Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
PK said:
My thoughts in passing …….. – it would seem to me that, in principle, the owner can do it as long as he doesn’t affect the common property.
What about affecting other owners? The Act is sufficiently vague on this to make it a potentially serious issue for the renovator.
117 Owners, occupiers and other persons not to create nuisance
(1) An owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession (whether in person or not), lessee or occupier of a lot must not:
(a) use or enjoy the lot, or permit the lot to be used or enjoyed, in such a manner or for such a purpose as to cause a nuisance or hazard to the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not) …
Also, there may be clearer restrictions in the specific by-laws of this building. And – to get back to PK's original point – I can't see how common property wouldn't be affected in some way (and there's a section on that in the Act too).
PK also said …
…why do you think that it makes a difference if his room is a kitchen and not the original bedroom? (and if he is moving his kitchen to a location that is ‘surrounded’ by existing bedrooms of other units, then conversely is he moving HIS bedroom to a location that will be ‘surrounded’ by the kitchens of those other units?)
Firstly, the kitchen floor will almost certainly be tiled – and hard floors never achieve the acoustic insulation of carpet over quality underlay so if the slab isn’t great and they skimp on insulation, there could be problems.
Secondly, it’s the renovator’s choice to sleep under or near someone’s kitchen. His neighbours might prefer not to be woken every morning by the sound of them clattering around upstairs making their breakfast. This also applies to the proper sound insulation of water pipes – a frequently forgotten area of noise irritation.
If it’s a quality build, then there should be no problem but the EC should be able to check that it will be done properly beforehand, rather than find once it’s in, they are faced with the mutual misery of forcing the owner to rip it out and start again.
My first call would be to the local council asking them if they have any feelings on the matter. There is a debate on this elsewhere on the Forum but I know some councils would be saying they wanted a look at the plans, regardless of what the EC felt.
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.
holofernes said:
In any case I think the issue is fraught with difficulty as I see even posts from supposedly strata experts which seem to forget the common law issues when considering strata issues.
I think he means me … but then it should have been “who” not “which” so I win.
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 hear you, Struggler. One of the great ironies of this kind of voluntary work is that the people who would never do anything unless there was something in it for themselves assume you’re only doing it for some benefit. And sooner or later the good people get sick of the abuse when anything goes wrong and the complete lack of recognition when it all goes right and, like you, they hang up their email address and call it quits.
The day of the professional committee member – somewhere between a strata manager and building manager – is not far off. Trouble is, could we afford to pay them enough?
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.
Thanks Austman
For NSW, go HERE to find similar material.
To answer Deliria1's questions (as best I can) there are three levels of notification and permission you have to consider.
For minor alterations – painting the inside and maybe even changing internal doors (as long as you don't affect the integrity of common property structures) – you can pretty much go ahead. Strict interpretation of some by-laws would mean you couldn't even nail a picture hook to a common property (external or adjoining) but nobody really pays any heed to that and some strata plans have used a permission provision to remove walls entirely.
The second level is where you are doing major work that doesn't affect common property in any significant way (like installing a new kitchen, for instance). The law requires you to give two weeks notice to your executive committee. A good EC or building manager will come back to you and negotiate work times etc in exchange for cincessions like allowing your tradesmen to use visitors parking exclusively, for instance.
Finally there are works that involve significant changes to common property (like tiling your balcony, for instance) which will require a special resolution at a General Meeting allowing you to do the work in exchange for taking ongoing responsibility for its repairs and maintenance.
Confused? Welcome to strata. But don't worry, it's mostly all common sense.
On question 1, I'd say as long as it's non-common property doors, you are OK to go ahead. But remember balcony doors are probably common property.
2. Tricky. This is one where you have to weigh the risk of doing the right thing – telling the EC you are doing it – with the very real possibility they might try to stop you if they have had previous problems with timber floors. However, if you can show your floor will be better insulated than the existing one, you should be OK. Check your by-laws and talk to your strata manager, building manager or nearest EC member. Or get creative and call it a repair job
But don't whatever you do skimp on the insulation, regardless of what's currently there. Badly insulated timber floors mean a world of pain for your neighbours and ultimately, you.
3. Yes you can but you have to tell the EC you are doing it. Note, this is not seeking approval, just letting them know. However, there may be issues with common property so be open about this. Everybody wants to renovate sooner or later so nobody's going to block you on principle (and if they do there are ways round that).
4. If the terrace is common property (check your floor plan) you may need permission to cover the tiles. Whether or not that requires a special resolution is another matter. Also check for any by-laws that require your terrace to be visually in keeping with the rest of the block.
5. Strictly speaking you will need EC approval at the very least, and possibly a special resolution. Or you could test how low the low-visibility really is. Put it in and see if anyone notices. Personally, Id go the former route, if only to maintain good relations for all the other stuff you want to do.
