Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
.KP’s post is basically correct except for a slight misunderstanding – if you are talking about the strata manager in NSW, you aren’t referring to the on-site residential manager but an external professional who looks after the finances and legalities of the building. I can’t think of a strata manager in NSW who’d be game to live in a complex that he also manages (but we DO have residential managers in some larger blocks)
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 have three issues here – the first is social, the other two political and of course the first impacts on the others. There’s no easy way around the first issue and I think you have to be firm (but not too aggressively so) and tell your neighbour that that you appreciate her concerns but she is intruding on your life and making you unhappy.
There are too many interventions and what she says is not only factually wrong but distressing to you because she is accusing you of a serious crime – mistreatment of an animal. You don’t want to have any more discussions about the cat. End of story. If she feels you are mistreating it, then she can call the RSPCA and let them decide.
Meanwhile, her constant contact with you is not what you expected when you moved in and you would like her to back off a little. You want to be a good neighbour but, popping her head round the balcony is an intrusion on your privacy and you want it to stop immediately. You want to be a friendly neighbour but this is too much.
If you have trouble saying that to her face, go and get a nice card with a pussycat on the front and say it in writing then slip it under her door. Practice writing out what you are going to put there before you actually put pen to paper so you can get the tone exactly right.
If it continuesafter that, then you need to explain in no uncertain terms that this is your home and you are entitled (if you are) under the by-laws to “the peaceful enjoyment of your lot”. Being constantly harrassed by her is a breach of the by-laws and you will take it further if you have to.
The political question is trickier. Often this type of particularly obsessive EC chair imagines the building can’t survive without them and will periodically announce that they are going to resign at the next AGM, in the hope that everyone will fall to their knees and beg them not to do it. Old hands will do so because they know that not to can lead to all sorts of shenanigans and so the cycle continues. The chair feels needed and feels that all their behaviour has been endorsed by the committee members.
It may be worth talking to some of the other committee members before the next AGM to find out iif there’s any feeling that they would like her to quit. Be subtle and bear in mind that by both telling her to back off AND finding out if there’s any chance of a ‘palace coup’ could look like an all-out assault on her. Maybe one thing at a time is enough.
As for being on the committee is concerned, I would hang in there, make sure you are familiar with your building’s by-laws and be ready to make a move. If she ever says she doesn’t want to be chair any more – at a meeting at which an new chair can be elected – jump in. The most common reason for a control-freak chair being re-elected is that nobody wants to step up and take their place. Maybe that person is you – but you can’t do that if you aren’t on the committee.
It’s probably worth getting to know the other EC members anyway – maybe one of them is close enough to your neighbour to intercede and prevent this turning into a feud.
Best of luck with this. The worst thing that could happen is that she just won’t speak to you any more … and would that be such a bad thing? By the way, don’t worry about permission being rescinded – even if she can bully the EC into agreeing to that, they’d have to jump through an impossible set of hoops to make it happen. Don’t forget, you are probably not the first person to discover your neighbour has a few ‘roos loose in the top paddock.
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.
Actually, I was going to ask if the car spaces were common property or were a separate lot or were part of the lot that includes your unit. I know it sounds nuts but I have one space that’s part of the apartment lot and another that’s separate. Other buildings have car spaces that are common property with usage allocated to the owners. I’m pretty sure there’s a different answer to this depending on who actually owns the car spaces.
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 have to out myself here as a believer in the power of the sun and wind to do the job we blithely give to electricity hungry drying machines.
Confessions over, you could have a lot of fun with this and go totally Bush Lawyer on them. If what you say is true (and I don’t doubt it is) then someone would have to be inside the building to be able to see on to your balcony. If that’s the case, you haven’t breached the by-law which was clearly written to apply to laundry that could be seen from the street – another issue entirely.
Send it back with a note saying you have not breached the by-law because it’s impossible to see on to your balcony from outside the building and you look forward to the mediation session at Fair Trading where they show evidence that the washing was visible from anywhere but inside the building.
I shouldn’t encourage you, really, but I’m seeing a whole re-enactment of the “magic bullet” scene from JFK, with charts and powerpoints. However, I’m betting myself a dark chocolate Tim Tam that the response will be a stunned silence.
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
Your last comment made me laugh out loud (thanks – I needed it). I don’t know if Scotlandx’s comments are fair but I know they’re true (and I suspect you do too).
Getting back to the original question (AT LAST!) I do think people get used to a certain level of ‘care’ around their building and a fresh pair of eyes may think it’s inadequate and they may be right. hard not to ruffle feathers. I also think it’s a bit illogical for someone to whinge about the levies being too high and then complain that not enough work is being done around the place. And I’m guessing that’s where Scotlandx is coming from – when the someone has two complaints that are contradictory, you have to think that maybe they just like a good moan.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.
Yes, you would expect that. And as I explained in my post to which you took such great exception, you do that through normal democratic means. Dragging your EC off to the CTTT is unlikely to get you the result that you seek, for reasons Chris Mo’ane pointed out – it’s not covered by the Act.
