[kiwipaul]

QUESTION

 

Can an OC decision (at the AGM say) be later reversed by an EC decision at a later date

OR

Would it require a OC vote to reverse the original OC decision. This sounds the most logical ans but hey it’s strata so how knows

[kiwipaul]

Def agree owner should be included in the dispute as it’s his / her house.

If it’s an adjudication hearing their is allowance on the form for more than one respondent to be included. Maybe whoever lodged the claim didn’t know (it’s as simple as that).

The number of people living in strata who understand even the basic rules is few and far between. That is why this forum is so good you can get real down to earth answers (rather than legal speak).

[kiwipaul]

@Danielle said:
Hello kiwipaul

Regarding each owner is responsible for their own property in it’s entirety, I had stipulated in the AGM agenda and confirmed the decision in the minutes captured and issued back to the owners via email, then confirmed acceptance of the minutes in the next AGM

Doing this achieves nothing, it needs to be in the bylaws to be effective and the new bylaws need to be registered. Otherwise the rules of who is responsible for what is just the default for a Strata complex generally. An AGM can authorize changes but until they are registered they do not apply. Strongly recommend you speak to a Strata specialist.

[kiwipaul]

My personnel opinion is that if you don’t already have a strata go for a Torrens Title instead.

Torrens Title

Torrens title land division is the division of land into at least two allotments, which are held independently of one another. There are generally no shared facilities or infrastructure.

As far as I can tell this gives you 2 totally separate titles and no common property, so no need for sinking funds, admin funds, AGM, voting etc. Seems to me a much simpler system.

You really need to speak to a specialist regarding the best way forward and their are some on here. Just read their entries and see which one knows their stuff best.

[kiwipaul]

Sounds like you have an excellent arrangement and each of you looks after their own property and takes care of all your related problems. This to me would be an ideal strata situation. Self management is the way to go if each owner maintains their own property themselves.

BUT

Have you formalized this arrangement by creating a Strata document and registering the bylaws you both agree to. The byelaws should state that each owner is responsible for their own property in it’s entirety. Doing this now whilst you are on good terms with your neighbor removes the risk that at a future date they sell and your new neighbors are not so accommodating.

[kiwipaul]

@Dudley said:

Would I be correct in assuming that I can discuss, and put to a valid vote, any financial issues which appear in the Budget Estimate attached to the Notice of Annual General Meeting.

Many Thanks

You can def discuss any issues it raises and I would suspect you could make minor changes (debatable what is a minor change) but you would have to accept or reject the main the quote as a whole. (this is because the only people able to vote on any changes you propose are those present and so you are disenfranchising those not attending or returning a postal vote).

Just because you vote to accept this report dosn’t mean you cannot make changes to it and then ask for it to be voted on again. I know it’s a 10 year forecast but it can be changed as often as you like provide you have the votes.

[kiwipaul]

I’m actually gobsmacked by some of these bizarre rules in NSW.

Seems to me that any alterations you want to do you keep quite about them (saving yourself having to have a bylaw added), once alteration complete and it develops a fault you lodge a request with the Strata to fix it if it’s common property.

Common sense seems to have done a runner in NSW Strata.

[kiwipaul]

@JimmyT said:

But if the renovating owner sells and the new owner doesn’t become aware until later that common property has been altered, then the repair and maintenance of the altered common property falls back on the Owners Corp – that’s why you need watertight by-laws that leave a paper trail of changes.

Not sure that is true. As generally it’s the new owners responsibility to make sure everything is in order before purchasing the property. That why they do searches before completion to make sure everything is kosher. Also how on earth is the OC supposed to know when alterations are done within the property if owner (who did the alteration) doesn’t admit to it.

Adding a sensor light (example) in place of a normal light outside your front door in effect means you need a bylaw to be legal at $2,000 a pop is ridiculous.

This also seems to leave the door open for malicious people to take other residents to CTTT over every little alteration they notice. Adjudicator would generally find in their favor and tell defendant to have a bylaw added to make their alteration legal (costing them $2,000).

[kiwipaul]

@JimmyT said:

There’s clearly a need, however, for a quick, cheap and simple way of allowing renovations without having to re-write by-laws from scratch every time.

Agreed.

But if your example of re-tiling was done in OP complex these lot owners would have been up for a bill of $2,000 to have the bylaws amended which is excessive I believe.

Surely if owners make changes without approval which results in costs to the OC at a later date the lot owner (who did the alteration) is liable for all costs to repair the damage anyway so you don’t need an expensive bylaw to state the obvious (you already have one that restricts owners from damaging common property in most bylaws).

