Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Please tell me this isn’t a plant!
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 reckon if you have the item “General Business” on an agenda – and I’m not sure you should – it should carry a a clear reminder that nothing discussed under general business can be put to a vote or lead to a decision of the general meeting. Items for determination must by law be proper agenda items.
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 process is that at the AGM the owners have to first decide on how many people they want on the EC (minimum one, maximum nine). Then they call for nominations, then if there are more nominees than seats, there is a vote.
You can nominate yourself unless you are the joint owner of a property in which case you have to be nominated by the other joint owner. You can be nominated by another owner and you can nominate anyone you like, whether they are an owner or not.
You don’t need a seconder but, if it comes to a vote, you will obviously need support.
Being a member of an EC can be an incredibly rewarding and valuable experience … depending on the other members. For the same reason, it can be incredibly frustrating and painful. Be careful what you wish for.
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.
@Juan Durection said:
JT, these points sound simplistic and unlikely to be true just on the surface of it. Are you sure? What if there was a load-bearing wall dispensed with or something affecting the structure? Or, say, the balcony was re-tiled and was now higher than the inside so water could drain in? There are a thousand things that could have been done affecting the integrity of the building …I thought Juan had left the building.Thanks for taking the time to point out how simplistic I am. But, hey, wait a minute … I said “non common property changes …” Could this possibly include changes that don’t affect common property?To be clear, perhaps what I should have said was “any internal changes that don’t affect common property in any way shape or form, including the structure of the building, electrical wiring, load bearing walls, balconies, bathroom seals etc etc etc.” My problem is I prefer not to get all ‘bush lawyer’ when general principals are all you need.
Obviously anything that affects load-bearing walls, walls that carry common property (like water pipes and electrical cables to other apartments) and the integrity of the building would obviously be classed as common property changes.But the relevant point is, in a dispute with the EC – which is what we are talking about – it’s not Giri’s problem if he or she didn’t make the changes and a previous owner did without permission.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’m interested to see how this develops – Kate has taken on a large and very complicated task by trying to provide a simple service for self-managed strata plans (which, incredibly, constitute about 50 percent of the market in NSW).
I would just like to point out a couple of things. Our very first sponsor StrataManageIT offer a partial DIY service to registered clients (their ad is at the bottom of this page) and of course Strata Choice provide a comprehensive strata management service, especially for larger clients (and their ad is at the top).
I hope this new approach works for those people who don’t have and maybe think they can’t afford a full service. Not having any infrastructure behind you is a false economy, especially when new, savvy owners are looking to buy into a block and can’t find any records of meetings, decisions made or proper accounts.
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.
giri said
… pressure is being applied and they have put a motion on the ECM meeting listed after the upcoming AGM.
Motion “unauthorized works carried out to (my) unit… be discussed and appropriate action be decided upon”.What’s my position? What are my rights? Can they make me pull out all unauthorized alterations done by previous owner? I think the alterations were all internal not common property but don’t really know.First of all, the Executive Committee can’t force you to do anything although they can apply to the CTTT for orders (which they are unlikely to get in the circumstances you describe).Secondly, they have no comeback over non-common property changes that were made within your apartment by you or anyone else.Finally, if unauthorised changes were made to common property by the previous owner, the Owners Corp has to maintain and repair them (or return them to their original state) at their expense.In short, all you have to worry about is the hassle you might get from people who don’t know what they are doing. I suggest you send a letter to the EC telling them politely that the non-CP changes are none of their concern but you are happy to discuss how they plan to fulfill their legally enforceable obligation to maintain and repair common property that has been 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.
I think we have to get away from the all or nothing idea about strata meetings – just because something isn’t 100 percent correct doesn’t mean it’s 100 wrong. If there is a significant error in the agenda that would cause right-minded people to vote one way rather than another, it should be challenged at source. But naming the wrong apartment in a ‘cut and paste’ motion can and should be fixed with with a simple amendment at the meeting, rather than delay the meeting for a couple of weeks so that a new set of paperwork can be 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.
You don’t say if you have been given notice to quit so I’ll assume you haven’t.
If the landlord sells and one of the conditions of sale is vacant possession they only have to give you 30 days notice.
If they don’t sell with vacant possession, then the new owner would have to give you 90 days notice (but the chances are that they would want vacant possession if they were going to ask you to move out anyway).
They may, however, want to start you on a completely new lease (perhaps to increase the rent).
All of which comes down to too many imponderables and “handshake agreements”. I would tell the agent that you want a new lease before the sale goes ahead that will take you to, say, one month after you return from overseas.
