Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
And shower water is “grey water” ie unsanitary. There are so many issues with this it doesn’t bear thinking about. It’s not a matter of owners voting whether to fix it or not – it’s a health, health and safety, and liability issue. Call your strata manager and get them to arrange to fix it. The Sinking Fund will cover it (if you have a sinking fund…..).
As for the first poster, agree, no “cut off” time for showers, but this falls into the realm of ensuring not interfering with the comfort etc of others in the block. If they are disturbed by the noise it’s no different to someone playing music loudly etc. But as previous posters have suggested, plumbing is usually installed to create as little noise, interference as possible. Clearly something has gone wrong here.
Plumbing is a Body Corporate / Owners’ Corporation issue. Your neighbour with the problem should report it to the Executive Committee or Strata Manager and get it investigated.
You should definitely NOT be subjected to other’s plumbing in a unit development. If you are, it suggests there’s a problem with the building or the plumbing.
Do you still have the documents relevant to your purchase of the property? A look at the plan in the Contract for Sale should inform you whether or not the roof forms part of your property or is common property. Or, ask the Strata Manager (if you have one) to explain the way levies are calculated – levies are worked out on the portion of the whole block of units that you own, and this may shed light on how much you own – so if the floor area of your unit is the same floor area of the unit below, but your levy is calculated as say 17% of the whole and your downstairs neighbour’s levy is 13%, then clearly you are paying for more because you own more – and the more you own might be the roof.
In my experience it would be very unusual for a unit owner to own the roof above their unit – after all, it isn’t just the roof for your unit, it’s the roof for the whole block.
The fact that the Owners Corporation used the Sinking Fund to do works on the roof the last time suggests that it is Common Property.
But either it is Common Property – and therefore the responsibility of the Owners Corporation – or it isn’t. Get a plan of your building (from your purchase document or ask your Strata Manager) and work it out.
If it fills with water and this is likely to cause damage to your unit, it may be in your best interest to pay for repairs to the roof before things get worse – and maybe sort out liability later.
I can’t see how undertaking work on your “unfenced” roof would be any more dangerous for a properly qualified roofing contractor than working on any other roof. But unless you have qualifications for working at heights, I’d suggest you keep off the roof.
First step is to ask to see the contract by which the Strata Manager is acting. If they wont answer emails etc the best idea is probably to call up, then to go the office and ask for a copy of the contract. Go over the Manager’s head to his/her manager if needed. Ask if they are a member of the professional association of Strata Managers (maybe they disclose this on their website?). Threaten to invoke the professional association if they are not co-operative.
I presume you are an owner? (You say “reside”.) Keep in mind that as an owner you are “the boss” of the Strata Manager – these people work for you!
If there is no contract in place you should be able to sign up another Manager – once agreement is reached between all owners. Talk to your neighbours now and let them know the lie of the land – that they can choose, they can take part in decisions. Bear in mind many people don’t want to take part or make decisions!
If there is a contract in place, find out the term of it and it may be a case of waiting until it expires. But have your ducks in a row well before then.
When comparing costs of contracts, be aware of different models – some Management contracts look cheap until they start to charge per page and per lot to send documents. Often better to go for a more expensive all-inclusive contract.
Good luck.
Surely the Strata Manager has some sort of professional (huh!) duty to properly record issues…. and they surely will have professional indemnity insurance. I suggest a scatter-gun approach – letters to Strata Manager, Conveyancer, Vendor and Vendor’s real estate agent alleging misleading and deceptive conduct, and indicating a preparedness to sue.
Work out what your claim is in monetary terms. Engage a solicitor to send another round of letters, then let the bargaining begin. If it’s not a huge amount the “professionals” (I use the term loosely, again) may decide to settle with you directly rather than damage their no-claim bonus on their professional indemnity insurance!
Not an expert on WA strata law, but in NSW alteration by one unit owner of common property would be dealt with by an “exclusive use” by law which notes the alteration / addition to common property. The by law attaches to the title of that property, so future owners know of their responsibilities. Something similar seems to apply in WA:
19.5 Exclusive use or special privileges by-laws
See section 42(8) of the Act
It is possible to create by-laws granting individual lot owners exclusive use and enjoyment of, or special privileges in respect of, common property or any part of it.Such by-laws will usually require a clear sketch plan of the relevant part of the common property and may be subject to conditions, including obligations to maintain and repair the relevant part of the common property or may be made subject to a payment or a combination of conditions and payment.
