[Sir Humphrey]

Depends who ‘we’ is. A committee must spend in accordance with a budget approved by a general meeting. A little bit of practical leeway is reasonable but not a complete reversal of a general meeting decision. On the other hand, a general meeting can rescind a previous decision and replace it with an alternative decision. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@Scuttlebut said:

Strata has nothing to do with supplying electricity to cars. We don’t pay for their gas so why ?  

Because the most convenient and practical way to use an electric car is with relatively slow charging at its usual parking place(s). Charging at home is usually enough to cover all of one’s local driving (as I have done for a decade) with rapid charging away from home generally only needed for longer, extra-urban trips. 

Note that the residents may need the OC to supply the electricity or at least facilitate that but the OC would not be paying for the electricity. Individuals would be billed for what they use. It is no different from electricity you use at your unit for other purposes. The main issue for owners corporations is how to arrange this utility for its residents when units and their associated parking spaces are often not adjacent and charging cannot be readily arranged to occur through the meter of the individual unit. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@Faraway girl said:

We can’t get our by laws adopted because the 9 owners of this 14 lot apartment building only hold 61% of the lot entitlements. We all live here and want these by laws adopted. The developer can’t sell his own apartment or the other apartments he still owns and these give him a 39% lot entitlement. In order to change common property ( we want to alter the ornamental pool area) or adopt or change by laws you are not able to have more than 25% of lot entitlements voting against it. So guess what? The developer does not live here, he visits occasionally, but he has told people that all the owners here are “scum” and he makes life difficult by voting against every special resolution just because he has some unsold apartments and his own holiday apartment.   

If all but one owner are unanimously in favour of various motions but lack the necessary entitlements for a special resolution, then I think you have a good chance if you seek an order from the Tribunal to give effect to the failed motions. In the ACT strata legislation the Tribunal can give an order giving effect to a failed motion on the grounds that opposition to the motion was unreasonable. I expect other jurisdictions have similar provisions. You would need to provide the minutes of the meetings where the motions failed, the voting numbers (and/or have all 9 owners as parties to the application to the Tribunal), any background on the motion that was presented to the meeting or a new statement about why the proposals are such reasonable proposals. If you are lucky, the developer won’t even bother to show up to defend his position and you could get what you want easily. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@Austman said:
…I’ve personally spoken to large strata insurance companies and it’s not the way they see it.  They have told me that lot owners are seen as a part of an OC/BC and can even independently make a claim if it’s for their insured lot property.

I’ve also had a recent claim in one of my ACT properties…

This is a useful resource for the ACT:

http://web.ocnact.org.au/decisions-by-acat-test#TOC-Insurance

[Sir Humphrey]

One observation is that ACAT were surprisingly unimpressed by not particularly complicated though technical arguments presented with evidence by intelligent non-experts. They do seem keen to prefer the cognitive shortcut of having a credentialed expert give sworn testimony, rather than follow an argument.

So, if you are arguing that some repair or maintenance has not been adequate, it might be better to have an expert witness assert that rather than assume it is sufficient to have a straightforward but slightly technical argument from an intelligent amateur (i.e. you).  

Eg. it might be obvious to you and me that a pipe is leaking and we might think a photo showing drips would be enough but it might be better to have a licensed plumber tell the Tribunal that the pipe is leaking!

[Sir Humphrey]

If NCAT is anything like the ACT equivalent, ACAT, there is some understanding and tolerance extended to non-professionals presenting their own cases. An order has to be in the form that some person (which could be the OC) must do some thing by some time. 

You could write:

The applicant seeks orders that each of the following items be repaired or replaced by dates determined to be reasonable by the Tribunal, as set out below:

1) that the respondent must replace X with Y.

2) that the respondent must repair Z.

3) …

It is often useful to finish with: “Any other order that the Tribunal considers reasonably necessary or convenient to resolve the dispute.”  This is an invitation to the Tribunal to propose solutions and shows that you are entirely reasonable and flexible, seeking only a satisfactory outcome and not even a tiny bit vindictive ;-). 

At a ‘preliminary conference’ or ‘directions hearing’, the OC might accept that it can do some things by some date while it might argue the point on other items. For the things that are agreed, you should then ask for ‘consent orders’. With the assistance of the Tribunal member, if both parties agree that some thing will be done by some person by some date, you want that in writing as an order. Then, when you come back to deal with the other more difficult matters you can report whether the consent orders have been complied with.  It won’t look good for the OC if it has not done what it agreed to and was ordered to do.

Note that the Tribunal will be looking to have the parties agree to some solution and go away without taking up any more time and public resources. They won’t tell you the best solution. As long as what you agree to is accepted by both parties and not obviously illegal,  then that is what you will get, even if the Tribunal member might privately think it is not really the best outcome. If you can’t agree, and the matter goes to a hearing, then the orders you get might be what you wanted or they might not be what either party wanted. 

