Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
It’s on your title, what they have done is irrelevant, you weren’t a party to that, and from what you have said it was an informal arrangement. They would find it very difficult to change what is your property right without your consent, I think it would be almost impossible.
I suggest you talk to like-minded owners and consult a lawyer, you need to assert your rights in pretty strong terms. The car space is on your title so therefore it belongs to you.If the OC approved the works to the domes three years ago and proceeded, it is difficult to see how they can now say it is the responsibility of those owners, and they have to pay for works that the OC did. Because if it were, it would have been up to those owners.
Hope that makes sense.That’s interesting, so essentially it is a by-law forbidding the keeping of dogs, other than guide dogs or assistance dogs. So in theory you could keep any other type of animal, provided permission were obtained. Usually you would expect to see a by-law that either forbids all animals, states that you must not keep animals without obtaining permission (and that can’t be unreasonably withheld), or allows small animals and for other animals you have to get permission.
A friend asked me about an issue yesterday, where she knows someone who lives in a complex where they have forbidden any animal other than three specific breeds of cats, and the cats have to be females. Apparently there is one person who controls the EC who has very definite ideas about what is and what isn’t acceptable. Seems a bit discriminatory to me, what if you are allergic to those three breeds?
But you are granting exclusive use of parts of the common property to specific owners, i.e. they can use their allocated spaces on the common property to the exclusion of all others. So you need an exclusive use by-law to reflect that. That is better for the owners anyway, it is more certain and adds value to their property.
It is unlikely that the paint forms part of the common property, otherwise the OC would be up for repainting everyone’s apartments any time it was needed.
Provided there is no such weird by-law, I would go ahead and remove the paint, because you don’t need permission.
Those builders sound like idiots, I wouldn’t bother discussing it with them – what you do after settlement is your business.A few years ago our strata manager was one of the big operations, who shall remain nameless, because they were so bad. They liked having GMs at odd times, or even better doing a meeting by paper resolution to approve renovations, with the note that no-one should attend. Two people out of nine voted. That particular decision is now the subject of a long legal dispute.
M S may not have the luxury but we got rid of that strata manager, and found one who fits in with us. The one we have now doesn’t charge for the first two GMs in a year, whenever they are held. Of course a manager has the right to charge for out of hours meetings, but they should not be dictating when they are held.
I don’t like undirected proxies being given to the manager and a meeting being held that way, because effectively you are putting the manager in the position of a compulsorily appointed manager. That is extreme but it does happen.You can be as untidy as you like, provided you are not damaging the property. You ls have the right to peaceful enjoyment of the property, so unless there is a sound basis for another visit, they should back off.
If there is mould on the bathroom window it may be the responsibility of the owner to fix it, i.e. if ventilation is inadequate or there are other issues causing it. Or you may need to open the window when you have a shower.Section 238 deals with the use of the common seal, refer below. The common seal is the “signature” of the owners corporation so its use should be controlled. In practice, it may not be practical to arrange for owners to be present for the common seal to be affixed, so the OC can resolve to delegate that power to the managing agent either specifically or generally, i.e. for a specific contract or for more general purposes.
How should the seal of the owners corporation be affixed?
238 How should the seal of the owners corporation be affixed?
(1) If an owners corporation has only one owner or 2 owners, the seal of the owners corporation must not be affixed to any instrument or document except in the presence of the owner or owners or the strata managing agent of the owners corporation.
(2) If an owners corporation has more than 2 owners, the seal of the owners corporation must not be affixed to any instrument or document except in the presence of:
(a) 2 persons, being owners of lots or members of the executive committee, that the owners corporation determines for the purpose or, in the absence of a determination, the secretary and any other member of the executive committee, or
(b) the strata managing agent of the owners corporation.
(3) The strata managing agent must attest the fact and date of the affixing of the seal:
(a) by his or her signature, or
(b) if the strata managing agent is a corporation, by the signature of the president, chairperson or other principal officer of the corporation or by any member of staff of the corporation authorised to do so by the president, chairperson or other principal officer.
(4) A strata managing agent who has affixed the common seal of the owners corporation to any instrument or document is taken to have done so under the authority of a delegation from the owners corporation.
