[TrulEConcerned]

Update

The SM advises that he has again searched high and low and there is no record of an acoustic certificate ever provided by the installer of the wooden floor.

SM also informs me that the current owner of the premises with the wooden floor was not the installer/renovator and when asked by the SM, the current owner indicated that she has no such certificate in her possession.

The SM refuses to act on my recommendation to enforce the noise by law or to have the noise verified by an independent party now. The SM wants to wait until the next noise complaint is made.

Must I wait? Is the SM not breaching the P & SA Act and the OC not breaching the SSM Act by:

(i) Failing to act on 2 noise complaints last month?

(ii) Failing to hire an expert to verify the level of noise transmitted to other lots? and

(iii) Failing to pursue those who acted in bad faith by not doing their jobs when approving the renovation? Had they done their job, an acoustics certificate would be filed with the SM.

 

 

[TrulEConcerned]

@slicendice

“…..committee decided to delegate the strata manager to represent them at mediation (after she explicitly said that’s not in the agreement – she charged $180 for the pleasure)”

Most committees choose the manager to represent them because doing so saves the committee members the shame of demonstrating their incompetence or ignorance of their responsibilities in front of the mediator.

“…the attitude and demeanour of said strata manger during the discussion – sarcastic, contemptuous, utterly non conciliatory, IMO totally unprofessional”.

I assume the manager’s poor behaviour is aimed at you and not all owners. If so, I recommend you not complain to her boss as the first step. Instead I suggest you make a formal complaint to those the manager works for ie the committee. Write to the committee informing them of the poor behaviour, abuse etc that you are enduring from their appointed manager, who it seems is treating you as instructed by the committee and that you have had enough.

 

[TrulEConcerned]

Summarising the parts of @Quirky’s and @Jimmy’s opinions that I like, and going a step further may I suggest:

1. Ask the gym junkie if he could work out at another time (tell him the times that suit you best eg after 9am or before 7pm etc);
2. Suggest he places far more flooring insulation to muffle the noise of the weights. And that you want that done by a certain date;
3. If he cannot or will not change his routine or equipment to accommodate your reasonable request, then ask your strata manager to send him an informal “breach of by-law letter” that outlines his obligations under the Strata Act in respect of the by-law on NOISE. Quote the by-law in the letter. The letter should make clear what problems have been caused by him and how that conflicts with his duty to abide by the by-law on noise;
4. After instructing the strata mgr to send that letter, review your by-laws on car parking to establish if it mentions only cars can use the space. This by default prohibits anything else being done there. If he is breaching the by-law on the garage, you could send him another”breach of by-law letter”. This time in respect of the GARAGE by-law;
5. If the garage by-laws do not explicitly prohibit any other activity from taking place in a car space or garage, ask your strata committee to consider making such a by-law. They’ll need to consult a strata lawyer, like those supporting this website;
6. If say 2 weeks after the letter on NOISE was sent, the noise continues, you should get the strata committee to agree to send him a Notice to Comply with By-law (on NOISE) and another Notice to Comply with By-law (on GARAGE). The process is one NTC per by-law allegedly breached. This makes clear that failure to comply may result in him being taken to the Tribunal.

Note: (1) Whatever you say to the gym junkie or strata committee members, follow it up BY EMAIL. Otherwise one day someone may say that they were never told about your concerns; and  (2) Letters in (2) and (4) and notices in (6) should be sent to BOTH the offending party (tenant) and the owner of the premises.

[TrulEConcerned]

@Jimmy, thanks for the feedback. You raise interesting issues.

 

[TrulEConcerned]

StrataChair, you make some good points. Thanks. Your post is more than “rough and ready”, trust me.

Now that I am Secretary of a scheme and a longtime subscriber to Flatchat, I will look into the OCN given my horrible experience with some – not all –  schemes, where SC members toot their own horns and are are often unable to defend their position on issues: their solution? No Q&A at meetings.

[TrulEConcerned]

Jimmy, thanks for the reply. Below are some more points:

1. Nobody on the SC (me included) knows what we’re looking at when studying a design document given to us;

2. The forthcoming by-law will be standard as it’s to be prepared by the OC’s solicitor;

3. The OC tends to vote as guided by the SC. So what the SC agrees to, now or later, will be the OC’s decision; and

4. One woman on the SC with a keen eye found that the renovator wants to make changes to the roof of the building (change the pitch) to allow for his renovations. When she approached him, he informed her that the changed roof is needed to partly cover an outdoor area he wants to construct. She has not studied the plans in detail so she cannot say (nor can I) what other issues are raised by the proposed renovation.

Given (4) above, I can see no benefit to the OC in allowing a change of the building’s facade. Also I have no idea of the impact on common property of the renovations. Hence I thought the done thing would be that the renovator would supply the SC with a letter from an architect or engineer listing all the modifications as well as their impact on the common property, if any. That way the SC can make as close to an informed decision as possible.

[TrulEConcerned]

I suggest you get legal advice from a lawyer specialising in strata law.

Find a couple of firms and ask for quotes. Make clear what you objective is e.g to collect the arrears in full come hell or high water. Don’t suggest that you’re open to payment plans or the like.

Be specific when you relate the FACTS of the situation. Include copies of a paper trail.

Just my 2 cents.

 

 

[TrulEConcerned]

@The Hood

You wrote that FT may indicate that “if the OC doesn’t like it then they can appoint a different agent”. I agree, they may well say that.

