Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I live in a townhouse complex. We too have had owners with termite damage. No-one had every thought of having termite inspections.
We started a yearly inspection programme for each owner to arrange and pay for themselves. We did this as we know of one complex where the EC/OC arranges inspections whether the owner is there or not. Some residents in this complex have “proof” that no one came into their lot and actually did the inspection! This complex has had continuing termite infestations.
We, however, with owners being present and organising their own, have had no more incidents since. We thought that by putting the responsibility of checking for termites that we may reduce our own liability (ie if we organised/picked the pest company and there were problems it would be our responsibility but owners arranging/paying it would be theirs?)
The owners who have had termites in their places have arranged and paid for treatments themselves. We put it to owners that if they wished the EC/OC to do this, we would have to increase levies to cover inspections and any treatments. Owners here would rather low levies, pay for inspections and treatments should they need it.
We believe that in making owners responsible, they will ensure that their homes are not “termite inviting” and take on the advice from their pest company in not storing items around the house that may encourage termites.
We had a unit that had an overflowing drain in their bathroom, causing water to flow out into a bedroom. The cause was hair blocking the drain.
Our Strata manager said that the EC should have gone around to every unit and checked that the drains in bathrooms/showers were not blocked with hair! So it was the OC responsibility!
As I have mentioned in a previous post, it is this (as well as other examples) that forced the EC to have a by law written that internal plumbing was the responsibilty of owners and that plumbing in common areas was the responsibility of OC.
Then reading this post regarding burst pipes in common walls! How would anyone know? The more I read, the more I want to get out of strata. Can I afford it – no. Can I afford not to – no. Not unless we find a better way for strata living.
In our complex of townhouses it would be impossible to know if an owner has changed something without permission. Unless someone questioned every ute that was seen in the vicinity. So someone here could have changed the aluminium sliding doors with wood french doors – and we would have no idea! Does the EC/OC have to insist on inspections of properties to ensure nothing has been changed? Do they have to put in cameras to see if tradesmen go into a unit or if building materials are delivered? Should the OC inspect a property when it is put on the market so the new owner doesn't ask for a repair on something that shouldn't have been there?
I worked in a large company where if you changed jobs (say from paper sorter to paper filer) you had to sign a contract which stated what the company expected of you, what you had to abide by (OHS etc) and what you could and couldn't do. In that way, even if you ignored what was stated in the contract, the company could not be held liable if you did anything they warned you not to in case of injury. It also gave them cause to take matters further in other matters (ie the don't come Monday talk).
Perhaps that is what is needed for strata. When someone buys or moves into a strata complex they have to sign that they know it is strata, that they can't do this or that without permission and spell out what they can do. Why should other owners pay for expensive changes that were not approved? Or pay for repairs when unauthorised changes cause damage to common property?
Will this stop people from changing things in their unit? No, I don't think so. But it could perhaps limit the liabiliy of the OC/EC. If an owner/resident signs that they know they are in strata and know its rules, then they should be held accountable for their actions, not others.
I am assuming that this car parked in front of your garage is on part of the driveway, which would be common property.
According to the model strata by laws for NSW, “An owner or occupier must not park or stand a vehicle on common property without the written permission of the OC. That permission can be cancelled. Permission does not give you a permanent right over that part of common property”.
Also states that “An owner or occupier must not stop lawful use of common property by another person”. So, I feel that if this car is parked on common property, being the driveway in front of your garage, it is stopping the lawful use by you or your tenant in blocking access to the garage.
Doesn't this EC member have their own parking?
Anything about trees is subject to each individual councils rules and regulations. I don't think there would be a limit to height. Our complex is surrounded by trees – some three or four storeys high!
Perhaps you could go the damage route. Approach your council re overhanging branches? Dropped leaves causing a slip hazard? Lack of light resulting in damp? The roots of the trees – potential for causing damage to foundations/plumbing?
We have had residents in our complex approach our council themselves then bring the council permission to the EC/OC for their consideration.
Don't know if the EC/OC have to clear things up (branches etc) but I know if it were my place on the market, I would do a bit of raking and sweeping myself. And don't forget, having trees around can be a plus – especially when one is living in a built up area.
Our complex had a by-law drawn up to say that the bathrooms and internal plumbing were the responsibility of the individual owners. We were forced to do this as owners would take matters into their own hands (get someone in to “fix” something in their bathrooms) but when it didn't work, or got worse, they would contact the EC to fix it!
We also had owners who would not take matters into their own hands (ie not bother to look into that leaking water) and waited until it caused considerable damage then contacted the EC presumably for a new bathroom!
By drawing up this bylaw not only will owners be forced to take responsibility of their own places, for the maintenance, for ensuring correct works are carried out. At least we hope it does.
It is a fact of life that people will want to carry out renovations in their units. Especially as a complex gets older and needs updating. Some may do so without permission do to ignorance. Some due to arrogance. The problem is, the EC/OC has to protect themselves against any repercussions of “dodgy” works, or the home handyman who chisels up the tiles on his floor and tries tiling himself! That is why we had this bylaw drawn up. Only time will tell if it has really done the job.
Why should other owners be responsible for changes made? In our complex, all the sliding doors are not visible from any common areas. For all we know, owners have changed the standard issue sliding doors for french folding doors!
The standard doors/windows here are anodised aluminium sliding. They ain't pretty, but thats what we've got. If there is anything but the standard doors and windows (fitted when I bought this place off the plan – and I still have all the glossy brochures) then I believe its their problem. And unfortunately, of any new owners (and the previous owners should be held accountable).
