Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I would go for the mediation first, just to be on the safe side. Point out that there are other by-laws that would allow them to remove the dog if it turned out to be noisy. The EC can’t assume there will be a problem because not all breeds are the same and you’ve tried to find one that won’t be noisy. This is a clear case of the EC not reading their own by-laws and then not liking what they see when they do. But you can argue that you bought your apartment on the basis that the building allowed pets so they are the ones in breach, not you.
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.
Easty
This illustrates very neatly the difference between what we can do and what we should do.
I think your EC and insurers were generous (ok, make that community spirited) to pick up the tab for someone's misfortune.
But I'm sure the reality is they could have chased the poor sod for the full amount, regardless of whether he was insured or not (my thinking is that as soon as that pipe leaves the wall, it's the owners responsibility).
But like I said, in the cut and thrust of strata living, we should be able to do these things … just as we should allow ourselves to fix minor problems that aren't strictly speaking our responsibility but are just easier and less hassle to get on with and get done.
The one thing that irks me, though, is when professionals who should know better start quoting non-existent laws to avoid their responsibilities. Who are they actually helping when it might be better to say “Mate, do us a favour and deal with it yourself and we'll put you down for a few brownie points to your credit.”
We can but dream.
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.
Biologynerd said:
One thing though re: the executive committee – you mentioned it is just one guy's vote – but we were told that there are only 3 people on the EC (this anti-dog guy is obviously one of them), and since there are only 8 units in the block, the EC must decide unanimously to pass these requests – therefore if this one guy says no, it could be the decider. Does that sound like it could be correct?
No – that's not right at all. There has to be a majority. I wonder, also, if your application is the time to ask them what criteria they use to “reasonably” refuse permission. It could make them think twice about saying no … or it could just irritate them. Maybe you should find out who they are and have a chat first.
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 recent discussions on Health and Safety, specifically personal liability of managers and EC members if a slip or fall danger has been ignored, should focus their minds 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.
This is a perfectly reasonable way of doing things – provided everyone is kept properly informed. In an ideal world you would have a forum like this with the ability to contribute restricted to those who are on the EC but with everyone else able to read it. That would pretty much cover the statutory obligation to allow owners to attend EC meetings where they don’t have the right to speak unless invited to. But all decisions have to be minuted at some point
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.
Fine by me … but now that you’ve raised it again it’ll be in the recent forum posts column and …ooo …errr
No but seriously, this thread is now 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.
Your responsibility on this is absolutely zero … unless the light globes were of a type that a reasonable person couldn't change without professional help.
If it was so difficult, the tenant could have contacted the agent or yourself. That they chose the easiest route – and the most expensive one – was their call and not yours.
This is what Fair Trading says to Tenants about light globes:
You are responsible for doing things like replacing light bulbs, changing the smoke detector batteries, cleaning windows, dusting, removing cobwebs and routine garden maintenance such as watering, mowing and weeding.
That's my bold italics. You can check that out HERE if you need further reassurance
Basically all the standard rental agreement says on light globes is that the landlord has to make sure they are all working when the tenant moves in and the tenant has to make sure they are all working when he or she moves out.
As I said, the only difference I can see is if you needed an electrician to work out how to change the globes.
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.
Owners Corp has a duty to maintain and repair common property which means providing a safe (ie earthed) connection to your fuse boxes. After that, any wiring solely for the purposes of your apartment, is your own and it’s up to you to make sure it’s up to date.
By the way, this is subject to whatever it might say in the specific by-laws of your building.
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 the strata managers are misreading the Memorandum because what they are saying is contradictory.
It states very clearly that water pipes in the ceiling, floor or walls are the responsibility of the OC.
2.17 Plumbing (includes bathroom, kitchen and laundry). OC responsibility.
a. Blocked floor drain or sewer.
b. Burst pipe general.
c. Burst pipe outside the lot.
d. Damage to unit after water leak when OC effecting a repair.By the way, “outside the lot” also means inside the original ceiling.
2.3 Ceilings or Roof. OC responsibility.
a. Ceiling cornices.
b. False ceilings installed on the registration of the strata plan and were there to hide communal piping, ducting or wiring etc.And yet you seem to have this bizarre ruling that they aren’t liable for paintwork caused by failure of Common Property IN Common property … but they are responsible for fixing the paintwork damaged in effecting the repair. Whether that’t right or fair is irrelevant – it’s contradictory.
But is that in fact the ruling? Read the actual wording again:
2.18 Plumbing (includes bathroom, kitchen and laundry). Owners responsibility.
a. Burst pipe within the lot.
b. Cabinet and/or mirror.
c. Cracked bath or hand basin.
d. Dripping ʺSʺ bend under sink.
e. Leaking pipes under sink.
f. Plug and waste in bath, sinks and tubs.
g. Shower Screen repairs.
h. Toilet bowl or cistern.
i. Water leaking from a bath or shower and not affecting another lot.
j. Water leaking from shower, bath or hand basin taps.
k. Water leaking through tiles and not affecting another lot.
l. Damage to a lot caused by any water leak mentioned above, as a result of the problem itself.Surely the phrase “any leak mentioned above” refers to items a to k in this section … not the section above. So there is no contradiction – the strata managers are wrong and the OC is responsible of the damage to the paintwork caused by common property piping.
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.
Anajr said:
Has anyone had any experience with ISTM's (or Strata Community Australia as they are now called) “Who is responsible” document?
https://nsw.stratacommunity.org.au/resources/638/Who%20is%20Responsible.pdf
My strata managers are using it as a bible when refusing to repaint my damaged bathroom ceiling (see my earlier post for all the details) citing this section:
Just a general note here to all users – please don't start a new thread every time you come back to a topic. There are dozens of postings coming in every day and it's a lot harder for other readers to find your original posting than it is for you to do so. Most won't bother to go looking for it so you are wasting your time referring back to 'previous postings' on another thread. I put the cross-referenced link in here but, really, I have better things to do with my time. -JT
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 need to start calling for a 'poll' whenever there is any king of a vote – that means the votes are counted on the basis of unit entitlements so the people who pay the higher levies also get a higher vote.
Get to know the people in the big building who are also suffering and you could have enough votes to make a difference.
By the way, anyone can call for a poll vote at any time at a general meeting
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 idea would be to crete separate strat for the running of each building and then an over-arching strat scheme or community title for the communally shared services such as you described.Apart from it being expansive and time consuming to get ba ll the legals exactly right, you would still need to get the majority of people in all three buildings to agree … and that's exactly what you'd need to do to oust the current EC (only without all the legal hassle).
What you need is a coup and the best way to do that is to present a viable alternative Executive Committee at the next AGM (or an extraordinary general meeting if you can't wait).
Even if, as you say, tha majority of residents hate the current EC, your problem is going to be convincing proxy voters to support you – too many of them just give their votes blindly to “the chairman”. However, if you can convince investors that the value of their property is being damaged by the way the strata block is being run, they will come to you in droves.
Forget reconfiguring the strata scheme – take control first, then decide what to do.
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 ‘who’s responsible?’ document is a guideline only UNLESS it has been adopted as a rider to your by-laws (and that would require a 75 percent vote at a general meeting). It is not the law and these guys should know that. Don’t waste any more time – call 13 32 20 and download a mediation form then chase this through the CTTT. You are right, they are wrong; someone somewhere will explain to them how and why.
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.