Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Noting your insurance company has already had to pay out once, would it be worth asking them if they would provide assistance to remove a potentially costly risk? Or even what course of action they might suggest?
It is also worth reminding the sender of the threatening emails that by sending them to the Secretary that they will form a permanent part of the OC records.
And that any other owner is entitled to see them, as is any other person entitled to access the OC records. This includes potential purchasers of units. Maybe even mention that the emails could inhibit the price paid for units being offered for sale.
And, especially important, the dispute goes to an external organisation, including NCAT then those emails will form part of the record of matters being disputed.
Therefore it behoves the sender to remain civil, factual and to seek to resolve their dispute timeously.
A warning for everybody. And if you lost money what hope does an inexperienced first time buyer have?
It is long overdue for the introduction of strict and strong legislation to protect buyers and having severe penalties for miscreants including restitution. Public naming and shaming would be good. As well as a one strike policy. I.e. break the law once and forever be forbidden from working in any field where you have access to other people’s money.
I’m sure you felt the loss of $50,000 Jimmy. For many people it would be enough to tip them into permanent financial stress.
Another way is to go to their school and speak to the principal. Let them know in a quiet unemotional way what the problem is and ask if they can help stop the problem.
When logging in to reply I saw that the OP wrote their query two years ago so I suspect the matter has been resolved one way or another.
However, one person’s reasonable noise is another person’s unreasonable noise. By way of example a few years ago I had some plumbing work done (replacement water heater) and my adjoining neighbour declared there was lots of noise from the pipes. Had water hammer devices installed and ended up having three different plumbers come to try and find the fault. It cost me about $1500 to try and remedy the noise issue.
No source of noise was found and each of the plumbers said that any pipe noise heard in the adjoining unit was very quiet. Basically with 50 year old pipes there is a little noise. The neighbour’s story fell apart when they changed their story and said I had been very noisy one weekend I wasn’t at home. Then there were also instances of me not using water at times they said I did. I’d kept a diary of times I used water after 10pm.
When the neighbour sold up and moved up I went back to normal use and after a few months asked my new neigbours actually commented how quiet I was, There was the occasional pipe noise but it was underneath their unit so they would deal with it in their own good time.
One of the plumbers had told me that they thought the original neighbour was very sensitive to any noise and complained about what anybody else would consider normal.
With the various internet ‘discussions’ about installing FTTP in a building it is indeed fortunate that electricity and toilets were installed before strata was in existence.
Some of the arguments against updating and future-proofing the internet connection are laughable.
And, it surely adds value to the building.
The strata manger has now informed the committee that they are considering this letter as a formal retrospective approval application.
Does the SM actually have the authority to issue such a letter? And why would they do this without committee approval. As was noted earlier the SM works for the OC and must follow the law. Since the SM obviously needs ‘guidance‘ on how to do their well paid job it’s time they were instructed in writing to get this matter resolved. I.e. issue a notice to comply and get the AC removed.
Since the SM has allowed the matter to get to this stage they shouldn’t be paid anything additional to their standard fee. Once resolved the SM should be removed, like the errant AC.
If the SM is working for a larger organisation go to the management and insist on someone competent.
1 user thanked author for this post.
If the hand rail doesn’t reduce the width to an unacceptable level then by all means install it.
You may need to determine if there is a minimum width for the hall, especially when people are moving in and out of the building.
Otherwise, we all get to the stage where we appreciate a good hand rail.
When an owner doesn’t pay their fees then it has the potential to adversely affect other owners.
The expenses continue and need to be paid. Even if there is extra money being put away (aside from the sinking fund) unforeseen expenses soon consume this money.
So, if one owner is behind on their levies then the other owners have to pay additional levies to keep the OC financial leading to even more unpaid levies.
A vicious circle. I’m not sure of the answer but being proactive in recovering overdue fees is essential. And the OC isn’t a financial advisor, nor is it a lending facility, e.g. a bank, therefore it behoves the late paying owner to seek independent advice about getting financial.
And for recalcitrant owners who simply refuse to either pay, or engage with the OC, the surely xCAT should have the power to sell the place to recover money?
If ‘strata’ doesn’t have the money then the fees need to be raised. If it’s for an essential repair then a levy needs to be struck.
An issue if you pay for it out of your own pocket is that you may never get the money back. Also, this repair sounds like something that must be done, meaning the Owner’s Corporation must do it.
And never forget the Owner’s Corporation, or as you’ve referred to it ‘strata’ is made up of the owners. You are as much part of the problem as part of the solution whilst you’re being adversely affected by the current fault.
PS the longer you wait, the more expensive it will be to repair.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Why on earth would you allow the OC or their management company to have a copy of the unit key?
As noted above, this has rort writ large. The management companies facilitating these rorts need to be removed ASAP. I would also wonder what type of security they have for storage and dissemination of keys.
Have you spoken to the owner above asking them if they can install a hose to divert the water?
Or speak with the OC committee and given them a written request to ensure compliance with the cited by-law by a specific date. And ask them to forbid the use of the AC until the problem is rectified.
Surely you have to be asked to grant entry first before you can be accused of hindering access?
If the resident had left contact details and responded in a reasonable time then surely that is all that is required in normal circumstances?
Otherwise it would seem that the OC/Management company would need to hold a set of keys for every residence in the building.
It may be worth asking your neighbours if they’re also affected by the invasive roots. It’s often easier to get something done if there are at least a few people demanding that it be done.
Noting that the original question was asking “...where the strata management gets the owners’ names...” here’s something people may not be aware of.
I am the Secretary of a small OC in Victoria and when a unit was sold recently I received a document from Pexa which contained the following details:
Name of seller, their new address, their phone number and email address, and the name and details of their lawyer
Name of buyer(s) their previous address, their phone number(s) and email address(es), date(s) of birth, and the name and details of their lawyer.
And being a document received as part of the Owner’s Corporation normal business it is discoverable by anybody who has legal access to our files.