A proprietor who would have the benefit of such a by-law must give written consent to the adoption of the bylaw (see section 42 (8) STA).
To pass a by-law relating to exclusive use and/or special privileges in a two lot scheme a unanimous resolution is required and in any other scheme, a resolution without dissent is required.
Proprietors granted exclusive use are responsible for the repair and maintenance of their exclusive use area, unless the by-law states otherwise (see section 42(11)(b) STA)
Firstly, lucky you to have found an unit block that allows pets. I do hope you are adopting, not shopping for your new dog.
The amendments seems pretty clear to me.
(a) is designed to stop irresponsible people locking dogs onto the balcony all day while they are out where the dog will bark and annoy others.
(b) means don’t let your dog wander around on common property. Of course you can walk across common property with the dog on a lead. When your dog is on a lead it’s within your control. If your unit block has a large common property area where you hoped to run your dog around, looks like that’s off limits unless you keep your dog on a lead.
(c) means pick up your dog’s poo. Not a hard one to understand. And if your dog is pooing on your balcony, don’t hose it off where it will run onto someone else’s balcony. And if it poos on common property eg the front garden, pick up the poo. as a pet owner you are going to get very used very quickly to picking up poo.
As far as I can find out, the 75% rule doesn’t apply to Victoria –
VictoriaIn Victoria, a unanimous resolution of lot owners in an owners’ corporation is required to approve the termination of a strata scheme. We are not aware of any proposal to review or amend this legislation in the near future.So having the last unit in a group of 4 may in fact put you in a stronger position, not a weaker one. If the owner of the other 3 units wants yours as well, they will have to pay you what you want for it – and not a penny less!Not an expert on Strata Law in Victoria (or anywhere, really!) so can’t help with your “4 out of 9” query.Can you frame your responses in terms of aligning unit entitlement with levies ie if you presently are occupying a greater unit entitlement than you are entitled to, your levies should rise; and similarly, if you have less, your levies should fall.
When people realise they are going to have to pay for something, it sometimes helps them come to their senses.
I’d highly recommend Mark Atkinson, owner and director of Perth based Atkinson Legal. He specialises in Strata Law.
Yes, that’s outrageous.
From what I’ve seen, Strata Managers have 2 models of charging clients:
1. Low base fee, high charges for everything they do; or
2. High fee level – but everything included.
We have a 5 unit strata in Sydney and we pay $3000-ish a year, all inclusive. No extra fees for photocopying, faxing, emailing.
I presume your model of fee paying is the low fee, high charge model. It would be worth you calling around to compare fees and fee models. Then when your agreement comes up, you are in a position to negotiate.
It may well be that you are better off with the low fee but high charge model. But frankly charging for emails sounds very 20th century and a bit of a rip off. After all, they just have to send one email to the seven recipients.
As a first step, have you spoken to your insurer? The damage may be covered by your Body Corporate insurance policy.
Are you in NSW? The Fair Trading website indicates that
The capital works fund (previously called a ‘sinking fund’) is to ensure there is enough money to pay for capital expenses when the job needs doing.
This can include funds to pay for the following works:
- painting or repainting the common property
- acquiring, renewing or replacing personal property for the scheme
- renewing or replacing fixtures and fittings that are part of the common property, and
- to replace or repair the common property.
A page specifically on repairs and maintenance within Strata Schemes in NSW indicates that where the issue starts on common property (the example used is water run off – close to the bottom of the page) but damages a lot, it is the Owners’ Corporation responsibility to repair.
Where it gets tricky is whether anyone is going to split hairs and say that repairs within a lot even though caused by a happening on common property, don’t constitute “repair [of] the common property”. How quarrelsome are your owners? How much is in the sinking fund? How up-to-date are your repairs / maintenance / repainting paid for by the sinking fund? Is there money to spare in the fund once all necessary maintenance is undertaken?
Either way the Owners’ Corporation will have to pay – hopefully as an insurance claim, from monies already saved (in the sinking fund), or raised by a special levy.
It seems to me to be all quite academic until you actually get an offer from a developer. And who knows, if the offer is enough, the owner/ landlord might like the look of the money.
If you read the procedure required:
you don’t get to the 75% requirement (of owners agreeing to sell) until you actually have
- a full and frank statement by the proposed purchaser or developer. This will state how they intend to use the strata parcel (the building/s and land)
- …….
- the amount each owner will receive. This must be no less than the compensation value for their unit.
