[Jimmy-T]

There is another alternative which is to get a Noise Abatement Order from your District Court – you may need more and a higher standard of evidence but if that is ignored the culprits are committing a crime.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

In our building there’s one bill for hot water (apportioned on the basis of Unit Entitlements) and another based on the gas meter that measures the flow of gas into your unit. It’s a pity the first figure is divided the way it does – one resident in a large flat pays more than a family of six crammed into a smaller unit. The only wat to change it is to install hot water meters for each apartment – try getting that past your OC.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Jim’s right on the money. Even if they had held a meeting and got the 75 percent, they’d still have to compensate the Owners Corporation under a formula established in the Supreme Court AND they should have the Unit Entitlements altered to reflect their increased property size. Make the call to Fair Trading 13 32 20.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Under new laws (they don't come in until the 31st of January, 2011) according to the Fair Trading website,  “If a tenant is no longer under a fixed term agreement and the landlord
wants the tenant to move out ‘without grounds’, the notice period
increases from 60 to 90 days. If notice is given by a landlord just
before the end of the lease, the notice period increases from 14 to 30
days.”

At the time of writing, that law doesn't yet apply and they only have to give you 60 days notice.  If this is a problem for you, contact TenantsNSW and they will advise you on what your options are.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Just discovered last week that pizza boxes ARE allowed in recycling – as long as they don't still have bits of pizza in them. One less thing for me to grumble about.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

There is a happy medium and strata living does require a certain amount of give and take and if everybody is on board with that, then it has so many advantages that I reckon it's the only way to live in the city.

However, as in every other aspect of life, there are people who think 'give and take' means you give and they take.

There's a building in the city that was taken to the CTTT by a children's pre-school situated at its base, where staff would come in every morning to find the place littered with food scraps, beer cans, broken bottles  and cigarette ends.  The cigarette ends also burned holes in the their sun shades and on a couple of occasions badly damaged their equipment.

Their complaints were valid and this wasn't just one person nor even the residents of one apartment. There was a culture of unfetterred yahooism in the building and nobody was interested in doing anything about it.

Yes, let's give each other a bit of leeway but, hey, isn't it time we all grew the f… up and stopped behaving like the cast of The Young Ones (showing my age).

In the 22 years I have lived in Sydney, 21 of them have been in apartment blocks in and around Kings Cross. I reckon I've seen the best and the worst and being asked to follow a few rules related to basic human decency isn't the toughest thing that will happen to you in your life.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

ConeOfSilence said:

This is what smokers need:

https://hilobrow.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/cone-of-silence-1.jpg

---

Yes, but will the Executive Committee pay for it out of the Stinking Fund.  Hurr-hurr!

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Drew said:

If it is not against a bylaw then it is not against a bylaw.

If smoking is not against the law then it is not against the law.

---

I agree with 95 percent of what you say but there are always circumstances that differ – exceptions that prove the rule, if you like.
 

The law is the law, as you say but the law is never as simple as it seems. For instance, if you live in strata and you have permission to have a pet under the terms of the by-laws, you are not breaking a by-law if you have one .  But if that pet causes a health problem for another resident then you could be ordered to remove it even though it is there legally:

151   Order relating to animal kept in accordance with

by-laws

(1)  An Adjudicator may make one of the following orders if the

Adjudicator considers that an animal kept on a lot or the common property in

accordance with the by-laws causes a nuisance or hazard to the owner or an

occupier of another lot or unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment

of another lot or of the common property:

(a)  an order that the person keeping the animal cause the animal to be

removed from the parcel within a specified time, and to be kept away from the

parcel,

(b)  an order that the person keeping the animal take, within a time

specified in the order, such action so specified as, in the opinion of the

Adjudicator, will terminate the nuisance, hazard or unreasonable

interference.

 

We're talking about a guy who has cancer and has been confined to his home. There aren't a lot of options open to him and a little human decency from his neighbours (for what we can assume will be a limited time) wouldn't go amiss.

 

Also the question of whether or not a by-law is in place neatly skips the issue of whther or not one SHOULD be in place.  The building I live in doesn't allow air-conditioning because it is 'environmentally friendly' and designed to be cooled by having airflow through open windows. The original chairman was a caveman who only knew how to cook on fire so he blocked any attempts to interpret the by-laws in any way that suggested they didn't allow barbecues (they don't allow smoke on common property). He would barbecue meat, fish and seafood five nights a week – after first burning off the fat from the previous cook-out.  After he'd been sacked as chairman he even managed to smoke out the room in the next-door apartment where a meeting was being held to discuss the issue of barbecues (TRUE!!). But because of his lead, gradually more and more barbecues appeared until about a quarter of the balconies in this building have them.  That means the by-law that should, logically, have been in place from day one – if you HAVE to keep your windows open in summer to stay cool you should have some protection from smoke and fumes – will never be enacted.  By the way, there are plenty of buildings in Sydney that do have air conditioning but don't allow barbecues.

