Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Perhaps the concern should be how many times can the owners corporation refuse the lot owner’s request before an application is made to NCAT for an order under s 126 SSMA?
If NCAT forms the opinion the owners corporation has unreasonably refused the request to alter the common property it can overrule the owners corporation. The proviso’s are that the alteration is a minor renovation and directly affects the lot of the applicant lot owner.May be best to give this lot owner some genuine engagement and be prepared for possible mediation?
To get to the bottom of Charlie Jones’ question, it is necessary to consult the Strata Plan to determine the extent of lot property. It is not unusual for courtyard spaces to extend say 2 metres below the surface, and include airspace say 3 metres above the surface.
Having determined whether the pipe is located in common property or lot property, the definition of “common property infrastructure” in the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015 becomes relevant.
It is quite possible this is a lot owner responsibility, if it is a pipe located within lot property servicing only that property.
Even if this is found to be an issue involving common property, the cause of the blockage and damage may be relevant if the scheme has a by-law requiring owners to indemnify the owners corporation in respect of damage caused by owners to the common property. For example, the owner or tenant may have put unsuitable items down the toilet, planted a tree with aggressive roots or brought in compacting equipment to lay pavers.
A plumber who has been engaged by “Strata” will turn to “Strata” for payment.
It depends…….
Are the balustrades obviously unsafe, for example are there gaps large enough for a child to fall through?
Are there other works planned? If a development application is lodged with Council they take the opportunity to require certain upgrades by way of conditions placed on the development consent.
If you are doing something like a balcony remediation including waterproofing then you will need a design by an engineer before anything else. What is the reason for the upgrade?
TrulEConcerned, is it too late to get your case back on track? Tribunal members are usually as helpful as they can possibly be to unrepresented parties. Just by hiring a lawyer a bad owners corporation does not magically become a winner.
The fees have been paid to NCAT to run the case, and you have done the work of putting your evidence together so may as well keep going. The tribunal member will grant adjournments if there is something in your paperwork which needs to be straightened out. The evidence of both parties will be given its due weight irrespective of who has presented it. Depending on the merits of your case the solicitor for the owners corporation may even decline to cross examine.
You cannot know what will happen unless you go. You can approach a solicitor for a fee proposal, it could be less than you think. It all depends on how much the matter in question impacts your life. You are very correct, one person cannot police the world of strata.
The owners corporation is still required to have a strata committee and office bearers regardless of delegations made to the strata managing agent. It may be necessary to convene appropriate meetings to elect a committee and office bearers in the case of TrulEConcerned’s scheme.
Also, the strata committee and office bearers can exercise their duties and powers notwithstanding the delegations to a strata managing agent.
This sounds like you would be terminating the strata scheme, and lodging a development application for a subdivision. It would be a good idea to talk to your council about zoning and minimum block sizes for houses, together with floor space ratios. A strata scheme may have been the only way to achieve 2 dwellings on the land.
You will also need to speak to a strata lawyer about your plans, and one who is a stamp duty specialist. The common property and private lots would be dissolved upon termination of the scheme, and so no transfers of these types of property. The underlying beneficial ownership of the land on which the houses are built remains the same parties but would no longer hold as tenants in common but would each hold a separate new parcel.
It could prove time consuming and expensive, so hopefully some kind of insurance solution may be found?
Under the usual SCA contract the powers/duties of the Strata Committee are delegated to the Strata Managing Agent.
As a “corporate entity” the owners corporation requires human representation to participate before a tribunal. Often the strata managing agent acts on behalf of the owners corporation. It is necessary to obtain the permission of the tribunal for a solicitor to represent a party, and where the other party has given their prior consent the tribunal member will usually automatically grant the request.
If TrulEConcerned declined to consent then the solicitor would have to apply to the the tribunal member for permission to represent the owners corporation. Asking for consent beforehand is both a courtesy and time saving at the hearing.
If you were only charged for photocopying, at the rate stipulated in the strata agency agreement, then that is probably an unavoidable expense.
On the other hand, if you were charged for access to the records that is not appropriate. Those records are at the heart of the responsibilities of the secretary, who also determines who has access to the records. Notwithstanding the delegation of the duties of the secretary to a strata managing agent, the secretary is still entitled to exercise their functions as set out in s43 SSMA 2015, by virtue of s54(2) SSMA 2015.
Sparrow73, the new Design and Building Practioners Act 2020 may provide recourse as it (unusually) has retrospective application. A duty of care is imposed upon the various building professionals, including engineers.
A bit odd this lawyer is demanding documents which his clients as lot owners would already have? Surely it is the lot owners and their lawyer who are potentially sabotaging a sale as the minutes and correspondence would reveal the situation upon a strata search by an interested purchaser?
Also, the lot owners cannot sell what they do not own or have rights over, and this defect in title could undo any transaction.
The issue is not one which could be resolved for the lot owners by any amount of threats or bullying toward the strata committee.
The nature of the lawyer’s correspondence appears somewhat unprofessional, perhaps even defamatory, and you are able to lodge a complaint about this type of behaviour.
The pre-meeting voting records would be part of the records of the owners corporation, and should be able to be viewed by owners. Whilst the viewing of the voting records would likely take place some time after the meeting, it would at least be possible to verify the actual votes lodged.
Yes, purchase prices in “over 55’s” complexes do appear to be cheaper, whether buying newly built or years down the track.
As these complexes are often a way for developers to build on land not zoned for the density of strata, such as a suburban street of free standing houses, the location may not be the best for retirees. It could be not near shops and amenities, or lack good access to public transport or even be a steeply sloping site with lots of steps.
The recent controversial article concerning elderly owners unable to afford a special levy had me wondering what happens in these “over 55’s” complexes with multiple owners on limited incomes when the infrastructure ages? Attention would need to be given to budgeting from the beginning to ensure the owners could collectively afford the repairs and maintenance required, especially if there is a lift.
Hi StrataSurvivor,
A lot owner or even an occupier, as an “interested person” can apply to NCAT for the removal of an individual committee member, pursuant to s 238 of the Strata Schemes Management Act, 2015, potentially in circumstances which include those you describe.
Hopefully the requisite mediation before proceeding to NCAT would provide a reality check, and resolution for all involved?
We have a similar situation. The electricity meters etc were not installed where intended by the plans but instead on the side wall of a neighbouring townhouse, but wholly inside our courtyard lot space.
For meter reading and any other purpose, someone has to traipse through our courtyard. One solution proposed but never actioned was for us to give up a metre-wide strip of courtyard alongside the neighbouring wall and in return receive the same area added to the courtyard from common property elsewhere.
Given the likely costs of surveyors, solicitors and changing boundaries on strata plans with the Land Titles Office, I expect simply moving the meters may well be less expensive?
Agree that nothing will change unless the other owners can be convinced to care!
When the superfluous issues were dropped the three issues remaining on foot became the entirety of the case. The effect of dropping the superfluous points of claim is the same as if they had never existed.
TrulEConcerned was entirely successful. A special levy addressed to TrulEConcerned would lack a statutory basis.
At the current rate it seems the Strata Managing Agent is likely chalking up more additional fees than the initial amount claimed for spectating at NCAT?