Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
It’s the owners corporation’s responsibility – you can’t register a by-law unless you are authorised by the OC. Write to them – both the strata manager and the EC and remind them that the by-law must be registered, and as it has been approved you request that it be registered without further delay so you can proceed.
An alternative is to advise them that you are proceeding with the air conditioner as the by-law has been approved by the owners corporation, then it is their problem!
Did you agree to pay the costs of registering the by-law? If so you will need to pay that. It is quite expensive if lawyers are used, i just do it myself.
in the case of meetings of the owners corporation, technically there has to be a “meeting”. That is – you send a notice out saying that a general meeting of the owners corporation will be held at X time on Y date at Z venue.
However, in some cases the resolution will be approved by the owners submitting their proxy and not attending. I have seen “meetings” where forms have been sent out appointing the strata manager as proxy and providing for a vote either way on the resolution – in effect the meeting has been “held” on paper. In those instances the owners are told not to attend, but of course they can if they want to.
(they did that once in our scheme, and we upset the manager by turning up)
With the strata law changes I am not sure this will be possible. Maybe Whale or Jimmy can enlighten us further.
A by-law needs to be registered within two years of it being approved. It doesn’t have any force/effect until it is lodged with the LPI. If it isn’t registered within the two years then you go back to square one – that is, it has to be approved again.
Registration costs extra.
There is no breach of the Act if it isn’t registered, but surely you would want to have the by-law registered.
Who is the secretary of the EC? They are the person responsible for recording decisions of the EC and that can help you when you are trying to manage someone like that.
In relation to the strata manager – I suggest you put it in writing. Ideally have an EC meeting and agree at that meeting to formally notify the strata manager that they are only to take instructions from the EC, in accordance with decisions made by the EC. It can help if you nominate someone to instruct the strata manager for that purpose. In a notification like that you can note that if the strata manager acts outside those boundaries, you may hold him liable for any costs etc.
In respect of the rogue member, it is a technical thing but has he been properly nominated by his relative? A proxy is not a nomination, that just allows the person to vote at general meetings. A nomination to the EC by the owner is a separate matter.
Assuming a couple of things:
– there are associated by-laws that provide that an owner must keep their pet under control when it is on common property etc.; and
– the OC is not on notice that the animal has acted in a way that is a concern, and not done anything about it – for example, someone has complained to the OC about a dog roaming free and attacking people, and the OC has done nothing to enforce the by-laws,
then the OC should not be liable. The owner of the animal would be liable.
Has your son’s strata scheme checked the conditions of Council approval when it was established? It may have been a condition of approval that the scheme has a certain number of visitor carparks. If that is the case then the owners can’t change anything without breaching that condition.
I don’t really have any comments on the methods other than method 2 would meet the requirements of being in the interests of the owners as a whole, assuming there were no Council requirements preventing it.
The irony is that if the Chair is verbally abusive at the meeting, it only goes to provide support for the original complaint.
It is the nature of some people to be unreasonable, and that can become more evident in a strata scheme.
If you get a credible expert’s report that says that there is nothing wrong with the common property that is causing damp in the unit, you then have a basis for telling the owner that the OC has no further obligations Note that it isn’t just a matter of ventilation, the report would have to conclude that all other elements of the common property are ok.
Conversely, an expert’s report may conclude that damp in a unit is caused by other factors, such as the resident’s failure to open the windows. If it does, then you can use that in any discussions with the resident.
I am not sure why the OC would agree to installing additional external vents if the current ventilation is adequate and there is nothing wrong with the common property (assuming there isn’t)? Look at it this way – why should the OC do that, just because a person refuses to open their windows?
Unfortunately some people do not see reason and will continue to make demands. That is just something you have to deal with, while acting in the interests of the owners corporation as a whole.
We have had issues with damp in one apartment in our scheme, and learnt a lot from that about damp, the causes of damp, what can be done, and who might be responsible for what (with emphasis on the word “might”).
I suggest you can split this into two parts:
– are there issues with the common property that are causing the damp – for example, the foundations, damp proof course, sub-floor ventilation etc.
– is the owner causing or contributing to a damp issue by their actions, such as not opening windows.
The Building Code requires that rooms be adequately ventilated, including cross-ventilation. This is done with windows, doors etc. that open to outside.
So have there been any issues identified, have you ruled out any issues with the common property? The best thing to do is get an expert in to look at the property and advise you as to whether in their opinion the mould is a result of inadequate ventilation, or some other reason. If it is the common property, then the Owners Corporation is responsible.
In our case it was slightly different because the rooms are below ground and not habitable spaces (ceilings below requisite height). Therefore a number of the Building Code requirements didn’t apply.
I believe what you need for something like that is a consulting engineer/strata consultant. There are quite a few of them around. You are right to be concerned – I certainly wouldn’t want to be proceeding on a project like that without independent expert advice, starting with whether it is needed or if work is needed, the extent of the work.
Jimmy could probably provide you with some valuable guidance.
No.
I did a search and there is a company called Arrow Building Services that might help you. Of course you may have already tried them. Good luck.
The NSW Home Building Act requires any residential building works over $20K to have a contract that meets the requirements of the legislation and that a certificate of insurance be provided (home warranty insurance). Similar provisions apply in each state. Note also the contractor cannot require more than a 10% deposit.
Even smaller jobs require a basic written contract.
Under the Act residential building works includes repairs (and also things such as plumbing, electrical etc.)
Presuming the company has a licence (have you checked, including whether there are any matters recorded against them), which they are also required to have to undertake this kind of work, they would know this, and that to not have a contract in place and provide a certificate of insurance is a breach of the law.
If I were on the EC I would be very alarmed if a tradesperson refused to enter into a contract, because the OC would have no legal protection, and if something went wrong it would have no redress. In the case of the EC members, and taking into account that you have checked with Fair Trading and been told, you might well be liable if something went wrong.
Your strata manager should know this and advised you not to proceed without a contract.
i know what it is like to have difficulty finding tradesmen to do a job, but I have also been on the other side where things went badly wrong on a project. Because we had made sure that all the requirements were met, we didn’t suffer any financial loss and were able to claim on the HWI.
I think we will have to disagree on that Austman. Where an OC is on notice that a part of the common property is dangerous and fails to take steps to prevent injuries or damage, the insurance company may refuse to pay out on any claim arising.
An act of negligence might be covered, but an act of gross/wilful negligence may not. I wouldn’t be willing to take that risk.
In relation to the external access staircase – given the advice provided by the engineer, the OC needs to take urgent/immediate action to prevent access to that staircase. If it doesn’t, then the OC is likely to be liable for anything that occurs such as injuries to a person using the staircase, and an insurance company would not pay out on it. That is a very serious matter as the owners will be personally liable.
It may be that the staircase is a fire exit in which case a number of issues also flow from that.
We had similar issues with our external staircase (which fortunately isn’t a fire exit), and we got builders in to block off access. Blocking off access has the effect of crystallising matters.