Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I was told it would be put to committee as to if I could do this.
My approach when drafting my response is that the original poster (OP) was trying to work with the committee, abide by the by-laws, and have the least amount of inconvenience for everybody. When the committee member’s response was to basically say ‘we’ll see if we’ll allow it‘ then it is obvious that they aren’t about ‘making things work‘ in the building but about wielding their power to make life hard for residents.
As the Secretary of a small block I do my best to make sure that residents (owners and tenants) abide by the by-laws, and answer their questions in a timely and professional manner. This makes it much easier to ensure compliance and allows residents to have a quiet and compliant building.
For this situation, the OP needs to be able to have confidence that when they book the moving van it will be able to do its job. That the committee members treated the OP legitimate query with, at best disdain and arguably contempt, it diminishes them personally and harms the reputation of the committee.
While they can try, it comes down to what can they really do.
Your truck may cause some problems for awhile, but once it’s loaded and gone then so are you.
The recalcitrant committee members can huff and puff all they want, but you wont be there to hear it.
It just goes to show that no good deed goes unpunished.
The strata manager informed me over the phone that they are not going through insurance…
Why not? And no matter their answer, there is no reason why you can’t directly claim via the insurance policy.
‘Build Double brick retaining wall starting 200mm over existing driveway Level to reach 800mm over driveway depends…
It looks like they plan to build the new fence over the driveway. If this is your driveway you need to act immediately. If you lose between 20-80 cms of driveway you may not be able to use it.
But here’s the thing, because it was designed not to have air-con, the electricity supply isn’t up to providing the necessary power.
Sounds like the developer did a cheap and nasty job with fantasy claims about passive cooling. And was allowed to get away with a deficient power supply.
All good if it works but since it’s not, are those whose residence missed out on the design benefits (which they surely paid for) doomed to suffer for ever?
Probably time to get a copy of the resident’s roll and make contact with your fellow residents and see who’s suffering in the heat. Then, let the fun begin. Hopefully you’ll be able to cool down again in the near future.
If there’s not a bylaw allowing the careless resident to be charged the cost of rekeying the building, then there needs to be.
And specifically mention that storing keys in the letter box, or anywhere else that’s essentially unsecured is not permitted. Basically put the onus on the key holder to prove they took appropriate care of the keys. And a police report for even a minor crime where keys are taken.
All in the name of getting evidence from the person that their actions were careless.
It might also be time to consider using electronic keycards which can be cancelled as soon as their loss is reported.
Noting that the chair lift will use electricity, how will the installer pay for this?
I reckon it would be fairly certain that other residents will seek to use the chair lift. Would this be permitted?
Of course the owner will be liable for its removal when they leave. Such liability would of course attach to the residence.
One of the fascinating things about this is it seems (and I can only say “seems”) that the owners who joined in on the Tribunal action won’t have to pay a share of any of the costs incurred in defending the action – about $75,000.
It would be interesting to hear how it was communicated to owners that if they didn’t join the tribunal action would be liable for legal costs. I’m assuming that if the tribunal action was unsuccessful then those who launched it would have been liable for the legal costs.
For those just want to live a quiet life in their strata building, it seems quite easy to be caught in a no win situation, where the wrong choice is going to leave you liable for large costs you really don’t understand.
I know you said it Jimmy, but why are Strata Managers so ignorant? Is it wilful? Or what? If there was a basic questionnaire that committees asked potential SMs prior to hiring them, then this would have to be top of the list.
If this occurs in your OC make sure you advise your insurance company, in writing. Then if there is an increase in premiums the owner is liable for them. Even if there is no additional cost, the insurance company does require that they be informed if there may be increased risk to the premises they’re providing coverage.
Do this in writing immediately, and make sure your OC manager knows that this is very serious and must be actioned immediately.
Maybe the legal person who is au fait with Victorian OC law could advise if the cost of any additional security that is required could be paid for by the owner?
And make sure that the strata manager doesn’t charge the OC for the time spent assisting the potential purchaser.
A couple of points to consider;
Some mobility scooters are large. How much space will it take up? Will it interfere with other residents use of the common property?
If/when the mobility scooter is left unattended who will be responsible? Sadly these very expensive mobility scooters are stolen/vandalised with monotonous regularity. Will the owner demand that the OC, i.e. other residents contribute to its replacement if stolen from common property?
Just because a person has a disability doesn’t mean they automatically get everything they need from other parties. The term ‘reasonable accommodation‘ forms a key part of what may/must be done.
Is there any reason the person can’t park their mobility scooter in their residence?
Finally, when the power point isn’t being used for the mobility scooter; will it be locked off or otherwise secured? What if someone else wants to use it and pay for the power consumed? Who gets priority?
Sounds like it’s water hammer.
It will either be easy or incredibly hard to fix.
Probably the first step is getting a plumber to examine the pipes and determining if there are any defects in the pipes that need repairing. Then installing a water hammer arrestor.
If that works, all good. If not, then the hunt begins for the cause and solution begins. That can be expensive and take a long time.
As to who is responsible, I’m sure someone more familiar with strata law will provide the answer.
Or go an even simpler route.
Refer it to the property manager/owner and tell them that the tenants in Unit X aren’t bringing their bins in on time and that any fines will be the responsibility of the owner not the OC.
Would be great if strata living was taken seriously by politicians; and the developers, management companies were brought to heel.
A real building warranty. and no building managers with ties to builders getting lucrative contracts. And abolish embedded networks where there is a restriction of choice for owners.
Let’s hope the OCN gets some traction and that it spreads throughout the country.
And some real powers to rid residential buildings of ‘short -term letting’ would be very welcome. At the very least to allow the OC to have a true picture of which apartments are being used for short-term letting and authority to immediately expel miscreants and punish the owner with punitive penalties for repeated misbehaviour.
Maybe there needs to be an indication on for sale advertisements of how many apartments in the building are available for short-term letting? When residential owners see the value of the property falling then they’ll demand action.