Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
@Stevecro said:
Whale has made a really good point there, you should check the wiring of those power points, its high likely that if every lot has one, then it may be connected to that lots power mains rather than to the common property switch/mains…How common is this configuration? If it is common then uptake of EVs by strata property owners might be less difficult than I was thinking it might be.
I agree a simple meter like the one Jimmy linked to may well be sufficient, especially while EVs are not common. That is what I have on a line from a neighbour’s unit that is conveniently next to our shared parking area. That works while my neighbour’s electricity tariff is flat rate. If there had been a way to have the line run back to my unit’s meter box I would have preferred that. I am on a time of use tariff (voluntarily) so I can run mostly discretionary loads such as the electric boost for solar hot water or the dishwasher on off-peak most of the time and save some money while having the option if necessary to run them any time. It would be nice to charge the cars that way too; usually on cheaper off peak but able to charge at any time if I need to. It is not really a big deal since an electric car is cheap to run anyway but the time of use tariff would save me enough money for an extra meal out occasionally.
@Whale said:
You’re amazing Peter – you never fail to add-value to discussions here especially (like all of us) around your pet topics,Thanks
but for the record, when reviewing the Mitsubishi iMiEV, one of our largest motoring organisations concluded that “compared with a similar petrol powered small car, the MiEV is $30k more expensive…
I agree it was too expensive at its initial price of $48K but at the price you can get them now $16-24K they are no longer $30K more expensive.
A Nissan Leaf is in the $30,000s. Now, in the $40,000s you can get a Mitsubishi plug in hybrid outlander: Two electric motors for front and rear wheels, enough battery range to do most city driving fully electric but long range with petrol too.
Making provision for EV charging will soon enough be an issue.
Jimmy, can I suggest you run your draft information sheet by me? As it happens, for many EVs you do actually “…just plug a car in like a kettle…”. The analogy is apt because kettles are often rated at 2400W and many cars have their built in charger running at the same wattage. Sometimes the charging cord (strictly an ‘EVSE’) is supplied with a 15A plug even though the draw is no more than 10A.
“You need special transformers to be installed so the pre-emptive strike on electrical sockets by the Owners Corps in the first post is a bit pointless.”
Yes, there is specialised equipment required for a fast charger but most people most of the time when charging at home will find they are happy with the 10A or 15A standard outlet.
The standard power point is the lowest common denominator of charge points. All electric cars can use them even while having provision for faster charging from dedicated outlets. For home charging, fast charging is usually not necessary. Fast charging is mainly useful for enabling intercity driving and for (say) delivery vehicles that might keep returning to a depot.
@Whale said:
Scott13 – I can’t see electric motor vehicles becoming a cost-effective proposition any time soon…Huh?! I’ve been happily driving my DIY-converted electric car for almost 6 years. For the last 18 months we have had a commercial electric car as well. The cost to run the cars is less than any petrol car available. Maintenance is less also. The ex-demo Mitsubishi iMiEV, virtually new, cost $24K. Now you can buy the ones that have come back from 3 year lease with low milage for about $16-17K.
Electric vehicle charging will be an issue for strata properties soon enough. I was lucky that a neighbour with his unit close to our shared parking space was happy to let me charge on a line from his unit. We have a subsidiary meter in his meter box so we can both see what I have added to his bill. Every six months I give him a few hundred dollars to cover the fuel cost of all our city driving.
Meanwhile, we have another power point on the OC’s circuit next to an unallocated parking spot. We pointed it out to all residents in a newsletter as a handy facility for unit owners so they would go there to vacuum out their cars rather than driving across the grass to get close to their units. The amount of power that anyone could take is trivial unless they were plugged in for hours day after day. An inappropriate use such as routinely charging an electric car would soon become obvious.
Peter.
The rest of the EC chastises the one who is overstepping the mark. Or, if enough are fed up, make a point of voting against that person at the next AGM.
I’m not in NSW so I am making a general point here.
I think successful management requires a little tolerance of ambiguity and judgement. If there is a general maintenance budget or a grounds budget line and the cost is small and the pot plant could be put against one of those and the EC would not be going over budget and the EC is confident that there would be general support for making the lobby a bit more pleasant with a few pot plants, then I think it should do it. At the next AGM the treasurer can write a plain english report explaining what the various lines in the financial statement actually mean and what they covered in the past year and what things might be done against those items in the coming year.
If the cost is not trivial in the grand scheme of things then put it to the next AGM.
