Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I used to be a “Strata Guru” on this forum, and while my Wife and I are no longer Strata residents, I couldn’t resist adding some comments and advice regarding the recent Court ruling about the keeping of pets in Strata.
As well as holding TAFE Cert 4 in Strata Community Management, I also hold a Masters Degree in Applied Science (Chem), the relevance being that I understand the “limits” that can be set, both realistically and administratively, around prescribed parameters whether they be for the detection of chemical analytes or under Strata By-Laws.
Enough of that…..but the relevance of it to the current conundrum of how to manage the keeping of pets in Strata Communities is that an acceptance parameter of “zero” is neither realistic or administrable.
The Special By-Law (SBL) that I wrote for the 23 Lot Plan we then lived in, and that I then self-managed, put administratively simple conditions around the keeping of pets by Residents.
The SBL permitted aquariums and one (1) caged bird by Application, and as best I can recall placed each of these conditions upon Applications for other pets:
▪ Renters requiring their Landlord/Owner’s prior written consent to the keeping of pet/s on their Lot
▪ Applications for assistance animals being supported by a written verification as to the animal’s status (training) from Assistance Animals Australia.
▪ A letter from a registered veterenarian who had physically inspected the Applicant’s Lot and found it suitable for the keeping of the specific pet/s in terms of physical size (of the pet and the lot), and for the overall wellbeing of the animal.
▪ A photograph of the pet/s.
▪ A written statements around the normal undertakings by Applicants to not place pet “residues” into the sewerage system serving the Lot, to manage noise, to not to permit their pet/s to be unleashed on the Common Property etc etc, and their acknowledgement of the consequences of a breach of any Consent under the SBL.Details of any Consents were included in a Pet Register that formed part of those items disclosed with Strata Inspections.
The operational consequences of this Special By-Law (SBL) were that those Residents who at best produced a letter from a GP to assert how much they needed their pet weren’t sent packing but were instead referred to the SBL, and only those with a genuine desire to keep and to properly care for their pet bothered to “jump through all the hoops” attached to that SBL.
As best I can recall, up until I “retired” from Strata Residents of eight Lots (of 23) had Consents to keep pets, only one had been served with a Notice to remove their pet after the 3 written warnings prescribed under the SBL, and perhaps of most significance, nobody had cause to run off to the NCAT because they’d been given a flatout NO to pets.
I hope that’s helpful, because I think I’ll now return to my retirement from this Forum (sorry Jimmy)
Arlette…….and you need to take into consideration that you’re residents not owners, and that while the strata manager is currently providing you with some advice, they’re engaged by the Owners Corporation (O/C) as a collective of all owners and as such provide paid services to that collective.
So subject to the precise wording of the Plan’s existing by-law for the keeping of animals (ref: previous post #17), in order to progress anything such as a Motion to amend that by-law you’ll need as a prerequisite the active support of your partner’s family as the Owners of your Unit, including their formal permission for a pet to be kept at their Unit subject to the consent of the O/C, and by placing any Motion/s that you might prepare on the Agenda for consideration by those Owners in attendance at a General Meeting of the O/C.
…..OR instead of NSW strata residents blindly accepting the Department of Fair Trading’s (DOFT) not so subtle guidance to participate in the symbiotic relationship that exists between it and the State’s Civil & Administrative Tribunal, use the free and independent mediation services provided by a N.S.W. Community Justice Centre (CJC)
I’ve twice used the CJC mediation service, and while it too relies on the willingness of the parties to participate in good faith, the process is far superior to that provided by the DOFT.
Jimmy – I agree, with the only further proviso being that at its first Annual General Meeting (AGM) post December 2016, the Agenda would need to include Motions:
1) To resolve that nominations for election to the Strata Committee must be by the individuals themselves, include any preference/s they have for consideration as an Officer of the Committee, and that nominations will close (say) 30 days prior to the date of each AGM; and
2) To resolve the maximum number of Strata Committee members that it will in future elect.
Both Motions should have an incorporated condition that the outcome of those Resolutions will remain in force until otherwise amended at a subsequent AGM.
