Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I've done a bit of checking for Care&share and this is a much more common issue that even I thought. I'm gathering responses from various strata professionals and they will appear in the Flat Chat column in Saturday's SMH (then right here too, of course).
Meanwhile anyone who has any ideas or similar experiences, feel free to chip in.
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 this is one of those situations where you ask the EC or strata manager to undertake mediation with you, either through the Community Justice Centres or, if you don't mind paying $70, through Fair Trading.
You want them to justify refusal specifically … not just some vague reference to looking “different” so that you know what yoiu have to do to comply with their ruling. If they can't provide that information, it's going to go against them if you take them to the CTTT.
Also, if you know someone who's handy with Photoshop (your average 12-year-old kid, for instance) get them to mock up a picture of what the building will look like with your shutters in place.
Again, the EC will have to be specific about their objections if you can show that your shutters aren't in breach of the by-law.
The key question is what is 'not in keeping with the rest of the building.' That's a matter of opinion, not fact.
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 it's illegal, not sure if it's standard practice and whether or not it's ethical depends on how it's managed.
There are obvious advantages on being approved by a strata manager and being able to advertise on their site. There is obviously a cost involved in all of that and your question has to be whether it's worth it to your business or not.
However, if the strata managers are, as you say, double dipping, it does sound a bit dodgy.
But there is another point here. Strata managers are notoriously underpaid for the work they do. They are caught in a nexus where, if they put their fees up, someone else will offer a cheaper service and, since they are generally under-appreciated, a lot of OCs will grab the opportunity to save a few bucks. It's almost never a good idea but it can take years of bad service before they realise they made a mistake.
However, in the short term that forces strata manager fees down and leaves them to find other ways to make money or at least offset costs and it sounds like this might be one of them.
I'd be tempted to call some of the other tradies listed and ask them if they think it's a good deal. If enough of them say no, then you might be able to change things.
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.
Some parking spaces are common property, some are separately owned lots – depends on the building.
There's a block in the city that had this problem with one owner for several years, not helped by the CTTT moron who decreed that neighbouring car owners had no right to swing their car door over the adjoining space (in fact, I think they said it was “trespass”). It took a ridiculous amount of time and effort to get the decision reversed and then the removal of the cage implemented but it ended with the EC sending cuilders in to dismantle the cage and stack it in the middle of the selfish bastard's parking space.
Ther are several probable grounds on which this could be rejected even if the car space is a separate lot. For instance, they can be refused permission to fix anything to the floor, wall or ceiling, which are all common property. There may be a by-law that they have to comply with the look of the area. There could be local council plannig requirements and fire safety issues.
But really, if this person wants to assert their “right” to do as they please with no regard for their neighbours, they should be living in a house. There's a social contract involved in living in apartments and if this selfish sod doesn't want to accept that, they should go and live somewhere where they won't be bothering people who 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.
Owners – even EC members can't just annex common property areas for their own use. They are effectively extending their lot space at everyone else's expense. They would need a by-law to get exclusive use of common proeprty areas and even then they would have to compensate the other owners.
Call Fair Trading on 13 32 20 to start the process that will lead to a CTTT adjudication. Alternatively, sit down with them and work out a plan so that everyone in the building has access to storage, even if it means subdividing the storage rooms with cages.
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.
All I can add is “what he said”. But there's one small point, the quorum for an EC of seven is exactly the same as an EC of eight – at least one-half of the number of members of the EC – which is four in both cases.
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 strata worrier's original post.
We recently renovated in our just bought 60s apartment in Sydney's eastern suburbs. Upgrading the bathroom we replaced the old, leaky toilet with a new one. The new toilet never seems to flush through properly and is subject to continual backflow, which becomes foul when we are away for a few days. We have had two plumbers look at the problem, our own and strata manager's. Our plumber says the problem is due to the branch stacks behind the bathroom wall not being angled high enough for the new toilet, a case of the new standard toilets not marrying up with the old plumbing. The strata plumber told our strata managers that the problem was due to an incorrect install, something the strata plumber supposedly denied when our plumber contacted him to discuss it. Either way, I am confident it is not an incorrect install and that it is a branch stack problem. (The stacks have been blasted recently). Apparently it has occurred in a number of other units which have changed over to modern toilets. The strata managers insist this is our problem and refuse to get a third plumber to inspect it as suggested by the dept fair trading. Does anyone out there have experience or knowledge of what the strata law is when a lot owner's new, regulation toilet doesn't work with old plumbing behind the (strata) wall?
And this is what the Act says about electronic documents:
22 Electronic transmission of documents
(1) Documents relating to a meeting of the owners corporation (such as proxies) may be transmitted to the secretary of the owners corporation by facsimile.
(2) In this clause, facsimile includes any electronic communication device that transmits information in a form from which written material is capable of being reproduced with or without the aid of any other device or article.
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.
Firstly, as good a place to start is Strata Living, the Fair Trading handbook which you can download as a pdf HERE.
I can't give you an estimate of costs because Strata managers traditionally don't like two-person strata plans and may factor that in to estimates. There's a lot of irresistible forces meeting immovable objects in two-unit complexes and there isn't a lot of money around because of the small size of the strata plan. Basically it comes down to less money for more hassle and that's not bargain in anyone's book.