So why waste your time (and your neighbours’) not to mention the good relations in your building by tilting at windmills. There is a better and easier way to achieve the same result and still have most of the people in your building talking to each other at the end of the day.
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.
@Unexpected Leigh said:
As one might expect, Strata Manager wins on a technicality?Chris isn’t a strata manager. Look at his website. He knows more about the nuts and bolts of strata living than you or I could ever imagine. Also, technicalities are pretty much what we’re talking about here.
Of course keeping the bin room and the walkways clean is ‘maintaining the Common Property’.
“Of course…”? By whose definition? This is in reference to Section 62 of the Act which says:
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.
Nothing about cleaning there and it does seem to imply maintenance of the physical structure of common property, rather than keeping it nice. However, a decision NOT to maintain the appearance of the building (rather than no decision to do so) could come into play. It’s debatable – certainly not “of course’.
I would like to see Chris justify his stance personally rather than you jumping in to defend a ‘sponsor’ Jimmy.
Cheap shot! Judging by previous sarcastic comments you seem to have a problem with sponsorship. Here’s the reality: no sponsors, no website. It’s as simple as that. However, we’re lucky to have people who not only want to support the website financially but to offer good, practical and reliable advice.
And if agreeing with a poster who clearly knows what they’re talking about is ‘defending’ them then dress me in green and call me Robin Hood.
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.
UL, we collectively decide the standards by which we live. Section 62 (I think) is about what needs to be done to keep a building in good repair – it’s not about lifestyle or social standards – and it’s there because most of us lack the training and experience to know what’s essential maintenance and what isn’t .
If the majority of people in a building find the level of cleanliness unacceptable, they will pressure the EC into doing something about it. If they are happy to live in a stinking tip, they will stay quiet.
Now, I admit that IS disingenuous because I’m pretty sure the majority of people living in strata either don’t know that they can change things or they don’t care. But I also know that if you tell people that a problem of which they are aware can be fixed, then they will make an informed decision to effect change. That doesn’t require trips to the CTTT – just a vote at a general meeting.
We get the strata lifestyles we deserve and, yes, the most common democratic decision is to do nothing. In extreme cases where there was a health hazard I’m sure Section 62 would apply. Otherwise, you have to let people make their own choices about their priorities. (And, by the way, I would upset and annoyed if my building was dirty and stank of garbage.)
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, your EC has obviously decided they want all correspondence to be filtered through the Strata Manager (see reference in Fred’s letter to the EC minutes) and, as Struggler pointed out, that way there is a paper trail of some sort if people deny ever having heard there was a problem.
We’ve also heard that some ECs prefer not to publicise their email addresses or phone numbers, while others do.
If you think your EC needs to be more directly accessible, then it’s something you need to bring up at your next AGM and, if you feel strongly enough, you could run a ‘ticket’ of more communicative candidates.
If you’re worried about the Strata Manager filtering out valid issues, that’s another thing you can raise at your AGM or by presenting a motion for consideration by the EC that the Strata manager has to at least provide the Secretary with a list of communications received and that list has to be noted at each EC meeting.
The EC can decide the way they want to run things and if you think differently, you can propose a motion at the next AGM insisting that they change their methods. I’m guessing here, but I would think you’d get mass resignations.
The one obvious problem in having the Strata Manager as the communications gatekeeper is where the complaints and questions are about the SM. It’s a bit like writing to a company’s website to complain about how the website is run – who gets to read the complaint first?
But there are plenty of other ways around that, including a direct appeal to the other owners who are, after all, the bosses of both the EC and the Strata Manager.
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.
@bexbella said:
I’m wondering what the repercussions could be if i took a dog into an apartment which i own without permission?
I’ve just realised I haven’t actually answered this question. What could the repercussions be if they have a by-law banning dogs? At worst, you would be issued with a notice to comply telling you to remove the dog. Failure to do so could lead to fines that would probably start off at about $200 but could progressively reach $5500 for non-compliance.
If the building has the standard by-law that says they may not unreasonably refuse permission for a pet, you still need to check if they have ever actually allowed pets before.
If they don’t have an anti-pet by-law but have never allowed pets, you could be facing months of going back and forth to the CTTT to prove that their refusal is unreasonable. This is good for neither your stress levels nor your relations with your neighbours.
You can find out from the strata manager, the Executive Committee secretary or by reading the minutes of EC meetings whether or not pets have been allowed.
If they have, to make your life easier when you do apply for permission, you should try to get references from your current neighbours and your rental agents to show your dog is unlikely to be a problem.
By the way, some buildings don’t have specific anti-pet by-laws but rigorously enforce their noise and nuisance by-laws because they have the same effect and don’t have the pitfall of giving permission then trying to take it away.
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.
