Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
PeterC said:
Just being pedantic, sorry. I think you will find none of the proprietors are 'disinterested', just that many are uninterested. The distinction is useful but we are losing it
Oh, Pete … next thing you'll be telling us the “begs the question” doesn't mean 'demands the inquiry'.
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:
Suggestions on how to conduct a coup at May's AGM or sooner would be welcome.
The only way to organise an effective coup is to get the proxies. The only way to get the proxies is to convince the absentee owners that there is a problem that is affecting the value of their properties. That is a much more effective argument than silly old ideas like right and wrong and fairness.
So do some groundwork and find local sales that make recent sales in your building look bad. Get strata managers, lawyers and real estate agents to confirm that increasingly, badly and irrationally run buildings are losing value because people are looking very closely at the minutes of buildings before they buy because they don't want to be trapped in a dysfunctional building (and you can quote ME on that).
Then put all that in a brief and succinct letter to each owner, complete with a proxy form and a stamped addressed envelope, telling them that the value of their property is being harmed by bad management at an EC level.
Send them out in time for owners to respond but not for the incumbents to get their act together. If possible, phone some of the people and have a chat. Suggest they come to the AGM to see for themselves and if not, plead with them not to send a 'blind' proxy to the chair. They might think they're voting for stability – in fact they're voting for dysfunction.
Despite that DON'T get into personalities (as far as possible).
DON'T make it look like a grab for power – offer three or four alternative names for people to send their proxies to (and give them good reasons why they should choose the people you suggest).
Don't make any more fuss about anything before the AGM so the incumbents don't know what's afoot.
And, finally, 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.
OK but what would their powers and duties be? We're not even allowed to clamp or tow cars.
Fortunately I have a cunning plan. If there was a specialist strata security firm – kind of like strata private eyes who, with the permission of the Owners Corp (of course) set up video cameras and recording equipment and were expert in getting the right statutory declarations from neighbours, wouldn't that be something?
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.
Just adding to Whale's comment, according to the relevant Tenants NSW fact sheet, clearly states that tenants should not stop paying rent and I guess that applies to just moving out too. However, it says landlords may have to lower rents if services are reduced.
Applying for a rent reduction
The CTTT may make an order that the rent is or was excessive due to a reduction or withdrawal by the landlord of any goods, services or facilities provided with the premises.
If the CTTT finds the rent excessive due to the reduced facilities, it will make an excessive rent order. It will specify the maximum amount of the rent and the day from which it applies – for a period of up to of 12 months.
In the case of a strata building, if you can't persuade the OC to compensate you, you may as well encourage the tenant to take it to the CTTT and then apply for relief from the OC and its insurers, using those figures as the basis for the claim. I don't know how much joy you will get there as everyone else is suffering too (and you will likewise benefit when the lifts are repaired).
Anyone else have any experience of this kind of problem?
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.
OK, enough with the sniping, both of you! You’ve had a pop at each other and it’s over. Take it outside.
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.
Given that you can’t pass a by-law that contradicts or supersedes state law, and state law says that a poll must be taken if called for, the answer would be no.
If there is a fear that the superior owner might use their voting power to force decisions on the other owner, solution may be to create a by-law that says any decisions on expenditure over a certain limit, or significant changes to common property, have to have a unanimous vote (having first made sure one owner doesn’t have more than 75 percent of the UEs).
The other owner needs both votes to get this through but you can assume their desire to make the UEs more fair may not be entirely philanthropic.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.
According to the Act:
initial period, in relation to an owners corporation, means the period commencing on the day on which that owners corporation is constituted and ending on the day on which there are owners of lots the subject of the strata scheme concerned (other than the original owner) the sum of whose unit entitlements is at least one-third of the aggregate unit entitlement.
In other words, the initial period ends when one-third of units have been sold (give or take a few big or little ones to make up the one-third of Unit Entitlements). The developer then has two weeks in which to call the first AGM.
Importantly, at that point the voting power of the developer is reduced to one-third of their holding until such times as they have sold more than half their units. Also, the developers are restricted in contracts that they can sign in this initial period as they all have to be approved (or not) by the owners at the first AGM.
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.
Boronia said:
If it is a condition of the lease, wouldn't the owner have final say even if the OC and By-laws allow pets.
Absolutely. The landlord can say no even if the by-laws says yes. But they can't say yes if the by-laws say no.
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.
Mikey_z4 said:
Hi Jimmy T, If the Body Corporate applies to the CTTT to apply for a fine, will I have an opportunity to engage with the CTTT to show that I have asked for written permission to park on common property, or offered to purchase or rent the common property? Also, is the fine to be levied on a per day / per month / or per year basis? Thanks again for your advice and Regards.
