Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Sounds like it to me. If the OC didn’t get a defects claim through in time then they (i.e. you and all your neighbours) have to accept responsibility for everything that needs to be fixed.
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.
At the risk of sounding obvious, if the leak was caused by a fault in common property, then it should be repaired by toe Owners Corporation. (This is the most likely possibility). However, if say the owner or a previous owner has replaced tiles without permission or in some other way damaged the mebrane or seal, then the repair should be done by the owner.
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 work on a very rough rule of thumb of annual levies being 1% of the value of the unit plus or minus, say, 0.3%, based the number of facilities the OC has to maintain divided by the number of units. For instance, hotel conversions often have lots of lifts and fewer units, compared to, say, purpose-built apartments, meaning the cost of maintenance per owner (or unit entitlement, if you want to get technical) will be higher. Buildings with no lifts or swimming pools, building managers or secure parking will be cheaper to run. But then they won’t have a swimming pool, building manager or secure garages. Just remember that any new building that offers “resort” facilities with all the bells and whistles as well as low levies is probably a con.
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.
If we get a definitive ruling on this chimney question, it should be known as the Santa Clause. Ho ho ho.
My immeditate response is, yes the OC should pay for the chimney being swept (unless somethere on the strata plan it says it's not common property). But you should have got approval first so you may end up paying – unless you can show it was a genuine emergency (like a fire risk). Making sure Santa can get down the chimney is probably not an emergency (well, not for a couple of weeks, anyway.)
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.
If this member self-nominates and they are the co-owner of an apartment, they may be in breach (which would be the easiest solution) and can be dropped from the EC. Failing that, you can hold an extraordinary general meeting and, if you can get 75 percent of the vote, have them removed from the committee.
Or you could propose a motion at the next EC meeting, listing this guy’s known breaches and asking the Executive Committee to ask him to resign. This will have no immediate effect if he declines but at least it will be on the record and will be open for discussion at your next AGM. Just be careful that you don’t make this too personal – stick to what’s already on the record.
Or you could quietly let this person know that there are moves afoot to remove him and persuade him it’s in everyone’s best interest if he goes quietly before any of this becomes a matter of record.
Best of luck with 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.
No sooner said than done – welcome to the Strata Virgins thread. And don't give up on strata – we never hear from the people who are happy – why would we? And the rest of us are trying to make it work. Hang in there!
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.
Sounds like your former EC member is on a revenge trip. The Owners Corporation (all owners) is liable for any damage caused by faulty common property so, for instance, you might have to pay the excess on the owner's insurance. If the car insurer want's more, they'll ask for it. As far as personal liability goes, your EC should have insurance, just in case you make a mistake. If you don't, get some.
Personal liability only comes into it when you have been told there is a problem and have chosen to wilfully ignore it even though you knew it might impact on owners, residents or anyone else associated with the building. That could be construed as wilfull negligence whioch probably wouldn't be covered by your insurance.
In other words, unless you knew this was going to happen to the ex-EC member's car, you're probably covered … and it spunds like you are well shot of this bully.
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, lawyers, don’t all rush to nominate yourselves – unless you’re offering a free consultation and/or a fixed rate. Otherwise, if anyone out there recommends anyone who fits the bill, please let us know.
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 agree with most of this – the problem arises with the initial complaint in writing. Can that really be kept confidential? I totally understand why you would want to do that in certain cases but is it legal?
Interestingly, in Victoria the Executive Committee has to respond to every complaint, even if it is only a letter explaining why they aren’t taking it any further. And they have to set up a disputes and mediation procedure – that’s what you get when laws are written by people who spend all day in committees.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 question here is whether or not having communal air conditioning repaired and maintained is more expensive than having individual units. 75 percent of owners will have to approve this change so it’s not something that will pass on a whim. If the motion fails, the Owners Corporation (and that includes you) will have to pay to have the air-con repaired. But if that’s what you really want, make sure you have organised enough votes to reject the motion at the 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.
The CTTT's adjudicators have a specific power that allows them to correct levies when they have clearly been skewed to favour one owner, usually either the develepors themselves or purchasers of large apartments or commercial areas whom they are trying to lure to the building.
The cheapest way to go about this is to get unanimous agreement from all owners to re-allocate unit entitlements. But seriously, that's never going to happen. Instead you need to consult a specialist strata surveyor with a track record in this area who knows exactly what need to be done to present a compelling case to the CTTT. I'm not sure but I think I remember reading somewhere that in some cases the CTTT can order the developer to refund the Owners Corporation all the money they failed to pay.
Unless the difference is miniscule, it's worth it and the success rates for the best companies are incredibly high, so go 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.
Here's a radical thought – there is no such thing as “private” correspondence within a strata plan. As an owner you are entitled to see any correspondence to or from the Executive Committee unless there is a very, very good reason for not doing so.
In other words, if an owner or resident has written to your committee in relation to how any other resident or owner is behaving within the strata, you can ask to inspect the correspondence. If the strata manager says it was a phone call, you are entitled to ask who the phone call was from and what the response was. If the strata manager or executive committee refuses to provide that information or show the content of the correspondence, then I would say you are entitled to say there is no such correspondence and ignore the warnings based on them.
Executive committees can't issue warnings without holding a meeting to ascertain whether or not there is a problem. In your case, the fact that the complaints haven't been minuted in
meetings means they effectively don't exist and I would treat them
accordingly.Strata managers who have been delegated the powers of the EC have to show the process of complaints and how they responded if they are challenged on these matters in court or at the CTTT.
There are situations where the EC and the strata manager might want to use their discretion such as when one resident is justifiably scared of their neighbours but there are ways round that. But using anonymous complaints as the basis for threats against owners is a form of personal harrassment verging on bullying.
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.
With so many first-time apartment dwellers around, this is a problem in every building. Many people don't want to know the by-laws and others think they don't apply to them because they are a) owners or b) renters (go figure!).
I would put on your welcome letter a prominent notice that says something like:
All owners and tenants are, by law, provided with a set of by-laws. These by-laws are legally binding on all residents of this building and are there to protect you and your neighbours. Among many other issues, they include legally enforcable rules on
BehaviourPets
Parking
Noise
Renovations
Floor coverings
Please read the by-laws as they explain your rights and responsibilities. Failure to read them is not an excuse if you are in breach which can lead to uneccessary conflict with your neighbours and, in extreme cases, great personal expense to you. Please ask a member of your executive committee if there is something you don't understand.
Obviously you would put the five or six “hot” issues in your building in the list (no more or it gets too off-putting). And the person to talk to may be the building manager rather than a committee member but you get the idea – friendly but firm, with themphasis on it being in THEIR interest to read the by-laws, rather than yours.
Hope this helps
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 simplest answer is to Google “pop-up bollards” and look at the options for securing your space when it's not in use. The cheapest effective option is a metal frame or post that folds up and padlocks in place when your space isn't being used. You will pay probably between $100 and $200 depending on how sophisticated it is.
You will need EC approval as the bollard has to be bolted to the floor. Why should you pay your own money for this? Because you can then forget all about it and get on with enjoying your apartment.
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.