Here’s my question to you [and anyone else]: has anyone managed to convince NCAT or a court to terminate a strata manager’s contract outside the terms of the contract? I understand that OCs can apply to NCAT if the complainant believes that the options to end the agreement, as listed in the contract, seem unreasonable.

[TrulEConcerned]

@Jimmy

Allow me to clarify: some of the meetings we are scheduled to have, just like a recent one, are neither in person nor virtual.

We are asked to vote in advance by email.

[TrulEConcerned]

My experience in NSW may be of interest. I cannot say it is applicable to QLD, you’ll need to establish that yourself.

1. A few years ago, a couple of months before a general meeting was scheduled, I emailed the strata manager with some motions, asking him to list them on the agenda for that meeting. (There is always a cut off date that strata managers claim they have, after which they argue they are busy preparing the agenda and any motion must have been submitted long before then. If a motion is submitted after the mysterious (and rarely advertised) cut off date, the strata manager will often say that such motions will be listed for the subsequent general meeting. This IMHO is baloney. Surely the cut off time is just before the agenda is sent out, not weeks before);

2. As expected, I had to chase him up several days later to confirm he received my motions;

3. He confirmed receipt and replied they will be listed in the agenda for the meeting;

4. Weeks passed and 7 days before the meeting the agenda arrived (i.e in the package called “Notice of Meeting”) with my motions not appearing;

5. I called him and asked what’s going on? He did not answer coherently;

6. I filed a complaint with Fair Trading against the strata manager (not the OC). I included a boat load of evidence;

7. I was told FT will consider it; FT will then call me to discuss; if they are satisfied with my case they will investigate the matter starting with asking the strata manager to offer evidence in his defence;

8. Weeks later I was called by FT and told that the strata manager’s evidence mirrored mine and that his actions in denying my motions being listed and then not listed was proof that he did not comply with what is expected of strata managers under the Property & Stock Agents’ Act (NSW) and accompanying Regulation. I was not told if he or his employer were fined, penalised or similar. Apparently the regulations prohibit FT from telling a complainant, even if FT upholds the complaint, what sanctions are put on the strata manager. My complaint was upheld;

9. Several days after FT called me telling me that they found him to be “non-compliant”, the strata manager emailed  the owners that he is terminating the contract and that email should be viewed as his 3 month notice of that.

Hopefully this helps.

 

[TrulEConcerned]

@Jimmy

My bad. I should have included “some”.

[TrulEConcerned]

I agree with Jimmy about self managing.

The issue you may find, as I did in a small scheme I am associated with, is that some owners believe a “professional” manager is needed and not an owner doing the job part time. When I quizzed them: “what exactly do you mean by professional”? They were unable to reply coherently.

There is a virus in strataland that infects some owners who believe, with zero evidence,  that all strata managers are:

(1) Superior to owners doing the job; and

(2) Efficient; value for money and put the interests of owners ahead of their own.

The best strata manager I ever found was efficient, but was very expensive.

When it comes to small schemes, say 6 lots, I found that quotes come in two sizes. Offered on a per annum basis they either a low balled eg $250 per lot but have huge charges for every single thing they are asked to do: send a letter; answer an email; prepare for a legal dispute (quite separate from the solicitor’s fees); call a tradesman, attend to paperwork etc. The kicker is that “attending to paperwork” may take an owner 2 hrs. The strata mgr may say it took 6 hrs at his hourly rate ends up horribly expensive. So by year end you’re not looking at say $1,500 ie $250 x 6, but possibly $4,000

Or quotes are high balled, e.g. $600 per lot, i.e $3,600 per year plus lower (than the above) charges for “additional” services as listed above.

Whatever you do, if you decide on a strata mgr, look at the contract closely.

 

 

[TrulEConcerned]

FWIW, I, like others on this website, am neither a lawyer nor expert.

I think it would be a courageous person who would go to NCAT arguing for the by-law as it stands.

While nobody knows which way NCAT will rule, it is conceivable that an owner will go to NCAT and argue that the by-law is harsh and oppressive as it curtails his/her right to use a facility which he/she as an owner pays for via levy contributions.

[TrulEConcerned]

@Quirky

Thanks for the reply.

Please note:

1. The SM has details of the lot entitlements. There are 12 lots and all but one have the same unit entitlements; and

2. Most meetings I am told will, like the one under discussion,  be held without any owner present. It will be conducted by the SM at a time stipulated in the notice of meeting and owners are to email their vote no later than 24 hrs in advance of the meeting. This is the preference of the SM and a couple of SC members. There is absolutely no way  for me to “immediately” before the “meeting” to notify the SM of my request for a poll vote because who is to say he will look at his email or answer the telephone in a timely manner? In fact, I can show that another SC member asked the SM to do something simple in early April. It’s now mid  May and the SM has still not done it. Proof that if I do not email my request for a poll vote much in advance of the “meeting”, then the SM will not receive my instruction before the meeting let alone act on it.

[TrulEConcerned]

@Jimmy

It seems I was not succinct in my choice of words. When I wrote:

Unless, possibly, if those who you denied are not helping foot the OC’s legal bills

I meant an owner who is not specifically named in the legal action could tell the OC that if the OC insists on denying  her access to the documents, then she should be exempt from contributing to legal fees. After all, on what basis can an OC on the one hand deny her access and on the other require her to share in the legal fees of the OC?

 

[Author]

Replies