Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
dustyrusty don’t use a paralegal, it is a waste of money, they won’t have any expertise. Put your facts together and go and see a lawyer.
It took me a while to work this out.
Write a formal letter to the Strata Manager noting the following:
– the proposed motion for the AGM
– that the motion is legally incorrect, and that the by-laws are those under Schedule 2
– that therefore in its current form the motion is out of order and must be withdrawn
– in any event, the owners have not been given sufficient information on which to vote, as the proposed by-laws have not been provided to the owners
You could look at amending the motion at the meeting to the correct by-laws, but it is a concern that the owners haven’t even been given the by-laws to consider. I wouldn’t worry too much about the timing, you can always say in the minutes that the owners have considered the by-laws.
bluehouse – this is not legal advice.
I think the OC would have to take all reasonable steps to ensure that the residents are aware of the by-laws, and the OC’s position in that regard. This may include things like sending a very firm letter to residents advising that these activities are a breach of the by-law, and that they are not permitted under any circumstances – that letter could be refreshed a couple of times a year. You could advise that if any children are found to be playing in that area they will be told to leave. You may also want to speak to your insurer to ask them what they expect.
Bear in mind that if something did occur, and someone was injured, if a court held that the OC was not liable, then the insurer wouldn’t be liable either. That might focus parents’ minds a bit. It is strange how parents don’t seem to care until something terrible happens, and then it is someone else’s fault.
A driveway is not a shared multi-purpose space, it is a driveway.
I think we have been down this road before, but essentially a group of children are using a common property carpark as a skate park. I am not going to get into an argument, but that is wrong. Go to your local Westfield and try it.
Yes – completely wrong.
Re conflict of interest – there is a difference between having an interest by virtue of being an owner generally, and having a material personal interest in a matter. This distinction is well recognised in a range of areas (particularly directors’ duties), and in the latter case a person with a material personal interest is generally excluded from participating in the decision. I am not saying that this applies in strata, although it should.
In this case I agree with Jimmy, don’t worry about the conflict of interest issue – just take them to the Tribunal, and resolve the matter.
Note that if you get legal advice on the matter, you can exclude them from seeing that legal advice on the basis that it is privileged.
There is a difference between what you want, and what may in most peoples’ view be right, and what you can validly claim or get.
It was the OC that was the party to the contract with the structural engineer, therefore it is the OC that has to pay the bill. You can’t unilaterally enter into a contract and then turn around and ask someone else to pay it. There may be circumstances where a person can be required to reimburse someone for costs and expenses flowing from their actions, but that is a different matter.
On the basis of the information you have given, there are a number of gaps in the way you proceeded. If you wanted to have the rogue renovator pay for the structural engineer’s report (and any other matters), then you would have needed to put things in place to make the owner liable, before you engaged the structural engineer. There are a number of ways you could have achieved that, including getting an order from the Tribunal. Or you could have gone through a process with the owner for breaching the by-laws and (possibly) the law, and agreed a form of settlement with them, that included them agreeing to pay for the report. Or you could have required them to obtain a report.
A big stick in the circumstances you outline is you could have advised the owner that the OC was going to require them to reinstate the common property unless they agreed to do certain things.
You say that you made it clear to the Strata Manager that you expected the owner to pay, but that doesn’t mean anything. Unless you had the owner agree to pay those costs, the owner is correct, you engaged the engineer, and the owner wasn’t party to that agreement.
It does sound like your Strata Manager is ineffectual but it isn’t just the SM, you can’t rely on things you told the SM – the issue is what was advised to the owner and what was agreed with them.
Oh for goodness sake. What a load of cr*p.
Ask him why he hasn’t registered the by-law, and if he has not done so to do it immediately. Point out to him that if you are required to have a GM, he can’t charge you because it is solely due to his failure to do his job.
I have just done one and you get the certificate of title back in a week.
Well yes the by-law needs to be registered so the strata manager should progress that. Don’t worry about it.
Your strata manager sounds like a pain in the neck.
Digby – the key issue may not be noise on the common property, because in the case of noise it has to interfere with a resident’s reasonable enjoyment of their property. The OP indicates that vibrations/noise are an issue, but this may be difficult to prove. It is much easier to go the other route I suggested.
The essential element is that children should not be allowed in an area like that unsupervised, and they certainly shouldn’t be riding skateboards. The model by-law that deals with that is:
8 Children playing on common property(1) Any child for whom an owner or occupier of a lot is responsible may play on any area of the common property that is designated by the owners corporation for that purpose but may only use an area designated for swimming while under adult supervision.
(2) An owner or occupier of a lot must not permit any child for whom the owner or occupier is responsible, unless accompanied by an adult exercising effective control, to be or remain on common property that is a laundry, car parking area or other area of possible danger or hazard to children.
Schemes usually have by-laws that are similar. Even if there isn’t a by-law like that, allowing children to do that when it is so obviously dangerous is just plain stupid and opens the owners up to personal liability.
Well yes you can do that, if the owners corporation resolves to adopt electronic voting. Note that is not giving a proxy.
I do wish the DOFT would give complete advice.
Have a look at this page here, go down to Voting from a Remote Location.
With any luck the OC will accept the vote, but they may not. Your other option is to ask to be dialled in to the meeting, and you can vote that way.
You request it from the strata manager.
Unfortunately no – the Corporations Act doesn’t apply to strata schemes.
I can understand you may be reluctant to subject a friend to an unpleasant meeting, but if that is your only option and it is important then I suggest you seriously consider it. Looking at it another way, some people (like me) enjoy that kind of challenge.
Strata managers aren’t psychic. While I would agree that as with any profession there are bad strata managers, the persons best placed to know who is moving in and out of the building are the residents.
No.
The Dividing Fences Act sets out the law that applies in such a case.
https://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/dfa1991137/