Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I have listened to Jimmy’s podcast with Paul Bannerman and it seems like the owners corp is probably up for these repairs.
It’s David Bannerman (thanks for listening anyway) and it’s my recollection that David was saying if the common property in a bathroom hadn’t been renovated then it was the owner corportion’s responsibility, but if it had it was the lot owners’ reponsibility. The same may apply to balconies. If so, the new owner can maybe take it up with the person who sold them the flat.
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 smell double-dipping! Isn’t this the same issue as this one?
Naughty, naughty. I’m shutting this one down.
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.
We are effectively moving an urgent CURRENT Capital works cost into a fund that normally provides for FUTURE capital works.
Future works become current works at some point. The simple answer would be to take out a strata loan. By the way, is the person who hasn’t paid being charged the mandatory interest on their debt?
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 recall a case in our block where a legal dispute between the committee and an employee was resolved in court as a “sealed document” which meant no one who wasn’t involved in the case was able to view the document. However, as interested parties, two owners not on the committee arranged to go to the strata managers office where they were allowed to view the document under supervision.
The committee issued a statement that we (the owners) had won the case. The people who viewed the papers said that wasn’t true. We’d lost but there was no way of proving that as they weren’t allowed to copy the papers.
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.
wanted a motion – presumably prepared by the strata mgr – to address the grievance
You know what they say about “assume”. The strata manger is going to do what works for the strata committee, because they will have a huge say in whether or not their contract is renewed. Expecting them to write a motion to further a dispute with the committee is way too trusting.
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.
By the way, the owners corp may be allowed to buy personal property and subsume it into common property. Worth looking at?
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’m not sure if I’m allowed to ask on this Forum which legal firm Kaindub consulted
You can send them a private message using the “send a message” link on the left of your post.
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.
Ie rent a space from the owners corporation and the funds get put back into the capital works fund? NSW if that makes a difference.
As per the post above, you can’t legally let car spaces that have been designated as visitor spots in your DA.
Firsy pass a by-law defining what your building means by “visitor” (number of hours, frequency of use, relationship with other residents etc etc)
Then just hit the buggers with Notices to Comply and apply for fines – no need to go through the Fair Trading nonsense. Straight to NCAT. Revenue from fines imposed by NCAT is paid to the owners corp.
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 can’t imagine a by-law that banned owners from writing to each other would survive much scrutiny at a Tribunal, and your strata committee can’t just issue fines or costs claims with a Notice To Comply.
Does the NTC mention a specific by-law (it should) and what does that by-law say?
Either of our strata law sponsors – Sachs Gerace or Bannermans would handle this with ease. Give them a call and ask how much it would cost.
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.
Can an OC dictate that I use an electrician of their choosing?
No. They can only insist that you use a competent qualified electrician who has all the appropriate insurances. However, your strata manager might say there is a cost attached to confirming they are accredited so it might be easier and cheaper (for you) just to go with their guy. Sounds like a good case for getting competitive quotes.
Also, I’m not convinced the ceiling is common property if its suspended. Our strata scheme, desperate to cover its backside after it gave dubious permission for a ceiling’s removal, argues that the ceiling was, in fact, a horizontal, non-load-bearing wall and therefore could be removed without a by-law.
This is one of those cases where I would be tempted jut to get the work done and let the strata committee prove that you had done something wrong. Not that I’m recommending that … no, no, no. But if it was me …
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.
Every day I see a reminder of what happens when an owner decides to go it alone and install non-matching double glazing, even filling the gap created by the smaller window frame.
[attachment file=”73926″]
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.
Eligible candidates can just raise their hand at the meeting, but technical eligibility is a whole other matter.
Section 31 tells us who is eligible:
- The sole owner of a lot (who may self-nominate)
- A nominee of a company that is the sole owner of a lot
- An individual who is a co-owner of a lot if they are nominated by an owner who is not a co-owner of the same lot
- An individual who is a co-owner of a lot if they are nominated by their co-owner who is not a candidate for election
- An individual who is not an owner, if the person is nominated by an owner who is not a member of, or is not seeking election to the strata committee.
Restrictions
A sole owner may not nominate more than one person for election unless they own multiple lots in the scheme, in which case they may nominate a candidate for each lot that they own.Only one co-owner (including a company nominee of a co-owner) of the same lot may be a member of a strata committee at the same time, unless they own multiple lots.
Ineligibility
Section 32 tells us who is NOT eligible for election.
- the building manager for the strata scheme, unless they are also owners in the scheme
- a real estate agent connected with leasing in the scheme, unless they are also owners
- Anyone connected with the original owner (developer) or building manager, unless they disclose that connection at the meeting at which the election is held and before the vote.
- any other person prescribed by the regulations.
- An owner who was an unfinancial owner at the date notice was given of the meeting and who has not paid the amounts owing before the meeting.
- A previous member who has been removed from the committee under section 35(1)(e), for 12 months from the day the resolution was passed.
NB: These regulations change from time so it’s worth checking back with the latest version of the Act. Also, the actual voting process is highly regulated (and widely ignored), including that it is invalid to print a list of candidates on the voting paper before the election.
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.
Make clear in the first email to the strata manager that following the passing of her husband, the wife will now do the correspondence.
I wouldn’t even do that. Just keep on top of the email traffic and pay the bills when they come in. It’s not as if they’ll be committing any major frauds.
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 that if you can put a convincing argument to the strata committee that their blanket barbecue ban would probably not pass a serious test at NCAT, and they might end up with a free-for-all, they might listen to a proposal to control barbecue use rather than ban it completely or allow it without restrictions.
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 can’t help but feel that making the argument for banning the use of barbecues to reduce the risk of smell / smoke drift would be too long a bow to draw.
Maybe, but the OP wants to rescind the ban on barbies, not create one.
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.