Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Stratafied – point taken, but as the topic is “building security” I thought that leif‘s angle was that the Strata Manager’s decision to remove the existing locks on the doors to the fire stairs including on the outside of those at street level, thereby permitting access to people who were now sleeping in the fire stairs, had compromised that (building security).
Far from confusing the situation, I thought that the legality of the Strata Manager’s decision to, as it appears, make permanent changes to the common property (locks) on those fire doors and possibly breach the building’s Fire Safety Schedule (as opposed to the rating of the doors themselves) in the absence of a Special Resolution by the O/C was germane to the discussion.
But then I could be wrong – so let’s wait for leif‘s clarification!
Yes you’re right Jimmy….. I was just being my pedantic self by advising that as “general business” can’t be on the Agenda for the Meeting, and as leif said that he had prepared his question about the fire door locks in writing, I wondered whether he’d actually submitted that for inclusion on the Agenda where a resolution should be minuted and be possibly open to Mediation, or if he’d just been fobbed-off in un-minuted post-meeting discussions.
I also notice that the locks were “removed under maintenance”, which to me implies that they’d be subsequently reinstalled as opposed to being permanently removed.
Anyway, with bated breath…………..
leif – I’ve been reading your posts and waiting for somebody more informed than me to advise you about the rules surrounding the operation of fire doors / stairs.
So far as I’m aware though, the doors on each level should be locked on the inside so that residents there can enter the stairway, and doors at ground /street level should be locked on the outside to prevent unauthorised access.
Depending upon your building’s construction date, the specific requirements for fire safety would be shown on the Fire Safety Schedule that’s provided by Council concurrently with a Certificate of Occupancy.
In answer to your question about “who is in charge of changes”, those undertaken on the fire doors can only be determined by way of a Special Resolution at a General Meeting, where ≥75% of those in attendance must be in favour in order for the change or alteration to occur.
So your Strata Manager’s advice was incorrect, in that your AGM was the correct forum for a decision to be made (or rejected) about removing the locks on the building’s fire doors, and furthermore, I believe that the actions now undertaken would be contrary to the rules surrounding the operation of fire doors / stairs.
How to handle this depends in part upon whether you submitted a Motion that was included on the Agenda for the AGM, so could you please advise.
______________________________________________________________
PS – Stratafied’s post arrived as I was typing this, and it should be noted that there can be no “general business” on the Agenda of General Meetings; hence my question about a Motion.
A Certificate IV in Workplace Health and Safety, but as a person with relevant experience is essential for strata plan assessments, you shouldn’t go past a Proposal from one of flatChat’s sponsors…….Integrated Building Consultancy.
groundfloor – thanks for the clarification, it’s just that your wording had me a little confused.
There’s no doubt that the Owners Corporation (O/C) is responsible for making-good all damage that it causes (even necessarily) to its property in the process of repairing and/or maintaining that property.
Unfortunately, custom and practice doesn’t automatically extend that responsibility to private property, so in some Schemes (not ours) the O/C will go to literal extremes by dismantling part of a wall to access something like a common service, patch the wall, and then only paint the patched area.
Frankly, in your situation it depends on your O/C’s approach, but as it has to involve private property in order to access its property, it would be prudent in my opinion for it to dismantle your kitchen only to the extent necessary for it to then repair/maintain its property, and to then re-assemble it.
However, if that’s impractical from any perspective (incl. $) or unacceptable to you, behaving reasonably, then you would be within your rights to request some monetary recompense – perhaps equivalent to say 90% of whatever the contractor has quoted to dismantle and rebuild your kitchen.
I’m only suggesting 90% as you’re the Chair of the E/C and are possibly expected (and even inclined) to be overly reasonable; that’s up to you of course!
Cosmo – it’s entirely up to your O/C, but remember that just because there’s never been a problem doesn’t mean there never will be, that you will only need one Special By-Law covering all affected lots, and that Strata funds and Owners’ funds are one and the same!
One final point though…. you’ve apparently looked at the Strata Title Plan, so check it again and look for any notations describing or qualifying what “exclusive use common property” is – I seem to remember something in the original Strata Schemes (Freehold) Development Act (?). Perhaps contact NSW Land & Property Information; they’re very helpful with interpreting Strata Title Plans and have a specialist Strata Team who’s rep. will call you back after contact.
groundfloor – this may appear to be a stupid question, but who’s commissioning the works; you or your Owners Corporation, and what caused the rising damp?
Cosmo – frankly I’m surprised that the issue of the courtyards’ ownership and moreso the matter of who’s responsible for maintenance and repairs of/within it hasn’t arisen during the process of the sale of any of the lot/s involved.
Similarly with the issue of how owners’ exclusive use of those areas of common property is reflected in the lots’ value, and how that sits with the units of entitlement and therefore the levy contributions each pays.
One approach may to be let sleeping dogs lie and to merely wait until the exclusive use issue becomes one, and another to which I subscribe is to remedy the situation before an issue arises.
Under Sect 52 of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act (SCMA) an Owners Corporation (O/C) can specially resolve to create and register a special by-law granting exclusive use of its common property (note Cl.2), Sect 53 enables the inclusion of conditions such as any payment to the O/C, Sect 54 covers who it is that must be made responsible for the maintenance / repair of the area, and Sect 55 covers the transfer of the exclusive use to subsequent Owners.
As you don’t envisage any difficulties with the Owners involved, it shouldn’t be too difficult to achieve the ≥75% vote in favour (by unit entitlement) to pass the special resolution at a General Meeting, but the process of converting the exclusive use areas to lot property is a little more difficult and expensive.