@Urban Spaceman said:
Where’s the name calling? What exactly should be censored, pray tell? I am allowed to say it sounds like CBR would be an undesirable neighbour, surely.You were and you did and now you’ve done it again. My post was an attempt to head off this kind of BS before it became standard practice … looks like I failed.
[Urban Spaceman has since resigned from the website in protest at my heavy-handed censorship, lack of moral fibre and general incompetence. As Bonzo Dog fans from way back, we’ll miss his excellent name. Let’s cheer ourselves up with a song.]
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 am really, really reluctant to censor or edit anyone’s opinions (apart from a few boring, boring, boring pedantic nitpickers who are thankfully no longer with us). But I’m even more averse to this turning into one of those websites where people point fingers and hurl abuse at each other from behind the Sofa of Anonymity.
So let’s just assume that everybody has a valid point and move on.
I remember renting in an apartment block where every Friday night a woman entertained her friends on her balcony until the wee small hours. The woman had the most irritating and piercing laugh on the planet but I felt I couldn’t complain as I was trying to make a living as a comedy writer at the time and I thought it would be tempting fate if I asked even one person to stop laughing.
I also recall the night at 1 am when the guy downstairs decided to play guitar and sing his repertoire of Neil Young songs. “I am entitled to enjoy my balcony as and when I like,” he shouted back (erroneously) when my wife called down and asked him to give us a break. “And I’m entitled to come down there and shove your twelve-string up your Jacksie,” I responded. Silence. Then “sorry …” in a very small voice. All he could hear was the six-foot-six Scottish voice. Just as well he couldn’t see the five-foot-five body from which it emanated.
But seriously, are there people who are just too sensitive to noise? Are you entitled to sit on your balcony and talk through the night, however hushed your tones are? And is there a compromise?
I find earplugs effective against most noise, apart from the deep throb of bass from someone who has decided to turn their flat into an extension of the club from which they and their friends have just been evicted.
Back to this thread, I just ask everyone to play nice, forget for a moment about by-laws and rules, and consider what you do when a light sleeper and a night owl live in too-close proximityIf 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.
@Ray2U said:
As a pragmatic way forward (rather than using confrontational and threatening gestures) I would suggest putting an item on the next general meeting agenda. Something like: That the Owners Corporation only ever use licensed tradespeople to carry out repairs or work on common property. Then let the subject be debated in a forum where all owners can participate and democratically decide on what suits your scheme.Ray, I truly admire your pragmatic and inclusive approach but I think there isn’t much to debate here. The EC shouldn’t be letting unlicensed builders anywhere near common property or even individual lots where the work affects common property.
However, to pick up the thread of your intent, if the discussion was draw a line between, say, handyman style maintenance and full-blown building work, that might be worthwhile. But where that line might be drawn would be such a subjective thing I’d be tempted to stick with no unlicensed tradies ever.
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.
Off the top of my head, I would say that if the concrete slab is common property, anything attached to it is CP too. I would be taking this one to the CTTT – it would be worth spending $78 to establish whether or not this is right and maybe save yourself a whole heap more.
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.
@apples45 said:The EC wants to communicate with tenants and tell them of “duties” that they should be participating in – like rubbish removal etc.
I don’t agree with EC members/strata manager communicating with tenants. It should be left to the strata manager/EC to communicate with the real estate agents/owners. The EC and strata manager are not managing the tenants. It is the owners responsibility to inform them of by-laws and duties.
Tenants are subject to the same by-laws and properly constituted rules as any other resident. The Executive Committee and/or strata manager, as representatives of all the owners, are perfectly entitled to inform them when they have breached them.
If it’s just a building’s unwritten rules, like taking turns to put out the garbage, and they aren’t covered by their lease or in by-laws, then they are entitled to ignore the requests. But if there is a problem, do you really want their rental agent and landlord to get phone calls and letters from the Executive Committee and Strata Managers telling them that they are bad neighbours?
Trust me, even if the landlord starts off sympathetic to the tenants, in a city where rental occupancy is below 0.5 percent, the easiest way to make the phone calls and letters stop is to ask the tenants to leave.
If they feel they are being unfairly treated r harrassed by their neighbours, the tenants can certainly ask the landlord to tell the EC members to back off. And the tenants can get good advice on their rights (and responsibilities) at the Tenants Union website.
But it’s standard practice in most buildings for the Executive Committee or strata manager to tell tenants directly if there’s a problem. They will then take it up with the landlords if their complaints are ignored.
When they get a Notice To Comply, a warning which can lead to a fine if they don’t pay heed, it comes from the Executive Committee or Strata Manager, not the landlord.
Ignore one of those and the next communication they might get from their landlord may be the one informing them that they have breached the terms of their lease by breaking by-laws, and telling them that they have to leave.
There’s a fine line between informing tenants of their responsibilities and harrassing them or bullying them. But surely a gentle reminder from someone in the building is better than a letter of complaint to the landlord or agent. I’d personally prefer a quick chat with a neighbour to a letter of complaint being sent to my landlord.
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.