Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Check to see that there have been no limits placed on EC spending by resolution at the AGM, or certain decisions. If there is no limit, you’re fine.
If there is a limit and you fall outside it then you will need approval at an AGM.
It is very tricky – we had an owner who did extensive renovations a number of years ago with approval, we have now discovered that they did a number of other things including installing an electric meter in their lot with related rewiring etc. and installation of gas piping through the common property into their unit. We are looking at putting in a by-law to cover those things to make it clear that they are responsible for those works. We have been advised that some of the electrical wiring is dangerous and we have to fix that asap.
Another owner went ahead with other extensive renovations including removal of a load-bearing wall with no approval from either the OC or the Council. We had to stop the work going any further until everything was sorted.
In my lot I found when I was having some work done that a load-bearing wall had been partly removed in the past and was being propped up with newspaper. I had to get a bricklayer to put in a supporting beam.
So there are two issues, work can have a serious effect on the integrity of the building, and an owner can later require the OC to repair/maintain work or structure that strictly speaking is not their responsibility.
I like Jimmy’s suggestion, it covers off most bases other than the ongoing issue of work being undertaken that compromises the integrity of the building.
It is not up to the OC to engage someone to determine if new membranes comply, or if any other works comply. That would place the OC in a very difficult position.
Standard drafting of approval given for renovations and any related by-laws will include wording to the effect that the lot owner will ensure that the work will be carried out in a professional manner by licensed tradesmen, that the work will meet any applicable standards, and the owner is responsible for any maintenance of that work in the future.
If the OC inspects work carried out by an owner then it could be claimed that it is responsible for it.
Jeez some people know how to make life complicated, even if they can’t draft resolutions.
You don’t say whether the EC/OC is suing another party, or whether the OC is the subject of legal action. If it is the latter, you may not have much choice – if you are the respondent in an action then you have to do something.
So, assuming that is not the case and the EC is seeking to take legal action or has taken legal action against another party on behalf of the OC – has there been a previous resolution under which a majority at a general meeting approved the seeking of legal advice or the initiation of legal action?
As of 2011 if an OC wants to seek legal advice or take legal action and the anticipated legal costs exceed $12500 (or $1000 x the number of lots, whichever is the lesser) approval must be obtained at a general meeting. You would expect as part of that approval that a costs agreement with the lawyer would be provided so the anticipated costs are clear.
Given the requirements of the legislation, I don’t think the resolution as drafted is sufficient to obtain approval for the legal action to continue, but it is hard to say because you haven’t given much information.
You should be ok if the majority of the OC wish to discontinue the legal action, presuming you are not the respondent. Perhaps you should remind the EC members that if they don’t comply with the requirements of the legislation as outlined above, they could be held personally liable for the legal costs.
That may be, but if the damage is due to the negligence or some other act or omission of the owner, then the strata insurer has a claim against that owner. If that were not the case you could go around damaging common property willy nilly. Insurance costs money, every claim you make pushes your premium up. So check with your insurer what their position is, and then deal with the owner and their insurer.
No it isn’t. If you put a resolution up for inclusion in the agenda it has to be included without alteration. If they want their own resolution they have to put it up separately.
You can move an amendment to a resolution at the actual meeting but it can’t change the substance of the resolution.You can’t put a strata scheme/OC into voluntary administration. Ultimately the debts of the OC are debts of the owners, apportioned by lot entitlement.
If the builder has gone into voluntary administration, I presume you have Home Warranty insurance?
It sounds like a very messy situation, you really should seek professional advice.There are times when I have to provide access to my apartment so repairs can be carried out or certain other things done such as inspections. For example, the ceiling space can only be accessed through manholes in my apartment and one other. I don’t have a problem with that, it’s my building together with the other owners.
If access through your apartment is the cheapest and safest option, then surely it is in your interests as an owner to go with that option. You do want the crack fixed don’t you?
There is nothing in the legislation or elsewhere that prevents you from including an agenda item of general business or any other business or anything else you want to call it. You can include items where particular information is noted but no resolution is attached. You can have an agenda item for discussion of the situation in Libya if you want to. Major listed companies have items for discussion and noting on their agendas as a matter of course.
It is up to the OC to decide what it wants on the agenda – as long as it includes what is required by the legislation that’s fine. It is true that often this is the only time some owners front up or communicate and the meeting is a good opportunity to raise any issues or concerns they may have.
An additional safeguard if there is any concern about confusion as to whether it is a resolution or merely for discussion/noting is to include a note in any agenda item like that making it clear that it is not a resolution. At the top put FOR NOTING/DISCUSSION.
I believe a resolution relating to appointment of a strata manager is an ordinary resolution, I.e a simple majority, so even if 25% opposed the resolution would still pass.
In relation to Home Warranty Insurance that is insurance that benefits the home owner, i.e the lot owner, and is required for contracts over a certain amount under the Home Building Act. The Owners Corporation is not a party to that contract and there is no requirement that they be given a copy. The rest of that advice is a bit confusing, when the real issue seems to be – is the OC responsible for issues attributable to defects in the common property?
Do you want to appoint a new strata manager or renew the contract of the existing one?
I’m not familiar with the Act, one way of looking at it is in terms of whether the EC can renew without GM approval is whether any other strata manager has been proposed. If there has, then it would have to be put to a GM vote. Also as the strata manager is usually appointed at the GM, the contract would usually come up for renewal at the time of the next GM, so there is no problem with putting it to the GM for approval.
In terms of poll votes, if someone calls for a poll then the votes are determined by poll, i.e. by lot entitlement, as distinct by voting on a show of hands. You can’t stop that if someone asks for a resolution to be determined by poll.
I am not sure if you are asking if the EC could renew the appointment and then someone moves to rescind the appointment at the GM. If the motion to rescind succeeded on a poll then theoretically yes, but it would be difficult if the contract with the SM had already been signed, as on its face it would be a legally binding contract. I don’t think you would want to get into such a messy situation.
I don’t believe you can compel owners to be members of the EC for a number of reasons, one being that the first step under the legislation is to be nominated, either the owner nominating themselves or someone else nominating them. In the latter case, the person being nominated can simply refuse the nomination.
Setting that aside, providing that everyone is a member of the EC could come back to bite you. For example if you have a scheme of 6 owners and only two people are willing to be on the EC, and the 4 other owners are somehow considered to be part of the EC, then the size of the EC would be 6. If the EC wanted to make a decision, you would need a quorum of 3 or more for any decisions to be made by the EC. If the 4 other owners refused to co-operate, you would not get that quorum.
That’s ok!
If the EC is having problems with the strata manager perhaps they should start looking for a better one.
Having read your other query in relation to by-laws, your strata manager sounds really helpful, not.
No to both questions – there have been no changes to the Act that preclude general business being included as an item on the agenda. General business is usually iincluded on agendas for meetings to enable people to raise anything that may not be covered, general concerns etc. Provided no resolutions are moved and approved under general business then there is no issue (you can’t move a resolution without notice).
You can change the order of resolutions – the Chair can rule against it but perhaps you can ask the other owners if they object and then ask the Chair why there is a problem.
Perhaps you should get someone else to chair the meeting, and next time ask the SM to show you exactly where in the legislation it says that something can’t be done.