For some things it is a matter of judgement. In your particular OC, will the EC be praised for having got on with some beautification rather than endless talking about it, or will they be condemned by a loud pedant who says that buying a few pot plants for inside rather than outside should not be counted against the admin fund line item for ‘gardening’?
I have no idea about the cost, sorry. Others might have recent experience.
My comment is advice to do as much of your own research as you can. Make it really easy for the EC to see this is not just a good idea to get behind but a clearly thought out proposal with everything considered such as on-going maintenance costs (or savings on current heating costs), a realistic assessment of how long the swimming season would be extended and so on. Don’t assume others will see it as obviously a good idea as it might seem to you. Find a few allies! Point out the increase in property values for those who couldn’t care less about having better shared, community facilities.
The Owners Corporation is the entity that can be sued and is responsible for maintaining the common property in a safe condition. I am not sure what you mean by ‘the strata’. Colloquially, that is the owners corporation. The owners corporation is the ‘club’ all owners become a member of, whether they like it or not, when they buy a unit.
Now, it might get more complicated in that the OC in turn might have a claim against some other entity if, perhaps, the executive of the owners corporation could show that they had directed the managing agent to arrange the repair of the doors and provided the funding but it was not done. I think that would be a problem for the executive committee to sort out with the managing agent and not your problem.
I expect it would be a matter of providing documentary evidence of the name change to the managing agent and asking for the change to be made.
However, I wonder why anyone bothers with this woman-has-to-change-her-name thing these days. I have been happily married for 27 years but my wife still has the name she had when I met her. I expect your wife has all sorts of things with her name on them: documents, licences, qualifications, job references, certificates, authorship of publications, titles to property, bank, superannuation and other investment accounts, and so on that would be a pain to change. Why not leave all that as it is?
You do realise the EC can hold a meeting whenever it cares to do so independent of the managing agent? Take your own minutes and send them to the managing agent to be added to the records.
I heard at the last Owner Corporation Network ACT meeting that at least one ACT OC had done this with their own rule (aka bylaw).
@tharra said:
I’ll suggest a softly, softly approach. Why don’t you start by attending a few EC meetings as you are entitled to do & raise your issues in a non combative manner? Remember EC members are volunteers.Agreed. Ask face to face about whether there had been some problem getting the work done and perhaps offer to help arrange some of the things. Some people seem to regard it as more of a virtue to come in under budget than to spend the money and get stuff fixed. You might find that some of the EC would like to get on with works but someone is so hung up on bureaucratic process that it never happens or takes ages. Perhaps they are being too nice trying to get complete consensus rather than getting a majority and getting on with it. There are many reasons why the work might not be getting done.
@JimmyT said:
What utter nonsense – sounds like lawyers making work for lawyers. Talk to an experienced STRATA lawyer about creating a by-law that covers all units and allows for all possible variations to be added as riders to the permission given.Indeed, agreed, and what about kitchen refurbishments? At the very least a blanket by-law should be able to give permission to all 42 units to do what 3 have been give permission to do.
Depending on what state you are in, there might be differences in what can be approved and by what mechanism. EG. in the ACT the Act says the EC can pass a resolution to approve ‘minor’ alterations to the common property such as an awning if it would not interfere unreasonably with the reasonable use and enjoyment of the common property by other owners. The Act gives an awning or an airconditioner as examples of minor incursions on the common property but what is minor in one OC could be major somewhere else depending on the layout of the common property. An general meeting could pass a resolution to direct the EC to only approve certain sorts of awnings, for example. On the other hand, in the ACT, an unopposed resolution is required to grant a ‘special privilege’ to use common property. Permission to have exclusive use of a particular parking space would generally be a special privilege rather than a minor use unless the OC had a great oversupply of parking, in which (unlikely) case it might be accepted as minor.
In other states, even the most trivial alteration might require a by-law and the class of resolution required to pass that by-law can vary.
A by-law could give permission to all or a class of owners to do a particular thing in a particular way (eg install awnings of a particular colour and type, but only on windows of west-facing units).
If the screens are on common property, and are furthermore not in compliance with a by-law, and they have given more than adequate notice to residents to retrieve their property, I can see no impediment to the EC simply going ahead to remove the items unless access to these areas of common property is only possible via a unit area. That complicates matters since I expect the NSW legislation and/or your by-laws have other regulation about reasonable notice and purpose to enter the unit. That could be the next step on expiry of the 30 days. To save EC members some personal grief, it could be best at this point if you have a managing agent to ask the agent to engage a person to do the removal following proper notice, to the letter.