You will be able to plead your case to the CTTT. Fines are levied per breach or continued breach; if the CTTT fines you and you go back and do the same thing again the penalties go up each time
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 makes a good point – how can they say the cat is a problem when they didn't even know it was there for four years.
On the other hand, you have probably broken the terms of your lease agreement and that's where you might have the greatest difficulty. But you should be able to spin this out until you move out later this 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.
Fiveaces said:
Where can I get a copy of all the bylaws for a Strata Plan? I am currently a tenant and while I have been given some bylaws, I unfortunately don't feel it's the complete set of special bylaws that have been passed.
According to the Tenants NSW Fact sheet No2, Starting a Tenancy, “the landlord/agent must give you a copy of the NSW Fair Trading New tenant checklist. If you are renting in a strata scheme, they must give you a copy of the by-laws within 7 days.”
I assume there is a government department where I can obtain a copy.
Lands and Property Information (formerly the Department of Lands) is where to go as that's where by-laws are registered (see this link) but I'm not sure if tenants can ask for a copy of a strata schemes by-laws. Call them on 1300 052 637 and ask.
But really, your landlord and agent are legally obliged to provide up-to-date by-laws so they should be your first call, to make sure the by-laws are current.
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.
Mikey_z4 said:
I have (yes I know, opportunistically) parked three cars in a two car spot in my building. As a result two of my cars encroach onto common property [and] I have been served a notice to comply by the Body Corporate stating that I can be fined up to $550. Is this correct?
If you don't comply with the notice, the Owners Corp can take you to the CTTT and ask them to issue a fine of up to $550 for non-compliance. To be honest, even though the OC seems to be 100 percent right in this matter, there is absolutely no certainty that the CTTT 'chocolate wheel' will support them. It's a lottery.
Also, the Managing Agent has signed the notice on behalf of the Body Corporate and affixed a seal but there are no other signatures. Is this notice valid? Or do I need to see signatures from two executive committee members?
If the strata manager has the powers to issue NTCs delegated to them (as most have) then this notice will be valid without requiring a vote by the EC or signatures of office-bearers.
I will write to the Body Corporate seeking written approval to continue parking my cars in the above fashion. If they refuse, are they obliged to give me a reason?
No.
I also wish to add that the common property I am encroaching upon is part of a space measuring approximately 13M by 13M – more than sufficient for any vehicle to turn around in with my cars parked as they are.
Regardless of whether this is a major inconvenience to other drivers or not, readers of this website who have suffered the steady creep of “rogue parking” will be on the EC's side. It only takes a blind eye to be turned on one small breach before chaos ensues.
Surely rather than trying to find a way round the by-laws you might think about buying or renting the common property space from the OC, then everybody will be happy.
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.
OK, boys – enough {taps top pocket to threaten yellow cards all round}
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 reference is to Work Health Safety legislation. have a look at the Teys Lawyers website – Teys.com.au – they have details
Jimmy
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 really think you have been badly advised on this (in the past, not on this forum).
Your building has clearly been run on the basis of a nod and wink and now they are exploiting your sense of right and wrong to bring their by-laws up to date. All the law requires you to do is to give the EC 14 days notice that you plan to change something in your lot. This is not requesting permission – it is telling them what you plan to do.
In the absence of specific by-laws relating to ceilings etc, that's all you need.
Your concerns for what happens if everything goes pear-shaped should be covered by getting a reputable installer to do the work and provide a warranty for it.
The difference between extractor fans and your ceiling fans is that the extractor fans should be repaired or replaced at their (the OCs) cost as they are clearly installed as part of common property.
As for the other unofficially installed fans in other units, if they were there when the current owners of the lot bought them, then they will have effectively become common property even though there was no by-law allowing their installation. So those owners wouldn't have to pay if the fell out of the ceiling (although the original owners – if they still own the units – would).
In other words, if you hadn't removed your fan, it would be common property.
This is one of these situations where I would be tempted to just go ahead and cover my backside by using competent installers (which is all a by-law could compel you to do anyway). A by-law isn't going to protect you if common property gets damaged – it protects the OC against shoddy work now and in the future.
There is a clear inequity in them forcing you to carry the burden of updating their by-laws. It's time to put a stop to it. Send them a letter telling them that you plan to install a fan and that you accept responsibility for any damage it causes to common property. If they want a by-law, they can formulate it and pay for 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.