Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Mould in apartments can be caused by structural issues (OC responsibility) and housekeeping issues (resident responsibility). As secretary of our strata committee, I regularly receive complaints about mould. Most of the complainants assume – and are hopeful – that the problem is an OC responsibility. On inspection, we find that it is mostly an issue to do with housekeeping – not ventilating by opening windows and doors whenever possible, not wiping down condensation on windows and from clothes dryers, etc.These are resident responsibilities.
I am about to put out a flyer with tips about keeping an apartment mould free, based on advice from the ACT Government available online.
As an example, our strata complex is 35 years old and has 35 units. One of the units has a tiled terrace that is about 40sqm. Around two years ago, water appeared to be leaking into the ceiling of the unit underneath. We asked our consulting engineering firm for a brief on how best to deal with the apparent leak. The cost came in at a projected $120K to lift all the tiles, replace the waterproofing and re-tile (new tiles) and by the way, replace the balustrade because it was 10cm short of current standards. For a leak? The explanation was that the job could only be done under the supervision of an engineer because it involved waterproofing, and the balustrade came into the picture because the tiles came up to the lower edge of the balustrade which brought it into the scope of works. Needless to say, we didn’t go ahead with that job. Rather, we had the whole terrace re-grouted at a cost of $19K. So far, no further leakage has been reported. Something is seriously wrong here.
1 user thanked author for this post.
The Mosman purchase of a $32M block of 12 ordinary apartments into a development of nine luxury apartments is not the first such purchase in this area. In or around 2022, a block of 24 1970s apartments on the corner of Park Avenue and Sutherland Street, Cremorne was sold as a deceased estate for $35 million. It is now being replaced by 11 luxury units. So low cost housing is being replaced by high cost housing. Makes no sense in a city that is apparently being rebuilt to accommodate more people and where low cost housing is desperately needed.
I am the secretary of an OC. As I understand it, the OC is responsible for waterproofing UNLESS it is damaged in any way by a resident/owner, who is then liable for its repair. In this case, I would want clarity on exactly where the leak is coming from, before doing anything else. Is it certain that the leak that is evident in the kitchen is coming from the ensuite above? If yes, then where in the ensuite is the leak coming from? If it is the area where there was a grouting repair 4.5 years ago, is there evidence that that grouting repair damaged the waterproofing? If yes, then the owner of the townhouse is liable for the repair of the waterproofing since that owner would have been responsible for the repair of the grouting. A waterproofing expert should be able to answer these questions.
I am the secretary of a strata committee where we have had the same problem – residents parking in visitor spots. This is a 35 unit complex with 8 visitor parking spaces. We have a by-law that regulate visitor parking to the effect that visitors may only park for 24 hours in a visitor parking spots in a seven day period. Then there is the general by-law which states that residents must not place their property on common property. In this case, parking their vehicles in visitor spots means that they are in breach of that by-law.
I monitor the visitor parking if someone lets me know that they have seen the same car in a visitor parking space for too long. I then check and if it continues, I issue a warning which I place on the windscreen, requiring that the car be moved. If there is no action, I issue a second notice in similar terms, but this time advising that I am moving the matter to our strata managing agent. If no response, that’s exactly what I do. The strata managing agent then issues a Notice to Comply and imposes a fee of $27.90 (or similar) for the issue of that Notice. The fee is charged to the owner’s levies. Owners can recoup this from tenants, I suppose, if it involves a tenant.
I have done this a few times with great results. No problems for the last six months (fingers crossed). By the way, the strata managing agent has drafted a by-law for the next AGM which specifically empowers him to charge fees for issuing Notices to Comply, although he already has an implied authority to do so.
What about the landlord who simply doesn’t want to rent to a tenant with a cat or dog? In our scheme, there is the appropriate by-law that allows cats and dogs on application and no applications have so far been refused. But if the owner of an apartment decided that they don’t want pets in the apartment, can they simply refuse to let the apartment to anyone who wants to bring in a dog or cat?
Well done, you, for persevering with this matter, notwithstanding the personal and financial costs, as well as the perils of dealing with NCAT, where the decisions can be capricious, to say the least. The strata development where I am secretary has had a no smoking by-law since 2018 and it works well. We have only had an issue with a tenant who was smoking, but it was very difficult to get the proof. However, the owner was on side and the matter was resolved.
If the drain is part of the network of drains that services all of the villas, then strata/Owners Corporation should pay.