6. Yes, you can hang wallpaper on internal walls.
7. Yes, provided the installation doesn't seriously affect the integrity of common propery (such a cutting a lighting track flush into a ceiling).
8. Cupboards yes (with the previous provisos), but careful with the TV. If it has powerful inbuilt speakers, it could end up using an adjoining wall as a sound board and your neighbour will have something to say. But a TV mounted on the wall with free standing speakers will not be a problem in itself.
There are variations on all this and I'm sure other Flatchatters will pitch in where I'm off the mark but this is a reasonable starting point for 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.
These things move in cycles, Drew. In a few years there could be a glut of rental properties and then it'll be the landlords doing the eyelash fluttering
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 sensible approach would be to call your council and ask them. But a lot of people won't do that because they fear interference, red tape and delays. Other people don't do it because they don't care … and that's when the trouble really starts.
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.
Drew said:
That advice is largely incorrect Jimmy.
You can undertake that work as complying development except if it is a heritage item.This just in – council forces owner to remove additional internal walls 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.
Come on, Drew. Maybe you’ve just been lucky in both your landlords and tenants. It's just not that easy out there … course, the rest of us don't have your inimitable charm.
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've decided long ago that what makes me unique in Strata is that I'm the only person who's ever wrong. But which part of what I said is “largely incorrect”?
That it varies from place to place? There are differences between states but the NSW councils have to abide by the state law on this. That said, I've looked at the websites of several councils in NSW and they all have slightly different forms for you to fill in so, unfortunately, there's no one-size-fits-all answer to this.
As far as what City of Sydney said about needing approval before you can alter the internal floor plan, I was just passing on what they told me.
However, Drew hjas raidsed an interesting point and the “complying development” situation is interesting (even though I could only find the briefest mention of strata in the Act). Have a look for yourselves HERE. Once again, it seems we are an afterthought – even bed and breakfast establishments get their own section.
Then there is this intriguing exclusion from complying development.
4.4 Development standardsThe standards specified for that development are that the development:
(b) must not result in a change to the floor area of the dwelling house
Does that mean a change to the size of the floor area or its configuration? I don't know (although it sounds like the former).
Drew, you may well be correct and clearly there are even substantial changes to the internals of a unit that need not affect anyone else.
However, knocking down supporting walls would obviously not be “complying” and what about, for instance, moving a bathroom so that it's over a bedroom?
Also, for any substantial change that doesn't require a DA, it seems you do need a Complying Development Certificate – you can't just decide you don't need a DA and go ahead.
Maybe that's when the alarm bells start ringing and someone tells you you might need a proper approval.
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.
Here's a long-running saga story with a happy ending. Furryball contacted us last week with this message.
Thanks JimmyT. We have actually found a place now! When we went to our viewing we had a good long chat with the current renters and asked for some hints and tips for our covering letter, something the owners would want to hear. They suggested a whole load of stuff specific to their property and it worked! I got along really well with the agent as well who I had a few chats with prior to the viewing – so we're all good now. Feel free to update on your site …
I'm not saying “told you so” to everyone who poo-pooed the idea of making an extra effort … well, OK, I am. It's an isolated case, I know, but it worked for Furryball. People like people who try just a little bit harder, whether it's looking for work or somewhere to live.
However, I have to hastily admit that talking to the existing tenants wasn't my idea … but it's a good one.
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 first question will lie in the company “articles” or papers that establish the rules and regs of your building.
The second part is much more difficult but far from impossble.
You will require as a high level of agreement in the building to go strata. Then you will need to establish your unit entitlements by using a chartered surveyor. And then there are about a dozen other things I haven't even though of. But it can be done. Talk to a lawyer.
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.
bpositive said:
Get a few owners together and consult a lawyer – there is something called compulsory strata management where the CTTT appoints a managing agent.
That's true and you might get a appointment if the EC is harming the building or demonstrably corrupt. But being remote and uncommunicative is probably not sufficient grounds for a statutory appointment.
Your best bet is to retake the palace at the next AGM – you might find the strata manager is suffering from the same lack of communication as you are.
By the way, one element in the appointment of a statutory manager is that you have to find one who is prepared to take on the job. This is one area where the democratic muscle is the one you want to flex.
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.
That's the heart of the matter – is a bylaw that says effectively and literally, “we give you permission to clamp our cars” a true instrument of legal permission by the owner? If it is, then such a by-law is not in contravention of the law because the law allows for permission to be given.
Don't get me wrong – I'm not saying this is the case. I don't know. As I said in my column, this hasn't been tested and it may not be valid. We won't know for sure until someone challenges it and gets a ruling.
However, I can assure you this by-law has been adopted in a couple of buildings (to great effect on the parking problem – I hasten to add) and I don't know of any cases where it has been struck down either at the CTTT or in court.
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.