Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
The Strata Committee has a duty to act in the best interests of the owners, and that would include seeking appropriate advice on a complex contract for expensive works, in order that the owners’ interests are protected. The only person qualified to do that is a lawyer expert in that field. Building consultants and engineers are not qualified to give advice on contracts, and I am sure if you asked them they would tell you that.
Jimmy – there’s only one owner, she wants the floor replaced.
If the owner chooses to replace the floor, as per Lady Penelope’s and my advice, that is her decision and the OC should not contribute in any way financially.
What the OC should be doing is saying we will repair the floor, we do not accept that we are responsible for replacing a whole floor. If the owner wants to replace the floor she has to pay for it.
If I were an owner with an original floor I would be concerned if the OC tried to remove that from what is considered common property.
I generally agree with Lady Penelope, however in respect of sanding and polishing that is maintenance rather than repair, and it would be reasonable for an owner to do that – the only issue in that regard would be whether the sanding and polishing was done properly, and whether that contributed to any possible damage.
It sounds like the OC has been more than reasonable, it is not clear on what basis the owner is claiming that the whole floor has to be replaced. If it can be repaired, then the OC should proceed on that basis. Owners often don’t understand that if they are claiming something is the OC’s responsibility, then as a general rule the OC decides how to progress it, provided the measures taken are reasonable.
In relation to a cash offer, as Lady Penelope says, do not go down that road. Whatever the OC’s responsibility may be, they should remain in control. For example, what would happen if you paid the owner the cash, and she did not repair the floor, and then sold the apartment?
It is often remarked that consumers don’t know the details of legal agreements that govern the most important things in their lives – house purchases, off the plan, insurance, mortgages. It is only when things go wrong that they become aware of specific conditions in those agreements, which are usually not in their favour.
The contract price is $800K, and the scope of works is likely complex. There is no way I would enter into a contract like that without a review by someone who is qualified. Bear in mind that the contract has been prepared for the other party, and the terms will reflect that. At the very least it will give you certainty as to what you are actually paying for.
Setting aside fire alarm requirements, if there was no motion and no resolution of the owners to install hard wired fire alarms, then the Chair has no authority or power to require you to give access. He certainly can’t bill you.
I would also be concerned that this work is proceeding without a resolution of the owners, as I presume the costs are being borne by the OC? If that is the case you should be asking on what basis he has engaged the electrician, because from what you have said the Chair has no authority to do that either.
I don’t think it is a matter of whether a Committee has the legal right, perhaps it is more a matter of whether they are authorised to take a position or make submissions on behalf of the owners corporation as a whole.
Looking at the legislation and the functions of the OC set out in section 9 which are essentially delegated to the SC, I’m not sure that they do. However, you don’t want to cut off your nose to spite your face, and I agree with Jimmy that there are a number of instances where a submission by the Committee can be of great use, taking into account that many owners may not be aware of an issue or just can’t be bothered.
One way of dealing with this could be to put up a resolution at the AGM to authorise the SC to do that kind of thing, within certain parameters.
An interesting parallel is with the recent marriage debate, the Law Society of NSW issued a joint statement with the Bar Association and AMA NSW supporting a change to the Marriage Act. A number of members of the Law Society have called on the president to resign, because in their view the Council of the Law Society does not have the right to represent the views of its members on the issue. Even lawyers can get themselves in a knot about this type of thing.
You can only inspect the records of the owners corporation if you are an owner, or you are authorised to do so by an owner. The latter usually applies where the owner is selling, and a prospective buyer wants to inspect the records. The request is made under section 182.
Those records would include the strata roll, which is the name and address for service of the owner. However, if someone accessing that information used it for a purpose other than that for which they have been authorised, that would raise concerns.
Strata records are private, they are not public documents.
No, Strata Committee information should not be public, strata schemes are not public companies, they are private entities. As a comparison, the Corporations Act sets out the requirements for persons who want to obtain the share register of publicly listed companies, and they are pretty stringent. The Privacy Act also sets out how personal information must be dealt with, and the details on the strata roll constitute personal information (outside of use within the strata legislation).
The strata manager is the usual point of contact for a strata scheme, if I found out that someone was accessing the strata records to obtain my details for commercial reasons I would be furious, however well-intentioned the person might be.
If you mean you are not an owner, then you don’t have any right to information about the owners or the Committee members, and the strata manager is doing the right thing – how would you like it if someone gave out your details to third parties without your permission?
If you are an owner then you have the right to access the strata roll which will have certain details about the owners on it.
Some time ago we had a long running saga associated with the replacement of our back stairs. We went for a three year period where none of us could use our back doors or the stairs, because there were no stairs, and there was no access to the courtyard. The noise and mess etc. during construction was considerable. Nobody claimed compensation, including the owners who had tenants.
While I am not sure what went down between the tenants and their landlords, all of the owners knew that if they claimed compensation they would effectively be paying for it, because it would come out of the OC’s funds, and the money could be put to better use.
It is my understanding that tenants can claim compensation for a breach of a duty by the landlord, which may include things like reasonable peace and enjoyment of the property. The question is do you want to encourage the tenants to do that?
The agent and strata manager are clearly dropkicks, so get the letterbox fixed, demand reimbursement in writing, and if it were me I would be calling the Department of Fair Trading. And tell your bank to send things like cards to a branch for you to collect.
So you don’t have a problem with them going into the property and doing the work, but you can’t be there. I am not sure why you object to arranging for them to have access, there is any number of ways that can be achieved.
If your door is locked they can’t gain access so yes, you are preventing access.
Why don’t you give the keys to a neighbour so they can open the door for the tradesmen?
There is nothing magic about the managing agent contacting the strata manager, equally there is nothing stopping you contacting the strata manager. However – the strata manager needs some comfort that whatever it is you are asking for is within parameters. In our strata the strata manager often liaises with the tenants directly because as you say it is just easier, but that is usually after a request from the managing agent.
Your tenancy agreement may say something about how repairs are progressed, and this may encompass you making a request to the managing agent.
If the strata manager isn’t responding, that is a whole other issue. Perhaps you need to ask your managing agent to contact the owner of the property to tell them that failure to carry out repairs may be a breach of the lease, and the strata manager is causing the problem?
Re the method of “payment” of this honorarium by forgiving a quarter of levies, I don’t think you can do that anyway.
The strata levies are a debt owed by each owner, and must be paid on a quarterly basis. If a levy is overdue, then 10% interest applies. The owners can resolve at a general meeting that a contribution is to bear no interest. The owners can also resolve at a general meeting to enter into a payment plan either generally or in respect of a specific lot, in respect of overdue contributions, and that plan can only go for 12 months.
As far as I can see from the Act there is no power of the owners to allow someone to not pay their levies or part of their levies, or as it has been termed, grant a “levy holiday”. The levies must be paid each quarter. The only way you could “pay” this person is by actually paying them, provided the requirements for making that payment were met, i.e. by a resolution for a period that has gone. The person still has to pay their levies, payment of a fee or honorarium is a separate matter, and an auditor would be likely to raise that. If you have a budget and you are meant to be receiving a certain amount of money from the owners each year, that is what should be showing in the accounts.
There are instances where an order can be given that an owner doesn’t have to pay a special levy, but that is in very particular circumstances, and the owners don’t decide that, the tribunal does.
More generally this arrangement seems highly irregular, and you shouldn’t be paying her anything. I suggest you get an auditor in to look at the accounts and if you can’t get this lady off the Committee at least try and get her out as an office bearer, which can be easier.