[peterepete]

Thanks all for your input. This is two examples of what I termed ‘Cold Feet’.

Remember they were most in favour for pursuing this up and till the point of Tribunal application.

This from the Treasurer, ” I think going to Mediation, although the outcome was unsuccessful, has brought the issue to light, and going forward I think it has set expectations for any changes to Common Property and works proposed by Unit Owners. That is that the Strata Committee needs to be notified and consulted, before any works proceed. I’ve considered and decided that I don’t wish to move forward with this Matter”.

The other reply, ‘My suggestion is going forward we all commit to obtaining Strata committee approval for any Common Property changes. This way we can draw a line in the sand and can all move forward on the same page. If there were subsequent issues then I would consider the Tribunal’.

Yeah, great ! Just lets start from Now and totally ignore the blatant disregard of the Act by the Respondent and hopefully our ‘expectations’ will be met in the future. To say nothing of the animosity that has been created and Unfairness.

I thought that at first, considering the 180 degree U turn that they had been paid off.

I’ll start with Mediation and Section232. Again thanks all for your input !

[peterepete]

Hi Jimmy,

whenever the subject of noise disturbances attributed to Upstairs hard floor surfaces arises, created either by the removal of carpet and the sanding and varnishing of the existing floorboards or the installation of a Floating Floor over floorboards, I tear up.

I wish to speak for the thousands who are the ‘Upstairs’ who must put up with the noise from ‘Them’ downstairs.

My building is a four Lot Strata constructed in 1940. Two up, two down. Both downstairs Lots have hard wood flooring.

To infer that you can only be disturbed in one direction in this regard is annoying to say the least.

[peterepete]

Jimmy,

Thanks for taking the time to respond with such a detailed answer.

I was expecting to end up paying a lawyer for that advice.

Peter

 

[peterepete]

Yeah, thanks Jimmy.

The Strata Loan idea (for some) is now canned. Due to the reasons you highlighted.

Supplementary Question.

So, the O.C (4 of us with equal entitlements) reach a consensus as to the total Cost and choice of Contractor/s, and that it will be paid for by a Special Levy.

Those who stand to be most financially disadvantaged by the amount of their share, argue that the agreed repairs do not require to be undertaken altogether at once. Owners wishing otherwise, with the motivation of having the Strata spick n speck for sale disagree.

Two of these are big ticket items, replacement of  tiled roof and building wiring. Which have both been inspected and reported as requiring replacement.

In the absence of a Strata Loan what next ?    Tribunal adjudication ?

 

[peterepete]

Thanks kaindub. I’ll give it a try.

[peterepete]

Thanks for your response Jimmy.

I looked up the Explanatory Notes that were attached to S.C Agenda provided by Manager, they read;

Section 50(4) of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015

Provides that the term of appointment of a strata managing Agent may be extended by the strata committee

for successive periods of up to 3 months after it would otherwise expire (but not for any period that would extend beyond the date of the next annual general meeting of the owners corporation) pending a decision as to the reappointment of the strata managing agent.

 

The current 3 month period expires on November 30th. Interestingly, the Strata manager (when she got wind of what I was up to) sent a missive stating that any decision from a General Meeting would have no effect, with the contract renewal only able to be dealt with a the next A.G.M. For us that’s way off at the end of February next year and it appears to contradict the above.

[peterepete]

I’m a victim of a Strata Manager – ‘Window Lock Nazi’. My ‘crime’ was to elect to install the locks myself , simply to avoid having the devices painted on during renovations.

I’ve been reimbursed for the cost of the Locks and have (in a attempt to appease said Nazi) had a member of the Strata Committee, inspect the installation, which was duly reported to the Nazi and Owners Corporation.

Even though the Nazi has conceded that a Compliance Certificate is NOT an mandated requirement of the Strata Titles Management Act, the drain of Strata funds continues via ‘disbursements’ from repeated narky and harassing emails to the O.C regarding my crime.

Of course, I have been given the option of spending $90 to the strata managers for this nonsense to stop.

[peterepete]

Thanks for your replies.

In answer – The bathroom tiles and bath are 73 years old.

The waterproof guys won’t issue a warranty for the job unless the bath is removed for access to the wall. 

Fair Trading has confirmed that the cost for bath removal and re-installation is met by O.C , providing bath is against affected wall. 

Another situation has arisen over this issue.

What if the the Owner decides to renovate the entire bathroom around this waterproofing repair. The argument going “well I’ll never find a match for these old tiles, so I’ll replace all of them and as the bath has to come out, I’ll replace that too”.

In this case, who has the right to choose Tradespeople ? The O.C, because their paying or the Owner because he is extending the tiling job (at his cost) and it’s his bathroom ? 

[peterepete]

Thanks again Whale. Well explained.

[peterepete]

Thanks Whale.

Just doesn’t seem fair that half the strata has to put up with a situation created by a new incoming owner. You’d think that to let a dog run around common property unsupervised would require the permission of the majority.

[Author]

Replies