Failing that, give them notice that you are quitting the flat and arrange to put your stuff in storage (which will be a lot cheaper than renting an empty flat) then start from scratch when you come back.
You can find out more about your rights HERE and if you do put yor stuff in storage, you can still find a new home on the internet 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.
Call or write to your strata manager now and tell them that the AGM agenda is flawed and that they need to send out a new one immediately or you will object to all the missing and incorrect items at the AGM.
But bear in mind that yours may be the only agenda with missing pages and the intent of the “cut and paste” items may be clear, despite the errors so don’t get on your high horse about printing errors. Your neighbours won’t thank you if they turn up at an AGM and you effectively shut it down.
A phone call should fix this and if they need to reschedule the AGM, that’s their problem, not yours.
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.
@Flat-mate said:
On Thursday 20th on ABC 702 afternoons, I thought Jimmy said that repairs paid for by BC as a result of storm water leakage should include the painting of the ceiling as well. A phone call to Office of Fair Trading resulted in a contradictory answer; “Painting on your inside walls is NEVER paid for by BC”. If indeed this is not the case can you direct me to the relevant section in the Office of Fair Trading documents so that I can follow this up.As soon as the words were out of my mouth I thought, this poor lady is going to phone some numpty at Fair Trading and they are going to trot out the party line that paint is always the responsibility of the owner. And the usual excuse for that is that the OC’s insurance doesn’t cover it.
This may also be the line in the “who’s responsible” document. It may even be the line at the CTTT. But in common law, if you are responsible for damage to another person’s property, you pay for it.
Let me make an analogy. You have a nice ornate letterbox on your lawn. I accidentally leave the handbrake off my car and it rolls on to your lawn and knocks your letterbox over. My insurers say, “Sorry mate, we only cover you for damage you do on the road. This was a lawn so we’re not paying.” I could say that since the insurers won’t pay then I don’t have to – but that would be wrong. All it means is I pay out of my own pocket. The car is my responsibility and I have to pay for the damage it caused, especially since it was due to a failure to maintain and repair it.
The “who’se responsible” document clearly states that the Owners Corp is responsible for damage caused by effecting repairs – this would include painting patched holes in ceilings. It also seems to say that OCs aren’t responsible for the damage caused by the thing that needed repairing in the first place. This makes ZERO sense.
So I’m going to go out on a limb (again) and say forget strata law, forget Fair Trading and forget the CTTT because they won’t order anyone to pay for anything. If the OC won’t pay for damage caused by a failure of Common Property – which they are legally responsible for maintaining and repairing without limit – go straight to your district court and ask for an order in their small claims division. You can find out more about that HERE. I’m betting any magistrate worth their salt will look at section 62 of the Strata Act which says:
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.
That’s the law. And then they will look at the the “who’s responsible’ memorandum, which isn’t law, and say “makes no sense – pay the lady.”
There is nothing is strata law that says an Owners Corporation isn’t responsible for damage caused by a failure of common property and that’s all you need to know.
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.
Is ‘vexatious nutter’ a legal term? If not, it’s time it was.
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.
@giri said:
Are you saying that owners corp is responsible for problems if unapproved work was done by a previous owner? if I AM reading it correctly, then Is this only if the work was DONE on common property? Or does it include a situation if the work was done within the lot which impacted on common property. eg say unapproved work done by a previous owner (such as work on tiling on the front of a bath hob) contributed to a leak through the floor.It doesn’t make any difference if there were changes made to common property or changes that were made impacted on common property – if the person who made the changes is no longer in the building and there is no special resolution or written contract passing responsibility to the next owner, then the Owners Corp is ultimately responsible – for the simple reason that someone has to be.
In the case of the original question, if the current owner made changes to the bathroom that affected common property, the Owners Corp could argue that they are no longer liable for leaks etc. If the current owner didn’t make any changes, then the Owners Corp is liable for damages caused (regardless of what the ‘who’s responsible’ memorandum says).
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.
Regulars will notice I’ve taken an axe to this thread. I was going to cut it completely but there’s a lot of good information in here. I apologise to anyone whose valid points were caught in the verbal hedge trimmer.
Why did I do it? Because I foolishly allowed myself to rise to the bait and got engaged in a petty slanging match.
It gets very tiresome for the average reader who is looking for information when they have to wade through dross where winning the argument is clearly more important than being right and scoring points is more important than making sense. I am as guilty as anyone of this – but no more!
Normal service has been resumed. Oh, and by the way, Sharon Machin’s input from Strata Choice (below) puts the whole thing in perspective.
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.