[stratalearner]

Further to the above, because the balcony is classed as Common Property, the Body Corporate is in a quandry.  It doesn’t know whether that means it has to pay for this water pooling problem or not.

Can anyone clarify?

The fact that the water entering the balcony space is caused by a building defect which wasn’t successfully addressed adds to the complexity.

What is the answer?

[stratalearner]

Further to my original question, the General Meeting has been held  with the resolution in essence being that the total amount will be paid by the Owners Corporation for the NBN contract, with each owner being billed $275 as per the NBN requirement with this amount being added to their next levy notice.

Thank you for all your advice.

[stratalearner]

Thank you for the information.  The meeting to make the decision is next week.  I’ll let you know the outcome as there must be others experiencing the same dilemma.

[stratalearner]

Thank you all for your responses.

So far I have been told by the Strata Manager that it needs a resolution to get through, which of course I appreciate and confirms the above.

Your cautionary advice is noted too.  So wording of the proposal being put to the vote of the owners is extremely important.  Thank you.

I shall follow up the Strata Manager and try and obtain more information on the loan arrangements to see if it is a fixed loan (which I don’t think it is as it was on the basis that we would only repay what had been drawn down and at our last AGM we were advised that we hadn’t drawn down the full amount originally planning to be borrowed.)  And also if there would be benefit or cost to those owners who are unable to pay out the loan in one hit.  Obviously if they would be disadvantaged, then I wouldn’t be interested in proceeding.  I am hoping that it would be a win-win situation.

Again, thank you both for your valuable advice.

 

[stratalearner]

Having bought into a newly constructed strata building, above 8 floors, in NSW, and thinking I was doing the right thing (downsizing and allowing my modest home for purchase by a young family), I am horrified to see what the developers and builders are able to get away with without apparent legal redress.

In trying to get defects addressed, and noting that most of them are breaches of legislative requirements, our committee is now at the stage (four years later) of being offered by the last remaining person of the building construction team, the developer, a portion of the amount required to bring the building up to minimum standard.  Take it or leave it is the mantra.

Our advisers tell us we are lucky to get that: take it; and, although not said, raise the rest of the money from the owners.

Why aren’t owners of such apartments covered by the basic laws of goods being ‘fit-for-purpose’?  In most cases they have outlaid large amounts of money to buy into these building with the promise of quality and satisfaction.  It’s disgusting how builders/developers, faced with the request to fix their buildings, can just fold up shop and disappear, to reappear in another form to dupe other unsuspecting purchasers.  Or if they do stick around, pay what they want to out of the huge profits they have made rather than what is necessary to address the result of their incompetence.

It seems the changes to the Strata Management Act aren’t going to help owners but enhance support for these builders/developers to enable them to continue as is with further protection!  I feel sorry for anyone buying into these new places – and yes, bring your bucket!

The suggestion to name and shame is good, but with the ability for these shonks to start up again under another name makes it difficult.  And to refer specifically to the building concerned isn’t something most owners would want to do in relation causing negativity to the specific address.

So what can we do????  In relation to the situation for my committee, should we do as our advisers suggest and then try and get on with life and raise the outstanding money in any way we can?  What other recourse do we have open to us?  The legal option is ruled out as they consider that we at least are getting something and we would be wasting money to go down that path.  Any suggestions?

[stratalearner]

I am most appreciative of all your considered opinions and advice.  I am not clear on what one can expect in relation to soundproofing of buildings with a completion dates of 5 years ago as ours is, so hence my query.  It would seem that most if not all of our issues are not building defect related, and I must say for me noise is not a great issue – but then I do have a hearing problem!  (Maybe that should be one of the requirements for people moving into strata living)

And, ccbaxter, your contribution has been terrific, including your advice re approaching the residents.  The majority here, and I think in general, are conscience of their potential impact and try to do the right thing.  But sometimes I think there are people that just shouldn’t be in strata living.  They just don’t seem to be able to appreciate they need to be considerate.  But luckily it tends to be a very small percentage.

So Austman, when you say the BCA is “low”, do you mean that it is hard to get a noise level reading that could be defined as a defect unless it is ear shattering?  If so, then perhaps we should forget about it (and I am thinking in relation to the music through the wall cavities and the slamming door noises – it seems the terrace noise transference is to be an accepted thing as ccbaxter suggests).  Your clarification re the BCA would be appreciated.

Thank you all again

[Author]

Replies