Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I just looked at the SCA website and they have a directory of names but it’s in company names not individuals.
You could do the following:
1. Go to the Contact Us button on the SCA website and email your concern; or
2. Call the SCA and say you understand she worked as a strata manager but you don’t know where. The SCA may or may not have her details depending on whether she’s a member of the SCA; and
3. I would not volunteer your strata plan details or that you’re unhappy with your current manager, who if he’s a member of the SCA, why would the SCA help you dismiss him?
As to your unhappiness with your strata manager. Do not assume the next manager will be any better.
Good luck!
Hi,
I’m with Jimmy.
Your post is extremely confusing and unclear. As Jimmy recommends: use bullet point, focus on the key issue and re-post the problem. I don’t know where to begin with my queries, so here goes:1. The by law you refer to, who prepared it?
(a) The strata committee?
(b) The OC’s lawyer?
(c) The studio owner’s lawyer?2. Was it registered?
3. As the studio gave the relevant lot more usable space and possibly increased the risk profile for the strata scheme, was a redistribution of unit entitlement (“U/E”) attempted or even considered by the OC? If not, do you know why?
If a redistribution was undertaken and a reasonable determination was arrived at then liability for insurance premiums would be a function of U/E. This is separate from any other term or condition of the by law.Note:
A. Note, in recent weeks I have been reading up on by laws and understand they CAN be amended retrospectively by the OC. I have not checked if such amendments have a time bar on them; and
B. You misunderstand who or what is liable as user of the studio: as I see it, in most by-laws it is not the owner of the lot at one point in time eg when the by-law was voted on or register which is the person responsible, rather it is the lot’s owner, which over time will change as people move in and out.Often in a multi story building, the OC determines
(a) how often to recarpet a common area (say every 6 yrs);
(b) How much money per floor to allow for said recarpeting; and
(c) What colour/style the carpet should be in order to be uniform in the building.
If say the OC allows $2,00o per floor, in your case it’s $1,000 per lot every 6 years, then so long as each floor is given such an allowance every say 6 years (adjusted for inflation), it doesn’t matter if one floor changes carpet today and another floor does it next year etc. Records will be kept of when a floor replaced a carpet. If owners of a floor want say a $3,000 carpet then they will have to top up the $2,000 allowance given to that floor.
The OC should stipulate that only well known carpet suppliers & layers can be used. Using such a commercial firm will ensure correct underlay is used and good quality workmanship will be provided.
Good afternoon andyj,
I just came across this post and below are my views, having been in a similar situation some years ago. Lucky for me I did not have to go to NCAT to resolve it.
1. Take Jimmy’s advice regarding a log of noise and statutory declarations from others attesting to the noise;
2.Look at the by-laws. (a) Usually there is a By-Law on noise, such as “non wet areas are to be covered so that transmission to other lots is minimised”. Or similar wording. Jimmy was correct to point out that “carpeting” per se is not usually mentioned (as I wrote in error); and (b) There is a By-Law on lot owners or occupiers having the right to peaceful enjoyment (i.e. not be disturbed);
3. Given a NTC (with one By-Law) was issued, you should seek the strata manager issue a NTC on the other By-Law;
4. Echoing Jimmy, I recommend you seek mediation via NSW Fair Trading (apply online). I suggest you apply for mediation with the neighbour for the noise. Apply separately for mediation and with the OC for failing to enforce the By-Laws. When the NTC was ignored by the trouble maker, the OC via the strata manager should have taken him to NCAT to seek a penalty. The OC and strata manager it seems have not complied with their obligations. I draw your attention to the following parts of the SSM Act: s. 135; 146 & 147.
NSW FT may come back to you indicating they prefer both applications be rolled up into one. If they say that, then follow their advice. I suggested the two applications because you can always combine them without losing time or your place in the listing of cases awaiting mediation. I think it’s tougher for you to apply for one mediation and later add another (related) application expecting both to be heard on the same day or close together.
I would not use a lawyer at this time.
For mediation you’d be wasting your money as the lawyer will charge to prepare the case and who knows? The other side may not turn up. They don’t have to appear at mediation. Also, Fair Trading does not expect lawyers at mediation.
If the other side fails to turn up or they do turn up but there is no agreement, your next step is NCAT.
Possible problem: even if you win at NCAT it is rare that costs are awarded, so you’ll be out of pocket who knows how much. Also when considering lawyers, you should get someone who focuses on strata law.
Just my 2c.
Paradise:
1. Jimmy is correct about FT not investigating strata matters per se but recommending (as FT recommends) that you go to NCAT (when complaining about the OC ie strata matters);
2. But if you complain as I did to FT about the strata agent’s conduct, then FT will investigate (and this complaint is free of charge). From my experience, NCAT is not the forum for such allegations to be tested;
3. Noting FT is not an advisory service but merely an information facility, there’s no harm asking FT what your options are when say yes, you were granted the right to inspect records, but many records were not available for viewing. Were some held back? Lost? If so, by who? Is anyone fined for breaching s. 180 (see below)?
