Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Have you had reason to review recently?
Not until I received this post. I struggled to find the article to which you’re referring (although I remember writing it) but all I can say is that apartment prices and costs have both shot up so things may have changed.
A quick search established that the median price of apartment in Sydney is about $850,000 and the average levies are about $850 a quarter. This boils down to about 0.4 per cent of the property value per annum. The big property websites don’t list the levies (except in Queensland) – you have to email the real estate agents (and go on their databases).
Also I suspect these figures are swayed by the proposed levies for off-the-plan blocks which will always be set lower than they would be in reality. There are mechanisms for getting compensation from developers who do this deliberately, but I have yet to hear of an owners corp that has successfully taken such a case to the Tribunal.
If I recall correctly, my rule of thumb back then was that the levies would be between 0.7 and 1.4 per cent of the property value. The reasonably well-managed 20-year-old block in which I live has four lifts, a heated swimming pool, gym, building manager and 24-hour concierges and the levies are about 6 per cent of the property values – suggesting that the property price rises have outstripped increases in running costs.
Our investment property has no pool, concierge or gym and a part-time building manager but multiple three-level lifts. The current levies (based on the developer and strata managers’ estimates) is 0.4 per cent which is already proving to be woefully inadequate and might be worth challenging at the Tribunal, depending on what the actual cost of running the block turns out to be.
I’d be really interested to hear from other Flatchatters what their levies are compared to their property values and the facilities that they are funding.
I also think Fair Trading should insist that real estate websites list the levies (fees) for apartments on sale, rather than allowing agents to withhold this essential information and use it to harvest email addresses for their databases.
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.
Is the SM not breaching the P & SA Act and the OC not breaching the SSM Act by: (i) Failing to act on 2 noise complaints last month? (ii) Failing to hire an expert to verify the level of noise transmitted to other lots? and (iii) Failing to pursue those who acted in bad faith by not doing their jobs when approving the renovation? Had they done their job, an acoustics certificate would be filed with the SM.
Regarding strata managers, the simple answer is NO.
Strata managers are not obliged by the Act or, most probably, their contracts to pursue complaints by individual owners about alleged breaches of by-law or the Act. They are not StrataKops.
They should pursue complaints made by the strata committee, but they don’t have to (although their contracts may not be renewed if they don’t). However, individual owners have the right to pursue issues through Fair Trading and NCAT if they so wish.
Strata committees can be taken to the Tribunal for a failure to fulfil their duties (Section 282, NSW) but you would still have to provide proof that the noise was excessive. But It would surely be easier to tackle the problem head-on that pursue a third party for doing nothing.
In any case, the key question isn’t whether or not adequate insulation was installed under the flooring, but whether or not the floor currently transfers the noise from the occupants excessively, or the occupants are excessively noisy, to the point that it interferes, unreasonably, with the peaceful enjoyment of the downstairs neighbours’ lot.
If you can prove that, you can take it to the tribunal. If you can’t, the strata manager isn’t likely to step up because they don’t have to.
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 a problem with all of these disputes is that an owner believes that the SM knows the answers and is there to help. You then find out otherwise!
If the recent SCA scandal has taught us nothing else, it is that SOME strata management firms are more about profits than service. Netstrata was the company caught with its pants down, partly because its boss was also the president of the SCA.
But look at the other big companies using similar vertical integration models and you can see the potential for maximising profits through their own insurance brokerages and integrated (and sometimes subsidiary) legal firms that have the opportunity to rack up costs against levies defaulters in pursuit of debts, at no cost to the OCs concerned, but with potentially horrific consequences for the homeowners who are already doing it tough.
So it’s no surprise that symbiotic unhelpful relationships between strata managers and strata committees can evolve. In a worst-case scenario, the SM shields the committee from complaints and helps to ensure they get re-elected; the committee renews the contract every three years.
It’s only when an SM with integrity (and there are many) refuses to act in a way that’s to the detriment of the majority of owners, or the majority of owners rises up and demands change, that these cosy relationships can be severed.
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.
Would it be worth taking pre-emptive action at NCAT via a complaint and interim order?
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 you’d be approaching the owners first to get their agreement.
Yeah, I skipped that option, exposing my misanthropic tendencies. That would indeed be the first and best approach. Interesting, though, that there is this widespread and mistaken belief that you can’t do anything about Airbnbs in your block.
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.
And certainly the legislators have said OC’s cannot discriminate against STHL lots in any way.
Where did they say this? I don’t recall STHL properties being given such blanket immunity from costs associated with their usage. I’d be grateful if you could point this out.
On the other hand, the Act (Section 82, below) says if the change of use of apartments causes your insurance premiums to rise, the owners can agree to pay the difference or may be compelled to do so by the tribunal on application by the OC or another owner.
It seems you have clear evidence that the Airbnbs have caused your insurance to increase, so the ball is in your OC’s court. If I were an owner in your block, I’d be filing my application for mediation as soon as I got the inflated insurance quote.