So you can certainly go ahead with the procedure to opt into the idea of selling, forming a strata renewal committee, developing a plan (ie getting an offer), considering the plan etc. Finally, you can go to the Land and Environment Court to have them approve the plan, which you may well end up doing in these circumstances.
I can find nothing online which addresses your question directly (and I’m sure you’ve looked too), but if you look at the intent of the legislation – to promote urban renewal, and not to let the majority be held hostage by a minority, I’d like to think that the Land and Environment Court might think – well, the majority of the owners are going to be very happy (you’d hope) with the outcome; the one owner who isn’t is a commercial entity who leases the premises. With the money they obtain from the sale they can obtain other premises to let out, so why should they, as the minority, thwart the desires of both the owners and the intent of the legislation? (The only protection afforded by the government in the process is for minority etc groups.)
This passage is also instructive (https://www.registrargeneral.nsw.gov.au/strata-renewal/renewal-process):
The approval of the Land and Environment Court is an important and final safeguard in the strata renewal process and provides protection for all lot owners.
The Court will initially seek to resolve any disputes through conciliation or mediation. It will consider whether the legislation has been properly followed. The Court can reject a plan if it was not developed in ‘good faith’.
The Court will also examine the amount to be received by each owner under the plan. For a collective sale, or for dissenting owners in a redevelopment, the amount must be no less than the compensation value of the lot, which is based on the principles used to determine compensation under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. This means that not only is the market value of the lot taken into account, but other matters such as the reasonable expenses attributable to disturbance and relocation (including legal costs and stamp duty) must also be taken into account. The Court must also be provided with a current report by an independent valuer to assist in this process. The Court must be satisfied that the terms of settlement provided by the plan are just and equitable in all of the circumstances.
This reads to me that if there’s a bucketload of money in it for all concerned, what’s the problem?
I wonder if there is anything to be gleaned from the second reading speech etc that introduced the legislation?
There may be wiser heads than mine out there.
It sounds like the other owner (and Strata manager) have confused “exclusive use” and “responsibility”.
In order to have exclusive use, there must be a special resolution put at a meeting. See pages 41 and 32 of this document:
https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/biz_res/ftweb/pdfs/About_us/Publications/ft045.pdf
(presuming you are in NSW?)
“A special resolution is a vote by unit
entitlement. A motion can only be
passed by special resolution at a properly
convened general meeting, with no more
than 25% of the votes cast against it. “In a two lot strata scheme, both owners would have to agree to the special resolution regarding exclusive use (unless they have a 75% unit allocation).
By fencing the area they have pretty much given themselves exclusive use, which it seems they aren’t entitled to.
I’d go back to the Strata Manager and point these provisions out, and demand that at least part of the fence goes so you can access the area. Or, an alternative may be that the other owner, having shown a determination to treat the land as their own, be required to purchase the land from the owners (you and themselves). You’ll have to then re-survey the land to show that that land belongs to the other unit owner (once they’ve bought it), but at least you’ll be compensated for it.
Page 39 of the document linked above provides a dispute resolution scheme.
In my block a previous owner installed a pull down blind on their balcony (not observable from the street or anywhere on the block) by attaching it to an external wall.
At some time it broke. Subsequent owner (who didn’t install it) just asked – hey, can I repair it? and kind strata manager pointed out that by the previous owner attaching it to the common property (external wall) it became part of common property and the owners corporation had to pay to fix it.
Great.
So I’m in two minds. If you ask for permission and get a “yes, it’s OK” it’s all well and good (just keep the correspondence) but if you don’t ask and just do it (as Lady P suggests) it might be easier (and it’s sometime easier to ask forgiveness than permission).
But I second the recommendation that the Owners Corporation do something about your privacy – even if that something is allowing plantation shutters to be installed.
If different units have different window coverings as you mention, then it does seem that external appearances aren’t an issue in your block.
Generally, what’s inside your unit is treated as your property, so you are free to do with it as you please eg by changing the curtains into shutters.
(Are you in NSW? This page outlines what is common property ie not your property:
And the answer to the question about insurance on this page [“Do I have to insure the contents of my strata unit?]” specifically includes curtains in the list of items that are not common property:
However, if you are attaching the shutters to the wall or the windows, an argument could be made that by so attaching, they become part of the common property, and therefore the responsibility of the Owners Corporation (which DOESN’T want that responsibility!)
Also, does your strata scheme have any rules / bylaws about external appearances of the block, and will the shutters be very plainly not like everyone else’ window coverings?
Best to ask your strata executive or strata manager, as you say, so as not to get caught out.