I hope that helps. Be prepared and utterly transparent and it is not as scary as it seems. Don’t spring surprises. Include your evidence with your application. If you have to add something later, do so as early as possible and always have a copy of any document or photo for the Tribunal member and the other parties. Copy in all parties in any correspondence, even if another party doesn’t. 

I hope that helps, 

Good Luck.

[Sir Humphrey]

@Austman said:
They might not be common property but that doesn’t mean they’re not covered by the OC’s strata building policy.  

My comments here only relate to the ACT, which is all I really know with any confidence. Here, the OC is required to take out insurance for the entire property, not just the common property. So, if an insurable event occurs, even where it is usual for the damaged thing to be a lot owner’s responsibility for repair and maintenance, a claim can be made. So, if some fixture was simply worn out or damaged through normal use, the lot owner would repair it. If it were damaged due to some specific insurable event, then the OC’s insurance should cover it.

And if they are covered by the OC’s strata building policy (I think they will be, as a lot fixture) then it’s allowed for the lot owner to make an insurance claim.  I don’t think the OC could even stop that.

Here it would be the OC that has to make the claim because the policy holder is the OC, not any individual member of the OC. That is why the OC would pay to do the repair and recoup its costs by claiming on its insurance policy. 

Who pays any excess is another question.  That seems to vary around Australia.  Sometimes it’s written in the Act, sometimes it’s an OC/BC decision.

And if the insurance claim is refused, it’s then the lot owners cost.  

In the ACT, the Act requires the OC to be ‘fully insured’. However, it is not possible to be completely, utterly, ‘fully’ insured because every available policy has an excess. Consequently, to the extent that an OC has ‘failed’ to have a ‘full’ insurance coverage, it has to pay the shortfall, normally, just the excess associated with the policy. For years OCs resisted paying the excess if it could be extracted from individual lot owners until a Tribunal case settled the question of who pays. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@Austman said:

@dan said:
Following on from my email above the strata manager has responded with – “This is not a misuse of funds as the shower screen is covered under the strata insurance policy and we are in the process of making a claim to the insurance company”.

To note that compulsory strata building insurance usually covers much more than just common property.  Most policies I’ve seen also cover lot fixtures, lot fittings and lot improvements as well. 

If that’s the case, a lot owner is within their rights to make a strata insurance claim if it’s a claim on their insured lot property fixture, fitting or improvement.  

It is usual for the owners corporation to pay the full amount of a claimable item and then make the insurance claim to recoup the cost. The OC then wears any short-fall due to any excess (at least in the ACT that is correct). 

[Sir Humphrey]

@jessico32 said:
Thanks Jimmy,

1. 1. Who should notify the owners of a SC. meeting – the committee itself or the strata management company? 

  

That would be a function of the secretary of the committee. However, EC functions can and often are delegated to a managing agent. However, the buck stops with the committee. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@N860CR said:
… Committee takes the commercial lots to NCAT, the commercial lots decide to stop parking the day before the hearing and “promise” the tribunal that they’ll stop. No fine is given, the day after, the cars are back again.

The committee gives up …

Was the “promise” verbal and not recorded or was it recorded as a ‘consent order’?  In the ACT equivalent, ACAT, if you go to the Tribunal and the parties come to some agreement and they make commitments to do or not do various things, those things are then recorded as ‘consent orders’. They are then legally binding, not just a promise that can be forgotten the next day. Having a Tribunal order enforced is another hoop to jump through but the courts do not look favourably on people who disregard Tribunal orders. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@LogicprObe said:
Driving around Sydney now, it’s starting to look like a third world country with all the washing on the balconies.

Some of the blocks are even ‘high end’!  

I’d be pleased to see that so many people are saving money and NSW’s coal-fired emissions by using solar and wind power to dry their clothes on the most cost-effective renewable energy equipment there is. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@Miranda said:
Geez… off topic here ….but Sir Humphrey she sounds lovely, I’d swap my neighbours for her any time…

Yes. Thelma was special: https://trove.nla.gov.au/people/756057?c=people

[Sir Humphrey]

@JimmyT said:
… In fact, the best thing Costa could do might be to give the neighbours a cheery wave – that would have most people closing their blinds … if they cared about how much their neighbours could see.  

Indeed. This is what happened with my neighbour, except that she asked me to give a cheery wave rather than avert my eyes when I could see her sitting up in bed as I went out to collect our newspaper. She wanted the connection between us. She was a bold, feisty and very interesting lady and a great neighbour. 

[Sir Humphrey]

@JimmyT said:
Perhaps Costa could send them a friendly note saying that he can see right into their kitchen and sometimes sees more than he would like … just so they know.  

Costa, if you do send a note, make sure you put your name and contact details to it. That would minimise the risk that it is taken the wrong way. A young woman on her own getting an anonymous note about her appearance could be seriously creeped out by it. 

More generally, I and various of my neighbours have, from experience, an abhorrence of anonymous notes. 

[Sir Humphrey]

So you are on the committee? Presumably you have a treasurer. Why not just ask the treasurer? What did the treasurer present to the last AGM?

[Author]

Replies