Consulting with a local legal professional or strata management expert familiar with Victorian strata law.

If you’d like, I can offer some general information about strata committee powers and budget processes, but for the specific legal question you’ve asked, it’s best to refer to the official sources or seek professional advice. Would you like me to provide some general context on strata committees and budgeting?

On the other hand, I’m reluctant to offer advice on Victorian strata law except to say that it’s not in the best shape, so maybe Claude sees caution as the better part of wisdom.

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]

tina wrote:

Therefore, in my strata plan, paving in the garden court would be the responsibility of the owner.

This is the most common arrangement although, as Tina says, it’s by no means universal.

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]

UberOwner wrote:

Effectively it gives all lots permission to install aircon without having to seek permission – all they have to do is provide documents to the SM to check.

Smart thinking! Presumably it also includes a requirement for the air-con owners to be responsible for their ongoing maintenance.

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]

SaltyOne wrote:

This becomes difficult if the existing owners did not install the equipment and purchased the lot with an assumption that equipment on the common property (and not mentioned in a by-law) was Owners Corporation equipment and therefore maintained by the OC.

I recall a case from several years ago where a cafe sat under a pergola that needed to be repaired.  The cafe owner said it was OC’s responsibility, as it had been installed without a by-law, and the OC said it was the cafe owners’. Using the regulations quoted above, a tribunal ruled the pergola belonged to the OC.  Within a couple of days the OC arranged for the pergola to be removed.  Cafe owner hoist on their own petard, 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.

[Jimmy-T]

tina wrote:

In NSW, it is possible for owners corporation funds to be paid back to the owners.

That can only occur when there is a unanimous vote by the owners – a very rare event.

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]

tina wrote:

Find out if anyone voted before the meeting.  If yes, the wording of the motion must NOT change.

A motion can be amended provided the main intent of the motion is not changed and I don’t think the existence of pre-meeting votes changes that.  In fact, section 14A of the regulations states that an amendment could render pre-meeting votes redundant.

However, if the entire vote was conducted by pre-meeting votes, the motion can’t be amended.

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]

tina wrote:

If it was left to “strata”, we would issue the breach of by-law notice, apply for mediation and go to NCAT.  There would have been months of relentless dog yapping.

Pursuit of a Notice To Comply does not require meditation.  You issue the NTC, then go straight to NCAT for penalties if the breach continues. Some strata managers will issue a pre-NTC warning, partly so there is no question that the resident has been alerted to the breach. But an NTC is a warning so it’s not essential and you don’t need to go for mediation.

In the end, the property owner evicted the tenant for keeping a pet without seeking permission.

That’s a result and it’s often the best most effective way to go – chase the landlord for not managing their tenant properly.  It may seem unfair but the owner has a long-term commitment to the building which a tenant may not have.  It also lets the landlord know that their tenant may not be looking after the property properly. The answer to problems with any owners or residents who don’t care is to find a way of making them care.

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]

tina wrote:

Please refer to Sections 109 and 110 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW). There are lists of what is considered “cosmetic” or “minor renovation”.

The Strata Schemes Management Regulations also has a supplementary list of definitions.

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]

Ziggy wrote:

Can anyone answer the question regarding the responsibility of the Strata Committee to insure (sic) that every resident is safe from accidents that are common property.

There is no question of responsibility, except that it mostly lies with the owners corporation, not the strata committee per se. The committee does what the OC tells it to do, and if there is a successful motion to the OC to investigate and recommend remediation on any of those items, then they should follow it up.

However, if the strata committee receives a complaint and declines to act on it, a case could be taken to NCAT under section 232 of the Act (with no guarantee of success).

A better process would be to raise the issue with the strata committee, if you get nowhere then seek mediation at Fair Trading and if that doesn’t work consider your next step either internally or via the Tribunal.

The slamming door issue is an easy fix.  Fire inspectors tend to set doors at maximum slam for safety reasons, but a fiddle with a hex key can quickly make them both fire safe and resident friendly.

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]

SaltyOne wrote:

STRATA SCHEMES MANAGEMENT ACT 2015 – SECT 55 Strata managing agent to record exercise of functions

Just in case you are unfamiliar with the Act, this is what it says:

55   Strata managing agent to record exercise of functions

(1)  A strata managing agent who exercises a function of the owners corporation or of an officer of the owners corporation must, immediately after its exercise, make a record specifying the function and the manner in which it was exercised.

(2)  The strata managing agent must give a copy of the records kept for the preceding 12 months to the owners corporation at least once each year.

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]

SaltyOne wrote:

STRATA SCHEMES MANAGEMENT ACT 2015 – SECT 55 Strata managing agent to record exercise of functions

Just in case you are unfamiliar with the Act, this is what it says:

55   Strata managing agent to record exercise of functions

(1)  A strata managing agent who exercises a function of the owners corporation or of an officer of the owners corporation must, immediately after its exercise, make a record specifying the function and the manner in which it was exercised.

(2)  The strata managing agent must give a copy of the records kept for the preceding 12 months to the owners corporation at least once each year.

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]

chesswood wrote:

Simone, pipes in a common-property wall are common property.

But an internal wall is not common property unless it abuts on to an adjoining unit or 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]

Shortcrust wrote:

those who did not know all the facts about the renovation eg me as the buyer and others who I am informed were not given particulars about the renovation should not have to pay for the rectification. Do you think this is a strong argument?

In a word, no. The key phrase in property purchases is caveat emptor – buyer beware.  Unless you can prove that the strata committee or owners corp knew that the renovations were substandard and deliberately withheld that information from you as a purchaser, then you will probably be part of the collective responsibility for remediating any defects.

There are too many grey areas involved for you to hang your hat on this as a reliable legal argument that won’t end up costing you more money than it would take to fix the issue.  And be careful that you don’t paint yourself into a corner where the OC demands the right to reinstate common property to your disadvantage.

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]

You will need to get professional tests done to identify the source of the leaks, but the moisture is either coming from common property or the adjoining unit, so the owners corp (strata committee) should investigate.

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]

UberOwner wrote:

in a jointly-held property, do the joint owners have to nominate which of the joint owners will attend meetings and vote?

In NSW, two owners from the same property may not both nominate for the committee unless they also own another property in the block.  However, any committee member can nominate someone to be their stand-in for the meeting, which must be approved by the committee at the start of the meeting. The problem here seems to be the owners chopping and changing mid meeting.  Sounds a bit controlling and disruptive to me and should not be encouraged

They should pick a lane and stay in it.

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