The latter involves a strata sub-division of your Plan, that is amongst other things preceded by a site survey, a valuation of the lots concerned, and the submission of the new Strata Plan and a revised Schedule of Unit Entitlements to NSW Land & Property Information (the former Land Titles Office).
After sounding-out the Owners, perhaps have your O/C consult with a Strata Lawyer about the detailed mechanics including the pros and cons of each approach, but if it was up to me I’d definitely formalise Owners’ use the Common Property whilst everyone’s in the mind-set to do so.
Somebody has to take-on the clown that you have elected as E/C Secretary, and I guess you’re trying to decide if that should be you!
As I see it, your current problem may be that even though the proposed renovations are entirely within your lot, some may be on common walls, you are making changes to the “services” within your lot and the SCMA requires you to give your O/C a minimum 14 days notice of that, your contractors will necessarily be on the Common Property and your O/C may have requirements with regard to that, and there will be unavoidable noise that both the O/C and your neighbours may regard as a nuisance.
So with all that and the information provided in your previous posts taken into account, as tempting as it is I’d be pushing the project back until you’re absolutely sure that all the boxes have been ticked; but that’s me!
Perhaps talk to the neighbours, and if they’re on-side and you can be sure that your Contractors will behave themselves by not leaving vehicles, tools, and materials on the Common Property, then tell (not ask) the E/C Secretary that if you don’t receive a definitive yay or nay within the (required) 14 days from the date of your original correspondence, then your works will commence.
Interesting!
Further to the post-script to my #8, I stumbled across this provision in the Strata Schemes Management Act that, depending upon the financial impacts, may convince the Owners of short-term lets to reconsider their position.
77 Effect of use of lot on insurance premiums
If the use to which a lot is put causes an insurance premium for the strata scheme to be greater than it would be if it were not put to that use, so much of a contribution payable by the owner of the lot as is attributable to insurance premiums may, with the consent of the owner, be increased to reflect the extra amount of premium.
Interestingly, the proposed Bill additionally provides for an Owners Corporation to seek Orders for increased contributions in the circumstances (above) if an Owner’s consent is unreasonably refused.
Stumped said: The lawyer and his Firm have a confidential, undisclosed agreement with the EC to provide legal advice to the OC.
Executive Committee Members sometimes forget that their role is akin to that of a Company’s Board of Directors, and unless they’ve personally engaged and are paying for the Lawyers’ services, and I doubt that, then the law firm’s client is the Owners Corporation (O/C), and as a Proprietor and a Member of the O/C you are entitled to apply to view the alleged agreement.
As for the demand that all communications from Proprietors is sent directly to the law firm, that’s absolute rubbish, as is the lawyer’s statement that the E/C needs (or can) approve of your requested renovations – unless there’s a Special By-Law covering renovations of the types that you propose.
You should in the first instance ascertain if the renovations you propose requires the O/C’s consent, if that’s the case I’d resubmit everything to the E/C Secretary (i.e. to the position – even if the person is the lawyer) and copy the Strata Manager.
In that way at least you’re complying with the applicable law (the Strata Schemes Management Act), and that should force the O/C to do likewise in terms of how your proposal is dealt with, and leave open the avenues that you have to seek redress if consent is unreasonably delayed or refused.
I can understand why you use the pseudonym “overit”; I would be also in these circumstances.
I gather you’re the “minority” who made application for Orders to compulsorily appoint a Strata Manager for your two-unit plan, and that before making that application you were aware that any Strata Manager who may now be appointed is customarily empowered (by the Order) to carry out all the functions of the Owners Corporation and the Executive Committee – that is, without any involvement by the Owners; no meetings, no discussions, no nothing!
Any Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) convened by the “majority” could only push-through the engagement of lawyers by the Owners Corporation IF a formal quotation / scope of services had been provided and tabled at the Meeting, and only then to a maximum fee of $2,000 in your case (2 Lots).
Although in any event, given the “powers” of a compulsorily appointed Strata Manager it would in my opinion be illegal for any General Meeting to be convened during the period between lodgement of the Application for Orders and the making of a determination by an Adjudicator.
If in doubt though, you could try contacting the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal and ask them, as you may get a better response than the CTTT would provide.
Julia – the first thing you need to do is definitively ascertain where the boundary of your Lot is located, and if you’re in NSW you can do that by checking it on the Strata Title Plan – perhaps read THIS and if necessary contact NSW Land & Property Information; they’re very helpful.
Once you’re sure about the physical location of the boundaries of your lot, then contact the Strata Manager who works for you by the way, and rather than trying to convince them, tell them that in the absence of any plausible reason that you accept for the fence being replaced off-boundary (e.g. so as not to disturb a retaining wall), that you require the new fence to be correctly placed on the boundary.
Oh for pete’s sake …… just like for the left-overs contaminating the office fridge, just distribute notes to everyone stating that anything remaining in that after 24 hours will be tossed-out (or in this case dragged onto the common property)!
In the circumstances as described, I’d say not!
This is what happens when some Strata Managers are tempted to ingratiate themselves to their Owners by defraying the costs of expenditure on legitimate repairs / maintenance (albeit possibly by the tenant in this case) by submitting those as claims against the Owners Corporation’s insurance.
Apart from the possible conflict of interest where these Strata Managers are both commission agents for the insurers and managing agents for the insured, all that results is the Owners Corporation (O/C) being judged a greater risk, with higher premiums resulting.
I’d be asking the Strata Manager to provide you or your Executive Committee with the completed Claim Form before submission – just to check how the circumstances of the damage has been described and justified.
Should everything be judged to be on the up-and-up such as where the O/C may have resolved to accept responsibility for glass balcony doors, then that raises the question of who pays the excess on the claim – perhaps they who caused the damage?