Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Absolutely right, Random! Have a look at what I said:
A “casting” vote is an additional vote given to the chair (or NOT, in this case) when a vote is tied (and only when a vote is tied).
I'm talking generalities about a casting vote under other circumstances, hence the use of the words “NOT in this case”.
What Is Majority was under the impression that if the chair cast a deciding vote, that was a casting vote. Which it isn't.
So yes, you're right, under Strata law in NSW it's one committee member one vote (proxies aside). I don't disagree with that at all.
But there are committees in other areas of life that do have casting votes. That's why I was trying to explain the difference to W.I.M.
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.
A “casting” vote is an additional vote given to the chair (or NOT, in this case) when a vote is tied (and only when a vote is tied).
A normal vote by the chair is not a casting vote, even if it tips the balance one way or the other.
I strongly suggest that at your next AGM you either lose a seat or gain one. Even numbers lead to all sorts of unfortunate things like … um … compromises.
But seriously, ask any strata manager and they'll tell you even numbers on ECs are a nightmare.
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 understand your frustration but we have a strict “no names no packdrill” policy here for a variety of reasons, not least that I would eventually lose my apartment defending the number of lawsuits I'd get.
Apart from that, in many cases it's a bad manager working for an OK firm and it's unfair to tar the whole company with the same brush. If it's a large firm, talk to their managing director and tell them you want a new SM.
In extreme cases you can, however, report them to the Institute of Strata Titles Management CLICK HERE who do take action against their members when they are acting unprofessionally. If your strata manager isn't in ISTM, that's a very good reason to get rid of them.
If they aren't doing their job, they may be in breach of their contract. See if you can get a look at that. In fact, I'd be lining up a new strata manager to help you to get rid of the old one. Make a couple of calls and don't get bogged down in the details of why you want this one gone.
I don't know how much help Fair Trading will be with someone who is just ineffective rather than professionally incompetent. ICAC won't touch a case this small and the Tax office is not the place to take a complaint like this.
By the way, there are other websites that allow people to post anything they like – but not this one. We try to be a bit more responsible. Sorry.
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.
They are responsible, for two reasons. One, they caused the damage so they have to repair it (including repainting). Two, the ceiling is common property and they have duty to maintain and repair CP.
They might say, well, this has happened to everyone so if everyone just fixes their own ceiling, it will all even out. Don't fall for it. Any half decent strata manager or building manager will find a contractor who will charge less per ceiling for doing a whole block than it will cost to individuals.
And make sure it's repainted too – that's another favourite “not our responsibility” bluff.
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.
Taking the door closure mechanism inside many apartment front doors as an example, it's considered common property and has to be maintained and repaired by the Owners Corporation. Whether garage doors are the same, I don't know but that would be the starting point of my argument.
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 department of Lands and Property management has (allegedly) all strata plans on file. Anything that hasn't been registered with the Lands Department (like handshake or verbal agreements) has little legal standing although there is a principle of accepted use over a number of years that could come into play. Anyway, they are your starting point. Just CLICK 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.
Of course! Why didn't I think of that?
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.
SP = Strata Plan, that I know. But, pardon my ignorance, what is an MO?
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 one more thing – Horsley is an optional (but very sound) set of rules to follow, isn't it?
Could an OC pass a by-law saying that all meetings have to be conducted by Horsley's rules (except where they conflict with Strata Law).
Would sound like a big step forward for a lot of dysfunctional ECs and OCs to me … but then, how do you get them to pass the by-law?.
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 for that. I'm still a bit unclear. If a motion for a by-law said: “This OC resolves to ban all pets.” and someone proposed an amendment that said “with the exception of pets already in residence”, would that stand or fall under the rules as you see them.
By the way, at our last agm, amendments to motions had to be on the agenda issued for the meeting. We weren't allowed to rock up and propose an amendment without prior notice (which seems fair, given proxies and the need to consider issues properly).
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 don't think you need to go near the CTTT with this and if you can avoid it, you should. As Chris says above, it's an environmental protection issue and involving the CTTT is a complication you'd probably be better without.
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.
Simone is right, of course, the maximum fine for ignoring a valid notice to comply is $550. But somewhere in the back of my mind there was the much scarier $5.5K which, it turns out, is the maximum fine for failure to observe a CTTT order.
In short, if the rogue parkers ignore a valid Owners Corporation Notice To Comply they can be hit with a fine of up to $550. If they ignore a CTTT order to not park on common property, they face a fine of up to $5,500 for failure to observe the CTTT order.
Me, I'd go the slightly exaggerated but more tactical route of scaring them with huge amounts of money that may or may not be applicable. I mean, a couple of years ago an idiot journalist wrote that you could go to jail for drying your washing on your balcony. True if you ignored a notice to comply, then a CTTT order, then refused to pay the fine and then said you'd rather go to jail than pay it. Rubbish, of course, but it got the model by-laws changed.
Exaggeration or not, the intent is to get them to change their behaviour rather than go through the agonies and uncertainties of CTTT hearings.
Also, if the OC declines to get involved – “It's between two neighbours” is the usual excuse, you can go to Fair Trading as an individual and ask them to issue the NTC.
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.
Billen Ben said:
When ammending a special resolution motion the rules are as follows;
Sch 2 SSMA clause 23
Amendment or revocation of unanimous or special resolutionsA unanimous resolution or special resolution of an owners corporation may not be amended or revoked except by a subsequent unanimous resolution or special resolution, as the case may be.
However, a unanimous resolution of an owners corporation dealing with common property may be amended by a special resolution.
So it seems you need a SR motion to amend a SR motion.
I'm not sure that that's the case. The quoted section refers to amending a resolution (ie, one that has already been passed) not a motion to pass a resolution. Even then, as you can see, there are anomalies (for instance, a unanimous resolution dealing with common property can be chancged by a special resolution but unanimous reolutions pertainiong to other issues (like what???) can't.
I'm really not clear on this myself as it seems to me having a motion amended by a simple majority still requires the litmus test of a 75 percent majority to pass into the by-laws. Maybe one of our strata manager or lawyer friends can help.
As for voting with non- discretionary proxies; if non-discretionary proxies mean that the principals have stated the manner in which the proxy is to vote then according to Horsley's Meetings, a fine text regarding meetings, a proxy who casts a vote contrary to the wishes of the principal is still a valid vote as far as the meeting is concerned and it becomes a matter between the principal and proxy.
Yes. I am reliably informed that regardless of how they have been instructed, a proxy-holder may vote in any way they wish*. What they should do is another matter but, for instance, if new information or a particularly compelling argument was presented at a meeting – which is why we have meetings, after all – they are entitled to vote against their instructions. Choose your proxy-holder wisely and discuss the issues with them – 'blind' proxy votes are not good for the process.
*One exception may be the standard inclusion to vote on the appointment of a new 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.
This makes perfect sense but the key to this is in the last paragrph – it's about making people responsible for work costs whether they come straight from their own pockets or are paid for by the OPC. Either way, there's no free ride in strata. Just because the OC pays for repairs of common property, it doesn't mean they are getting something for nothing. Crack that little conundrum and you're ahead of the game.
By the way, I worry about “user-pays” common property repairs because all it takes is for one person to come in and say, well, thanks for paying for your own work … but you still have to pay for mine!
I also worry about the owners who let their own properties go to rack and ruin and let the termites spread to neighbours homes. But, hey, if it works for you then that's all you need to know.
JimmyT
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.