A cheaper solution would be to collect all these approvals (duly voted on) and once you have 10 then add these to the bylaws as the cost to change the bylaws is the same whether 1 is added or 10 (assuming you don’t require someone to draft them as well).

[kiwipaul]

This is one of the stupidest rules I’ve seen (in NSW Strata act) and can you blame people for ignoring it when renovating a kitchen will cost them an extra $2,000 to absolutely no advantage.

I don’t see WHY you need a bylaw to do any internal renovations that doesn’t affect the structure or outward appearance of the property. What you do within your own home is yours business (so long as it doesn’t affect other residents adversely). I’d ignore this rule the same as your neighbors have done.

How many people would pay an extra $2,000 to have an a/c fixed to an external wall that might not be visible to anyone except that lots resident.

QLD just requires a simple majority vote authorizing these type of alterations and then only if it’s visible form outside the lot or structural.

[kiwipaul]

Yes the EC can arrange insurance, (the SM works for you and has to do what you tell him, if he doesn’t like it get another SM).

Yearly insurance valuations seems a bit much (QLD once every 5 years). You need to check reg in NSW.

OH&S is my pet hate, we have the same in QLD. It’s Workplace Health and Safety and as far as I’m concerned a small residential Stata is NOT a workplace. How often do non strata properties (homes) carry out one of these (never in my experience). I can understand large residential / holiday lets with onsite managers, lifts, swimming pools etc requiring this but in your sit noway.

I found this on NSW H & S website

A strata title body corporate responsible for any common areas used only for residential purposes is excluded from the definition of a person conducting a business or undertaking (PCBU – the new term that includes employers) under the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011 (WHS Regulation) unless the strata title body corporate engages a worker as an employee.

https://www.workcover.nsw.gov.au/newlegislation2012/Pages/strata-title-body-corporate.aspx

 

Seems to me your SM is ripping you off left, right and centre.

[kiwipaul]

@JimmyT said:
New by-laws over-ride previous by-laws

Agreed

BUT only if they have been registered with the state authority. Until the new bylaws are registered they old ones apply (assuming they were registered).

When you buy a property your sol will obtain a copy of the current bylaws from the gov dept and these are the ones that are valid. Costs about $100 to obtain a copy from NSW land dept.

[kiwipaul]

I’m assuming the rooftop terrace is same as what you refer to as the balcony.

The balcony is within the lot and it’s yours to use alone, but roofing membranes are generally considered CP (see memorandum) and so it is a strata problem. The damage caused by the failure of roofing membrane would also be the responsibility of the Strata as well (unless your insurance picks up the bill, contents) as the damage was caused by a failure of the CP.

I also believe that even if the balcony tiles were fitted by yourself these would have to be removed to fix the membrane and so it’s strata problem to restore them.

Don’t see YOU have any liability unless their is a bylaw were you’ve all accepted liability for your own roof terrace.

I also doubt you will get any joy from strata insurance as they will claim fair wear and tear.

[kiwipaul]

@daveo said:
The strata plan shows each of the subdivided plots in the warehouse as Pt 1, Pt 2 etc. It also shows each of our balconies labelled as “BALCONY”. In the plan (top down) view, the balconies are shown separated from the unit interiors by a dotted line. Does this confirm that the balconies are or aren’t CP?

Dotted lines general signify a structure below the level of the relevant plan. If plan is level 2 dotted lines indicate structure on level 1 or below.

THICK lines indicate common property boundary

THIN lines indicate structure within your lot and your responsibility.

This is for QLD but I believe the convention is Ozzie wide.

Strata insurance covers all original structural features, internal walls, doors, etc even though they are not common property (weird). You should see an entry in the insurance quote to cover fixtures and fitting as well and these are for fitted kitchens, bathrooms, fitted carpets, etc.

[kiwipaul]

JimmyT said

And you’re right, it has to be adopted as a by-law if buildings want to use it a a set of rules rather than guidelines.  However, it’s probably the first document a CTTT adjudicator will look at when a dispute like this hits their desk – not because it’s the law (it isn’t) but because it gives them a consistent set of answers to tricky problems.

That seems very sensible and could resolve a lot of problems without going to adjudication. It also gives Strata residents a definitive guide of what is what providing they don’t have a bylaw that conflicts with it.

BUT

It also seems to be a money grab by the state by getting you to add a bylaw to all strata developments (cost approx $1,000 each) when if they had legally made it law it would have covered all strata developments automatically. Also why bother adding a bylaw when adjudicators are going to use it anyway whether its part of the bylaws or not. Just seems to be adding another layer of unnecessary bureaucracy

[Author]

Replies