In that way a ballot at the physical AGM would be unnecessary, and the Agenda for an on-line vote could at the applicable Motion instruct Owners to vote there for the pre-nominated candidate/s of their choice up to “… the number determined by the owners corporation as the (maximum) number of members of the strata committee” [ref: Reg.2016 – Sect.10,Cl.3(a)]
I’m sure that a well designed software package could block any votes in excess of that maximum number.
The process to then nominate and elect Officers of the Strata Committee could occur at a subsequent Meeting of that Committee, which with the assistance of the preferences indicated at the time of Members’ pre-nomination, could also be conducted on-line if necessary, or by teleconference or Skype® otherwise.
All of the above is a bit of a “fiddle” around the edges of the Regulation 2016, but I can’t see anyone challenging such a strategy so long as it’s initially transparent, and subsequently open to amendment by way of a later majority vote at an AGM.
Thanks for the follow-up Jimmy, but I must say that the explanation by the Department’s spokesperson both defies logic and in opposition to what I thought were the objectives of introducing the option electronic voting for General Meetings, being to facilitate greater involvement by Owners in the overall management of their Scheme, and particularly so by the elected members of their Strata Committee.
If it’s good enough for the State Government to have a cut-off date for people to pre-nominate for election to its Parliament, and even for those nominating for the Board of Registered Organisations to do so at least 30 days in advance of the applicable General Meeting, I don’t understand why that’s not available for the election of Strata Committees?
Feliix said…….My understanding is that the windows overlooking a balcony of the lot owner is their responsibility and the other windows on the walls not overlooking the balconies are the responsibility of the OC. Is this correct?
That’s what’s been advised in earlier posts with regard to Schemes registered prior to 1974, so YES
Felix asked…….Should the OC want to install a by-law for this Strata that would place the maintenance and repair for the windows on the lot owners, what would be required?
A special resolution at a General Meeting of the Owners Corporation (O/C) would be required, but that is conditional on the building itself and the item of common property involved, in this example windows, not being adversely affected by a decision by the O/C not to maintain and repair. Further, should the O/C wish to have maintenance and repairs instead undertaken by Lot Owners (as opposed to not at all) then there’s a further condition that each Owner agrees in writing to do that and to have that requirement included in and enabling special by-law. So in summary, such an action would be extremely difficult for an O/C to introduce.
YES that is correct, in your circumstances the windows in their entirety are common property and the responsibility of the Owners Corporation in terms of maintenance and repairs, with the exception of cleaning that’s the Owners’ responsibility wherever that can be done safely.
Jimmy – your journalistic skills are really honed, as despite the fact that my “correction” was oblique you still picked it up.
No self-imposed penance was necessary or expected, especially as Whales living in aquariums shouldn’t provide their neighbours with glass cutters!
Dudley – as you’ve had no responses as yet, Ill advise in the first instance that the problem is NOT one for your Owners Corporation to address but is rather one for its neighbours to rectify.
The Building Code of Australia provides technical standards for all aspects of building, and in relation to stormwater Australian Standard AS/NZ 3500 Plumbing and Drainage applies, where it is stated that “roof water and surface water from a property must be collected and discharged through underground pipes to legal points of discharge including to Council’s public drainage system including the roadside gutter or to an inter-allotment system.
Clearly the roofwater collection and disposal system at your neighbour’s property is not functioning properly, and whether that’s due to a lack of maintenance (e.g. blocked gutters) or a non-compliant design, your Owners Corporation needs to write to its equivalent for the neighbouring property in order to make them aware of the issue, and to seek prompt resolution of it.
If that polite and reasoned approach is not reciprocated, then perhaps seek the advice of your Local Council and depending upon their interest (or a lack thereof) your O/C could seek professional mediation via a Community Justice Centre.
I’ve agreed with Scallywag (post #1) about the potential for those voting electronically at General Meetings to be disenfranchised to the extent that they would not be able to cast a vote for persons who are properly nominated for election to the Strata Committee at the physical meeting (as opposed to for those who nominate prior to the electronic distribution of the Agenda), but as it would be unusual for the numbers of nominees to exceed the numbers of Strata Committee Members decided upon at the Meeting, a ballot would be in most circumstances unnecessary.