82 Individual contributions may be larger if greater insurance costs(1) If the use to which a lot in a strata scheme is put causes an insurance premium for the strata scheme to be greater than it would be if it were not put to that use, so much of a contribution payable by the owner of the lot as is attributable to insurance premiums may, with the consent of the owner, be increased to reflect the extra amount of the premium.
(2) The Tribunal may, on application, make an order for payment of contributions of a different amount to one or more contributions levied or proposed by an owners corporation on an owner if the Tribunal is of the opinion that the owner’s consent has been unreasonably refused under this section.
(3) An application for an order under this section may be made by the lessor of a leasehold strata scheme, an owners corporation, an owner of a lot or a mortgagee in possession.
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.
Committee members can nominate themselves for offices.
By the way, in NSW those positions can be declared vacant and new officers elected by a simple majority (show of hands) at any properly convened strata committee meeting, where the vacation and elections are on the agenda.
I may be wrong but I think it’s different in Qld where the general meeting elects the office-bearers.
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.
My unit [is] company title in Victoria
Check your company documents (by-laws, rules, whatever) to see if there is anything about excessive noise. You probably don’t need an acoustic certificate – just evidence of noise penetration which you can get from stat decs from visitors or recordings using the Snooper software.
But be warned, as a company title this probably doesn’t come under strata law in Vic. It’s company law in NSW which is a whole other legal minefield.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 best approach is to make a noise complaint.
The best approach is probably to ask the gym guy if he would mind changing his exercise times. If he responds negatively, then he can be told that there are ways of making this happen that could conceivably result in his garage gym being shut down. If he still tells you to get stuffed, THEN you pull out the big guns. We don’t have to go to war every time there’s a minor dispute.
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.
He wants the committee to informally “pre-approve” his plans before he spends money on experts.
And there you have it – “informally” – the applicant is just trying to see which way the wind blows before spending money that may be wasted because the project was never going to fly in the first place.
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 analogy has a few substantial holes in it, not least what constitutes “adequate information”.
If you go to your committee and say, “hey, I want to extend my roof and build into the common property air space and change the exterior look of the scheme,’ what’s to stop them telling you that you will need by-laws, council planning and, by the way, a lot of other owners will object and will have good grounds to do so.
But no, according to the analogy, the committee will need to see detailed drawings and engineering reports on something that had a fairly limited chance of approval in the first place?
A lot of people in strata don’t know what restrictions there might be on them doing what they want with their homes. Explaining the facts of strata life to them costs nothing, commits no one to anything either way, and avoids unnecessary cost or conflict.
That is VERY different from having a chat with your council planning department, not least because the planning person is not your neighbour.
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.
To rescind any such permission given in the past would require you to consent
Only if the permission was in the form of a common property by-law (which doesn’t seem likely in this instance).
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.
One cant approach a lawyer, in this case Marrickville Legal Centre on behalf of another party without the approval of the third party. So thats not an option.
So you’re saying, no one can call MLC and ask if they know any agencies that might be able to advise and help? Seems highly unlikely to me that they would throw an old lady under the bus rather than hand over the phone number of someone who can help.
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 know what NSW tenancy laws have to say about pet restrictions that landlords might want to impose.
This from the TenantsNSW fact sheet on pets:
There is no term in the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 that prohibits you from keeping a pet, or that requires you to ask for your landlord’s consent before you keep a pet. However, many landlords will include a clause restricting pets in the residential tenancy agreement (i.e. your lease), and there is no specific ban on them doing so. The Tenants’ Union believes that such a restriction is a breach of your reasonable peace, comfort and privacy, however this has not been fully tested before a court or the Tribunal.
The standard form of the residential tenancy agreement issued by NSW Fair Trading includes additional terms which require you to have your landlord’s consent to keep animals. Additional terms may be crossed out when you and the landlord sign the agreement, but if they are not crossed out, they will apply to your agreement.
By the way, the Tenants’ Union websites in the various states are just about the only authoritative source of information for both tenants and landlords. Just click on tenants.org.au and it will take you to the relevant site for your state.
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 know what NSW tenancy laws have to say about pet restrictions that landlords might want to impose.
This from the TenantsNSW fact sheet on pets:
There is no term in the Residential Tenancies Act 2010 that prohibits you from keeping a pet, or that requires you to ask for your landlord’s consent before you keep a pet. However, many landlords will include a clause restricting pets in the residential tenancy agreement (i.e. your lease), and there is no specific ban on them doing so. The Tenants’ Union believes that such a restriction is a breach of your reasonable peace, comfort and privacy, however this has not been fully tested before a court or the Tribunal.
The standard form of the residential tenancy agreement issued by NSW Fair Trading includes additional terms which require you to have your landlord’s consent to keep animals. Additional terms may be crossed out when you and the landlord sign the agreement, but if they are not crossed out, they will apply to your agreement.
By the way, the Tenants’ Union websites in the various states are just about the only authoritative source of information for both tenants and landlords. Just click on tenants.org.au and it will take you to the relevant site for your state.
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.