Heaven help those who buy the units here where the some owners have previously tried to make changes that did not comply with building codes, Australian standards nor council regulations! Who know whats they have done where we can't see? And why should the rest of us pay if there is no record of permission for any changes from the standard fittings, fixtures and layouts?
We have an owner in my complex who believed that the visitors car space next to their unit was their own. So I suppose it is possible for buyers to misread/misunderstand what is on their title.
The previous owner of this unit used to abuse this visitors car spot as their own (and sold up after only 11 months after the EC/OC advised they were taking the matter further). Then this owner moved in and started using it (but stopped once advised to).
I have friends who live in a townhouse in the eastern suburbs. There is an apartment block behind them that is apparently owned by the one person. It is backpacker central. There is constant noise from this block. My friends have called the police on more occasions than they care to remember. After each police visit, my friends are bombarded with bottles and debris from their party and called offensive names. My friends have complained to every governing body they know. Still they have to live under these conditions.
To make matter worse, the townhouse next to them is rented out to some more backpackers. My friends have asked them to keep the noise down. This resulted in the “backpackers” parking in their car so they couldn't move it (they had to catch taxis to work that day). They are not in a position to move out (and why should they?) I am passing all the information on this ruling to them.
I have been a landlord myself in the past. It only took one phone call from an irate OC members (at 7am on a Sunday morning!) for me to warn my tenants that offensive behaviour (of them or their guests) or excessive noise would not be tolerated and they would be out!
I count my blessings that I have only had the occasional party (with good behaviour and a bit of music) in the places I have lived in. I cannot imagine living with constant noise!
We now having a growing trend with residents who believe the bylaw regarding parking in visitors car spots doesn't count – if they borrow/use someone elses car.
Just witnessed a neighbour who has obviously “minded” a friends car whilst friend was away. Nice guy – but he parked the friends car in the visitors car spot including 4 days over the last weekend when visitors parking is at its peak (it was Mothers Day).
As I read the standard strata bylaws it states that “residents” cannot use the visitors car spots without the written permission of the EC/OC. It doesn't stipulate that residents can't park their own registered vehicle in the car spots but can park any other vehicle there. So if residents park there – whether their own/borrowed/hired car – they are still in breach of by laws? It is still the resident parking there? Despite the car not being a residents, if the visitor isn't actually visiting, is it not common property not being used for its intended purpose?
Personally, I would write to the EC and advise that you would be seeking to go to mediation and that in the meantime, you would hold the EC/managing agent liable for any damage to your personal property/belongings in the event of another break-in/attempted break-in.
I have used similar wording in my past apartment when water leaking through my garage roof (common property area above garage) ran over a power point in the garage! Constantly. The OC fluffed about and said they had tried to fix it and it didn't work so too bad. I pointed out that the water ran over the power point and under my metal garage door to the driveway outside which had public access. I advised that I would hold them liable should this water cause electrocution to any person passing. Guess what – they managed to fix it (and install new wiring/power point in my garage too). And it was done very quickly!
Infact, mentioning liability has worked with council too in getting permission to remove a large tree when it was mentioned that it could cause damage to person/property in the complex.
Surely he can't just enclose this parking space. This would, I assume, be common property (the actual car parking area that is). There would be permissions to get – council, strata. I would think there would also need to be some sort of engineering? report to ensure any structure is secure and safe. And then probably a exclusive use clause to cover the repair of this structure, or alternatively, any damage caused to the building from installing this structure?
I am sure a strata lawyer could supply all the correct information. An owner or resident cannot change common property (without proper permissions) and I would think that this would fall under this.
Well you have done the right thing by asking for permission to do this renovation. And, I am no expert, but I do believe that in this age of internet/sms etc, that these forms of electronic communication can be deemed “written”. To do the wrong thing via email can get you into a lot of trouble, so by doing the right thing – I don't see how it cannot be classed as “in writing”. Though perhaps some stratas do not see it that way and want the bic biro signature on the bottom of the paper. This complex would be happy if anyone would actually ask permission in any way shape or form!
I cannot for some reason access the start of this thread? but believe I read that others have had similar problems with their renos? With the new fitting not fitting with the old? In that case, I would think that it would benefit all if something was done in all units to ensure that any future renos would not encounter this same problem. Would not be good for the complex as a whole for future residents to find that there was leaking plumbing due to old fixtures not matching new! I personally would not like to find that someone putting in a new loo above may affect me below!
If these car spots are on your title, surely the EC cannot use them even if the other owners with car spots agree, I find it hard to believe that their agreement would cover your car spots as well.
Having car spots on any unit title is a huge benefit (especially in the Eastern Suburbs) and a factor in buying a unit, not to mention an increase in the sale price. If your unit did not have car spots on title, it would probably have cost less and you may have considered other apartments with car spots (I know I would have).
We had areas of common garden that, became overtaken by weeds, despite the best efforts of those on the EC. We had someone come in and clear it out and then heavily mulch the area. Weeds are few and far between these days. Someone comes in once a month for maintenance along with the occasional guest appearance of an EC member! Perhaps suggest the clearing and mulching done first then at a later date the EC could look at getting a few easy care plants in.
You should emphasise the health risks of an overgrown weedy garden (allergies, spiders, snakes, rodents) not just the appearance. If I was looking at purchasing a property, I would walk around it all to make sure it was all looked after, not just the bits at the front.