Still and all there appears to be a conflict in the Regulation between the procedures for electronically electing pre-nominated candidates to the Strata Committee and for electing those who are later nominated at the physical Meeting of the Owners Corporation.
Is it too late for you to seek some clarification from your contacts in the Minister’s Office Jimmy?
Robyn – in response to your question about guidelines / interpretations regarding the responsibility for windows and /or doors adjoining the balcony of a Lot within pre-1974 Schemes, here are two that may be helpful:
A “Direction” from NSW Land & Property Information (incorporating the former Land Titles Office) until such time as our State Government sells it off (too).
From Strata Community Australia as the Peak Strata Industry Body; refer item 20.
piximalone – I suggest you read the above, however if the windows to which your post #1 refers are within a post 1974 Scheme, then YES the Owners Corporation is responsible to properly maintain them to the extent that they’re among other things “fit for purpose”, but if that’s not adequate in your opinion due to noise etc and you wish to have them replaced, then YES you would need to obtain the prior written consent of your Owners Corporation at a General Meeting and pay for the preparation and Registration of a Special By-Law only if, as I expect, your Owners Corporation wishes to make you and future Owners of your Lot (and not it) responsible for the on-going maintenance of those.
Finally, HERE is a link to the requirement for window locks to be installed and maintained on some windows by the Owners Corporation (not by individual Owners) before 31 March 2018.
Scallywag said……
– The new Regulations DO allow electronic voting before a meeting on matters “not being an election”. In other words, Pre Meeting (electronic) voting excludes voting for any nominees for Committee.
– In QLD the Election of Committee is placed on the Agenda, owners pre-nominate and ALL OWNERS have an equal opportunity to vote for members of the Strata Committee. Owners at the meeting can also nominate if there are vacancies ….
As I interpret the new NSW Regulation the “not being an election” provision to which you refer relates only to postal voting, but not to pre-meeting electronic voting (including by the use of a website) under the provisions of Clause 15.
Similarly, it appears to me that the pre-nomination provisions at Clause 9 of the NSW Regulation mirror those applicable in Queensland, where I agree with you that any nominations made at a General Meeting itself may only be voted upon by those personally present there and/or holding a proxy.
supersleuth —
Jimmy T said……the payments that aren’t allowed are for those for future work done.
……which mirrors my more oblique reference in post #2 to a permitted reimbursement for works performed and not for an “undertaking” to do so.
Peter C is also correct by observing that while it may be in some circumstances quicker and easier for a committee member to purchase something like a bag of lawn food and to have that expense reimbursed, it MUST be accompanied by a sales receipt, be booked to an appropriate account such as “gardening supplies” where sufficient budgeted funds must exist, and be used on the Common Property of the Scheme and not on any lot owner’s property.
A reimbursement of that type would not come under Cl.25 as it’s not a payment for work performed by an E/C Member as part of their role of say, Secretary. So prior consent via a resolution at a General Meeting would not be required, although some limitations on the amounts and types of such expenditures that may be in future permitted would be an apropriate resolution at your upcoming AGM in my opinion.
That’s a lot of prerequisites, which is why for those same reasons of quickness, ease, and one more that I’d add of transparency, I’ve never encouraged it or permitted any catch-all accounts such as “sundry expenses” and “general maintenance” in the Scheme that I was managing.
I suggest you contact your Local Council in the first instance, as even if the “subdivision” is self-contained, I don’t believe that so-called Granny Flat provisions are Complying Developments in NSW if they involve strata lots; so your neighbour’s works may be illegal from that perspective as well as under the provisions of the Strata Schemes Management Act that relate to changes involving the Common Property of the Owners Corporation.
Then armed with Council’s advice, contact your building insurers, tell them about Council’s ruling (either way) and ask the question about impacts on your cover.
As eniquitous as it sounds, Cl.25 of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act provides for Executive Committee Members to be paid for services performed for the Owners Corporation where that’s in accordance with resolution passed at a General Meeting.
So provided the services have been performed (i.e. not an undertaking) and they’re properly documented, then YES payment that in my opinion should be as a reimbursement of expenses incurred can be made if the O/C so determines by a majority vote.