The problem isn't even the majority of barbecue owners.  I'd say out of all the  barbecues that there are my building, most get used once a month in Summer, if that.  But allowing them to operate means that there are a couple of barbecue maniacs who cook almost every night, never clean their barbecues and can stink out 20 or 30 apartments with smoke and smell in one go (I wonder if there's a connection between cooking and eating the cheapest meat and sausages and having no regard for your neighbours).

Your admirable tolerance and give and take would be tested by coming home after an eveing out to find the stink of prawns and chorizo clinging to your walls becasue you'd been foolish enough to leave your window open to keep the place cool.

The telling point for me is the one thing that balcony smokers and barbecue cooks have in common – they close their doors so the smoke and smell doesn't get in to their flats (usually because of pressure from their partners).  So it's not that there's no problem – it that they want to make sure that problem is not theirs.  And by the way, anyone who says banning barbecues will reduce rents is just clutching at straws.  We own a rental property and just to be consistent, insist that our tenants can't have barbecues.  We have never had any trouble letting it and one guy who didn't read the small print just shrugged his shoulders and dumped the barbie.  Live and let live – I agree – but it's time Sydneysiders grew up and accepted that give and take might mean giving up barbecues when they get all the other benefits of living in 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.

[Jimmy-T]

Not as far as I know but there is a column in the Domain section of the Sydney Morning Herald, modelled on Flat Chat, that answers house-dwellers questions.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

ct031 said:

I just wanted to add that does this massive chain-smoker, who supposedly smokes constantly on his balcony below is even aware of the unfortunate situation of the gentleman that is living above him? … Just trying to help give some insights from what I've read, about the other party(smoker downstairs), which seems to have been left out of the article that has been published.   

---

The original article says this:
 

In November, another smoker moved into another unit on the floor underneath theirs and when Ms Kuhn explained her husband’s condition to the neighbour and asked him to limit his smoking she was met with abuse, she said.

By the way, there's a very high probability that the balcony isn't his property – it may well be common property under the strata plan.  Also he's not exactly smoking on his property if the smoke is going into other people's homes.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

singleejk75 said:

---

Your kidding about the ban on BBQ use on a balcony right?
So unAustralian.

---

I think the “right to pour toxic fumes and the stink of burning weeks-old fat into your neighbours home (while your balcony door stays firmly closed)” was lost in John Howard's rewritten constitution along with “mateship” (aka the right to take bribes from and do favours for business cronies). “UnAustralian” is the last refuge of the drongo.  NB: dozens of buildings ban barbies on balconies … and if we ever get a government with a spine, it will 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.

[Jimmy-T]

Unfortunately CTTT rulings do not create a legal precedent – as anyone who has been on the wrong end of some of their bizarre u-turn decisions will attest.  This decision needs to be tested in the Supreme Court, where legal precedents can be established.  

CTT adjudicators are supposed to use previous decisons as a guidline – but then they are supposed to be able to apply logic and commonsense too and that is all too often completely lacking.

What we need is for someone to take up legal cudgels on behalf of this resident and not only claim for a decision but demand damages as well.  That would by-pass the CTTT (who can't award costs or damages) and propel the case to the Supreme Court where the “right” to pollute your neighbours' homes could be measured against the selfish luxury of wanting to breathe fresh air.

Isn't there an anti-cancer, anti-smoking organsiation around to get behind this? I would have thought it was a no-brainer.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

I don't dispute your general assertion that we live in a toxic world but I think you'll find 17-20 percent of Australians smoke.  And by telling this person to close their window you are denying them the right to breathe air that would be a bit less toxic if the person below him wasn't chain-smoking.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

Slightly off topic, I'd just like to acknowledge the contibution of someone who clearly remembers 'Big Brother” before it was the name of a crass TV show.

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.

[Jimmy-T]

stratahound said:

I am looking to buy an apartment and have noticed a strange amendment to the by-laws. It reads: You must not keep any animal (e.g. dog-cat, etc.,) on premises (exception Guide Dog). Further, no bicycles are to be allowed …

---

Sounds like this building has had  trouble with people wheeling their bikes throughthe lobby and/or storing them on their balconies.

Less worrying than the bike issue, I would be more concerend that you have discovered evidence of StrataNazis at work. It may be perfectly resonalble to ask people not to wheel their bikes across common property or soore them on balconies but to ban them from the building?  If there is no adequate bike storage area where you can leave your bike safely, and this by-law is a recent innovation, you have to ask yourself what living with neighbours like that would be like.  On your bike, say I.

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.

[Author]

Replies