STRATA SCHEMES MANAGEMENT ACT 2015 – SECT 180
Certain records to be retained for prescribed period
180 Certain records to be retained for prescribed perio
(1) An owners corporation must cause the following to be retained for 7 years–
(a) any records, notices and orders required to be kept under this Division or Part 10 of the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015 ,
(b) minutes of meetings required to be kept under Schedule 1 or Schedule 2,
(c) its financial statements and accounting records,
(d) copies of correspondence received and sent by the owners corporation,
(e) notices of meetings of the owners corporation and its strata committee,
(f) proxies delivered to the owners corporation,
(g) voting papers relating to motions for resolutions by the owners corporation and to the election of officers or the establishment of a strata renewal committee (under Part 10 of the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015 ),
(h) a copy of any signed strata managing agent agreement or building manager agreement entered into by the owners corporation,
(i) records given to the owners corporation by the strata managing agent relating to the exercise of functions by the agent,
(j) any other documents prescribed by the regulations for the purposes of this section.
<small>: Maximum penalty–5 penalty units. </small>
(2) The regulations may prescribe a different period for which any or all of the things referred to in subsection (1) are required to be retained.
4. Trash the idea of a solicitor and a summons. IMHO it’s money down the drain. Yes that may be a means to secure the documents you want, but what if the agent agrees to give them to you only to admit, when handing them over, that “we’re sorry but some (maybe most) are documents are missing, lost, borrowed and not returned”, see (3) above.
5. While FT is limited in what it can do regarding the SSM Act, it is the case with most consumer complaints (I am not sure if strata falls under this as well), that the more complaints the better for consumers. It used to be that if a company is complained about 10 times in a month, then that company is listed on a register available to be viewed online by anyone. Of course a company, eg a supermarket with many outlets is more likely to get 10+ complaints per month than a strata agent UNLESS you convince your neighbours to file a complaint themselves.
From memory, damage to stove could be covered by landlord insurance but not maintenance or replacement due to old age. The original stove may have been OC responsibility, but not any subsequent stove.
When looking at strata insurance you need to get the PDS (Product Disclosure Statement ie policy papers) which often come with a summary of what is covered (eg building, catastrophe cover etc) and to what degree.
Decide what you want covered (some items are optional) and to what degree (i.e. how many $ of cover).
Then compare the above items across several insurers. I say “several” because there are many different insurance companies, but ultimately only a small number (3?) of giant organisations run the insurance market in Oz. The high price of insurance is very much a function of the absence of competition.
There are many problems with Airbnb, that unsurprisingly several are missed by the regulators and politicians in general.
Two come to mind as chronically missed opportunities:
1. Say you’re a landlord. You lease your investment unit for one year to Mr and Mrs Jones. A few months into the lease they tell you they are scooting overseas for a month and their neighbour will take their mail in their absence. You have no issue with that. Without your knowledge they rent the place out for that month via Airbnb. Your llong standing andlord insurance policy does not cover anything while STHL is taking place. The OC is not happy with three different parties living in the property over the month. Some of which make unbearable noise at night and create parking problems. When you find out about this business venture by your tenants, during their month absence, you contact Airbnb and complain saying the tenants have no right to contract with Airbnb. Airbnb tells you to go fly a kite. Specifically: “thank you for your feedback. Our policy is to stand by our hosts and the Jones’ are our hosts”. I repeat: “they cannot be hosts. The place is not theirs. It’s like them selling a random car in a shopping centre car park. They do not have papers to show it is their automobile”! Airbnb thanked me for my feedback but didn’t budge an inch.
I had to go to NCAT (after waiting a few months to be heard) in order to stop this situation, which was repeated a few times and each time exposed me as uninsured. Alternatively I was happy for NCAT to have my tenants ordered to pay the additional premium for landlord insurance that covers STHL.
At NCAT I won because the Member saw the facts as I did. Who knows how another Member would see the facts?
What is needed as part of any reform to the legislation are massive penalties for Airbnb if caught contracting with anyone other than the owner of the premises or anyone who has the owner’s written consent. Maybe a three strikes and you’re out of the Australian marketplace would be a good start. It’s not like there are no other similar platforms; and
2. It was reported a few years ago that negative reviews of accommodation is not a selling point for the platform, so Airbnb did its best to exclude such reviews from the website. For tourists, this makes good hosts indivisible from lousy ones. I am unaware if this unsavoury behaviour continues to operate.