(5) Subsection (4) does not operate so as to enable a person to fraudulently obtain a benefit.
(6) A person is taken not to have fraudulently obtained a benefit from the operation of subsection (4) if the benefit was, without any fraud by the person, obtained before the seal was affixed.
If the person who signed it was nominated as the person to sign it, i.e. as representative of the OC, then that is fine. If the seal is on it, then that also matters, the use of the seal usually binds the OC. Usually when you enter into something like this there should be a resolution of the OC saying that it is resolved to enter into the agreement, certain person or persons are delegated to sign it on behalf of the OC, and that the common seal should be affixed.
Was there a resolution to that effect?
The common seal is usually kept by the strata manager, but they shouldn’t use it unless they are instructed to do so (in the absence of delegated powers).
If the agreement has been going for 8 years you would have difficulty disputing its validity because it has been on foot for so long, i.e. services under the agreement have been provided and paid for. That doesn’t stop you looking at appointing another agent, depending on what the termination clause says.
I wasn’t being frivolous, I was deadly serious. I have never frequented a brothel but those hours seem very odd to me, why would you think it is a brothel? The noise could be from anything. You could send in a swat squad and find it is a little old lady who likes banging on pipes, it happened to me a number of years ago, when a little old lady did exactly that at 6am every day, until I asked her to stop.
More generally, as someone who has been employed to solve problems of various kinds for a long time, it has been my experience that people don’t try the most obvious and simplest solution first. When we have problems we are usually part of the solution, in that we need to take some sort of action to try and resolve the problem. The person next door is likely not aware that they are disturbing their neighbour – knock on the door and tell them that you are being disturbed by strange noises, can they assist? It is only if or when they refuse to assist that you then consider other options, although calling the police or Council re illegal brothels is the last thing I would do, in the absence of any clear evidence. They have better things to do.
That’s easy – your husband can appoint you as his agent for the purposes of the mediation. Just draw up a document that he can sign, including that he appoints you for the purposes of agreeing to any resolution that may come out of the mediation. The solicitor can help you, the solicitor represents your husband anyway, they can agree to any resolution as well, so you may not need that last bit.
Have you thought of knocking on their door and asking them?
I strongly suggest that you not follow your fellow owners suggestion re the money. That money should be kept in a trust account, basically it doesn’t belong to either of you, it belongs to the strata scheme. What will you do if work is required and you find that the other owner has spent the money?
As Whale has pointed out, there should be both an administrative fund and a sinking fund and you need to prepare a budget each year to determine contributions to those funds.
You say the strata scheme has no registered by-laws. If it was created after 1997 then it would have to have had by-laws lodged with the registration of the strata plan. If it is a pre-1997 scheme, then the model by-laws in the Strata Schemes Management Act apply.
So, presuming it is a pre-1997 scheme, then the model by-law that applies is the one that provides that an owner/resident can’t keep an animal without the written permission of the owners corporation, and that permission can’t be unreasonably refused. From what you say in the third paragraph, it is likely that this is the by-law that applies.
The managing agent is wrong, in that for an owner or resident to keep an animal they must first obtain the written permission of the owners corporation. If they don’t do that, then they are in breach of the by-law. Yes that permission can’t be unreasonably refused, but in some cases an owners corporation may refuse on reasonable grounds. At the extreme, it would generally not be unreasonable to refuse permission to keep a horse.
I am not suggesting that permission should be refused (I have a dog), but the point is that the owner/resident has to ask for that permission and be given it, and the owners corporation may put conditions on the permission. For example, it may say that the animal must be kept within the lot and if it is on the common property it must be under the control of its owner.
In this case, assuming you do have that by-law, and it sounds like you do, the tenants should be told to seek permission, and if permission is given they should be required to keep the cat under control, i.e. off the common property. As they are tenants they should also get the permission of the owner. Of course you could decide to refuse permission, but it would have to be on reasonable grounds, and that can be tricky.
I don’t think cats should be allowed to roam around, they can cause real havoc.
Yes, you can, and you don’t need their permission. You’re not recording a conversation, you’re recording a noise.