There are two strata management companies that sponsor this website (which if nothing else shows they are highly intelligent people). Strata Associates actually run my building, I've known them for years and they are great. Strata manageIT who have an ad on the forum page are a full-service SM firm too, but they have a flexible online component that allows you to use them as little or as much as you need to and pay accordingly. Certainly in the long term they might offer a solution that fits your bill.
The resetting of the Unit Entitlements can be fairly easily done by unanimous agreement. Get a surveyor in and get their expert opinion. Shifting UEs over to your neighbour will save you a lot of money but will remove the “absolute” power of that 80 percent vote.
If I were you, I'd sort out the critical issues first – the roof, renovations and water meters – and wrap them up in a package that the neighbour will agree to which includes agreement on redistribution of UEs.
Then look at a flexible strata management arrangement so you can get help as and when you need it.
For what it's worth, I think standard SM fees are somewhere north of $200 per unit but I'm happy to be corrected if someone has a more accurate figure.
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.
There's good news and bad news.
The bad news is that if you can't get agreement with your neighbours, this can only be sorted out in the Supreme Court.
The good news is that, unlike in strata and the CTTT, the Supreme Court can award both damages and costs. In other words, if you have a very strong case you can expect to have most of your costs covered and maybe evenn get damages awarded in tyour favour.
But that's a big if.
I would try to make use of the Community Justice Centre's free mediation service (CLICK HERE) in the first instance. Failing that (or at the same time) I'd be getting in touch with a specialist strata lawyer who has some experience in Company Title.
Obviously strata by-laws don't apply in your building but there may be something in the articles of the building that you haven't noticed. And there may be other remedies available that we haven't thought of.
One thing is certain – this will not be the first time wooden floors have been at the heart of a dispute in Company Title apartments.
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 neighbour is playing games with strata law. The same principle that says you have to pay 80 percent of the water usage (sorry about that!) also means that you have 80 percent of the votes, which is enough for you to pretty much do as you please (within the law) provided you do it properly.
That means properly convened meetings, proper agendas and minutes and all the other bells and whistles of strata life.
So your neighbour can't block renovations because they would be outvoted at a general meeting by a factor of 80 to 20 once what is known as a poll vote was called by you.
You can go ahead and agree at a meeting to fix the roof – but you will have to pay 80 percent of the costs.
You are even in a postion to pass special resolutions because there's no way there can be 25 percent of the votes against.
For instance, you could pass a motion to install separate water meters, which would take care of that problem.
Just be very carefull that you do everything by the book so that you don't spent the rest of your life fighting your neighbour through the CTTT.
For instance, your unit entitlements don't count at an executive committee meeting – there it's strictly one owner, one vote.
And there's a established concept in strata law of a majority “defrauding” the minority whereby even decisions that are within the letter of the law are patently unfair and can be challenged on that basis.
What I would strongly recommend is that you first write down all the things you want to change about the place then engage a strata manager or specialist strata lawyer as a consultant, to tell you what you can and can't do, direct you through the correct processes, and make sure everything that is done is done properly.
The other owner can slow things down by not turning up for meetings (which would then be inquorate) but you just set the meeting for seven days hence and if they don't turn up, you carry on regardless.
You should definitely talk to a professional about guiding you through this difficult initial period of taking control of your building, meanwhile here, from Fair Trading's Strata Living handbook, are a few points about two-lot stratas.
Building insurance and sinking fund
Owners in two-lot strata schemes may in certain
circumstances be able to obtain their own building
insurance for their lot [s. 83] and be exempt from the
requirement of having a sinking fund [s. 69]. These
circumstances are as follows:
• the buildings in each lot are physically detached
• no building or part of a building is situated outside
the lots
• the owners pass a unanimous resolution for the
owners corporation not to have building insurance
for both buildings and/or not to have a sinking fund.
Quorum
A quorum in a two-lot scheme with two owners is
always two people who are entitled to vote [Schedule
2, Clause 12 (3)].
Executive committee
The executive committee in a two-lot scheme is made
up of:
• the owner of each lot that has only one owner
• one co-owner of each lot that is owned by co-owners
• the company nominee of each lot owned by a
corporation [Schedule 3, Clause 1].
Audit of accounts and financial
statements
There are no requirements for two-lot schemes to
have any audit of accounts and financial statements
carried out in accordance with the Australian Auditing
Standards [s.107].And here is what it says about meetings where there is no quorum
If there is no quorum after 30 minutes of the scheduled
start time, the meeting must be postponed (adjourned)
for at least 7 days. The person chairing the meeting
sets the date and time for the next meeting. If there is
no quorum within 30 minutes of the time fixed for the
adjourned meeting, the meeting is able to go ahead.
The quorum is then the owners and proxies present
who are entitled to vote [Schedule 2, Part 2, Clause 12].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 there's a general consesus in this forum not just that the area at the back should be maintained but that, legally, it must be maintained.
If I were you, I'd be having a cup of coffee with the EC office bearers and telling them (very politely) they can either do this the easy way – just pay for the garden to be tidied up and maintained – or the hard way: fight it through the CTTT and then pay for the garden to be tidied up and maintained.
What they can't do is ignore the issue because doing nothing is legally not an option.
If you can take along a number of valid quote for the work from contractors who already work in the area, then there's not much in the way of an argument they can put up against it.
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.