I missed the SMH article but am entertained weekly by the SCA mouthpiece on Sunday afternoons on 2GB. I recall the SCA gentleman often giving the impression that owners, strata managers etc can all join the SCA. As though it’s just one big happy family where everyone’s interest is looked after equally. Never have I heard reference by him to the Owners Corporation Network or other organisation as a more suitable grouping for owners to in which to congregate.
It would be useful if strata managers were penalised heavily for breaking the law. If they must hand over details of the strata roll and refuse to do so or make amendments to the strata roll if asked by owners and refuse, then a fat fine, say for the first offence, $2,000 on the management firm and $1,000 on the individual himself/herself who refused to comply would be a good start.
Sometimes strata managers are ignorant of the law, sometimes they want a fee (to provide the roll) as it may fall under what the SCA contract calls “additional services” and sometimes they are just plain nasty.
Case in point: we have a manager in place for 18 months. Every time there is a need to access my premises (water issues etc) she would email me demanding access. Sometimes giving <24 hrs notice. I would then have to reach out to my tenant. Assuming I reached out in time.
As I don’t live on the premises, I asked for my tenant instead to be notified by the strata mgr directly. Strata mgr refused stating “I go by the names listed on the strata roll”. I replied that for 20 years I have not lived there and ALL previous strata managers complied with my requests to contact the relevant tenant. The latest strata manager continued to refuse to liaise with the tenant.
When a new committee was formed, which I joined, one member seemed to have a good relationship with the strata mgr. She asked the strata mgr on my behalf and presto: the tenant is now contacted directly by the strata mgr.
I am unsure if ignoring my instruction as to liaising with the tenant is evidence that the manager is vindictive or just ignorant of her obligations. But the fact that without a peep of dissent, she agreed to what I wanted when it came from another owner on my behalf.
Had the other committee member not been successful in obtaining the result she did, I would be compelled to complain to FT to ask the strata mgr to explain herself.
Jimmy’s point on the building being possibly designed in a way or limited by some variable so as to discourage or negate the installation and use of a/c units may well be valid. At this stage we don’t know.
I suggest that 3dpotato ask the s/committee or manager “how did the by law come about” and “what’s its purpose”?
Don’t be too specific in the questions. And email them, don’t ask in person.
If the committee’s answers do not rely on design or electrical capacity available in the building, then I’m with Kaindub: the by law is harsh and oppressive and worth a challenge.
Here’s my $0.02.
I penned a long response outlining the many pot holes you need to avoid when transferring common property to a lot owner or worse still, selling the common property.
On reflection I have a far simpler response: drop the matter. Do not proceed. Keep as far away from it as you can. As you wrote: “The supplier has plenty of references in private houses but none in stratas”.
Do you know exactly the model chair lift under consideration? Will parts be available in future years? Will others be inconvenienced by the noise? Will the OC decide on the terms of a service agreement with the supplier or will it leave it to the lot owner?
Do you really want to be the guinea pig if something goes pear shaped? Are you or others in your OC confident, really confident that the skills and outcomes in a private house are transferable to a strata? Say you’re all in favour. Say the local council approves it but in say, 5 years bans it for any reason. The council orders the OC to remove it. Do you think the lot owner would accept the OC’s dictate to cover the cost of removal and restore the area to its pre-chair lift condition, without a fight?
The historic record will show the OC knew the supplier has no provable record in stratas, yet the OC chose to go ahead anyway.
In my humble opinion, that is not a winning hand.
Many OCs and strata managers make it difficult to access strata documents, even if the person seeking access is on the strata committee.
One strata manager I deal with got the OC to agree to a management contract in the form supplied by the Strata Community Association.
That agreement from memory lists what documents will be available to committee members to access at no charge via a portal e.g. invoices etc but for ALL other documents eg strata roll, bank statements etc there will be a charge per document.
I am unable to understand why some owners would support such a lopsided contract. Unless of course they failed to read the contract before voting “Aye”.
Out of interest, was the management contract b/w the OC and the SM the standard contract provided by the Strata Community Association?
Sir Humphrey is on the money.
In a NSW strata I am involved in a few years ago the OC got an alleged “special price” from a contractor to upgrade individual lots’ fuse boxes. Each lot had its own fuse box. Nobody was forced to upgrade and nobody was forced to use the OC’s so-called “preferred contractor”. But it was made clear that any upgrade will be for the lot owner’s account.
Further to Jimmy’s point on hiring an experienced person to look into the minutes etc, while that is a good idea, be aware of situations where, as I have experienced, some committees choose not to hold strata committee meetings and hence while there may be significant issues at the scheme and they may or may not be attended to. Importantly, without meetings there are zilch minutes so nobody outside the strata committee would have a clue what’s really going on at the scheme.