Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Hi flat chatters,
I am currently in the same position. The OC were given orders to replace the membrane on our roof terrace. There is a timber deck on the roof that has been there for three decades. It did not cause the leaks, this has been proven. Our OC are refusing to remove the deck claiming it is our responsibility. We do not have a bylaw making us responsible for the deck nor did we install the deck. There is no documentation proving who installed it. We believe it is common property. Multiple owners have enjoyed it over the years.
We believe the Oc should remove it, they have the orders to repair the membrane. We are going to the tribunal for the 7th time now after fighting to get them to repair the membrane now we fight to find out who is responsible. It is $20,000 to remove the deck and then there is the argument of replacement, another fifty thousand once the other items on the roof have been included.We believe also we bought a lot with a landscaped roof terrace which affected the cost of our apartment. The OC intend on leaving us with a bare membrane where the deck used to reside. It would help if the tribunal were more detailed in their findings, the loopholes left after orders are handed down are being taken advantage of. I will let you all know how we go in the tribunal.
With all due respect I agree with Jimmy.
It was my understanding if costs are awarded there is a specific process to arrive at the correct amount. Does not sound to me like this process has happened. Did they put in a submission on costs ? If they did, you would have seen it. It would have been sent to you. Then the Tribunal decides if costs are awarded. You would have also received a letter from the tribunal saying whether costs were awarded or both parties bear their own costs. If the letter regarding cost did not come from the Tribunal I would have a high index of suspicion. I think Jimmy is right. Good luck.
This is an interesting coincidence. We recently obtained orders to have our CP front door replaced. It took me three years in the tribunal and appeal panel. Once we obtained the orders, the committee tried vigorously to convince us not to paint the door, like all of the other doors in the building, but to varnish it. We smelled a rat, as the conflict was hard fought. The wood was not of good quality and we were on a floor with three other doors all painted. We insisted it was painted the same way all of the other doors were painted. We suspect the others owners would have been told we requested the varnish and rejected the paint. Now after several years of seeing a pattern of transference of responsibility this is just another cheeky loophole.
Seriously these guys need to start a hobby like wood work then they can have all the varnish they want.
Great Podcast, we would also suggest that any major works on a building whether new or old should be independently checked by government certifiers. We are about to embark on a six figure rectification work in an old building and we would feel much better if we knew that the work was going to be of high or even acceptable standard. Disagreements abound over scopes of work. Currently in Strata a volunteer committee of non qualified owners are making decisions on the remediation of a twenty story building. Disastrous after spending hundreds of thousands to get the orders to force the owners to do the work the least the government can do is ensure that work is up to par. Cheapest options are chosen, short cuts are made, penny wise pound foolish false economy prevails. There is too much leeway for owners corporations to compromise a building whether out of ignorance inexperience or pettiness.
We totally agree with the checks on all works in strata over a certain budget figure. You need a pink slip for your car after all.
Thanks Jimmy
I applaud you Jimmy thank you . I also applaud OCN. They have been invaluable to us in our struggles. Although this has been dreadfully traumatic for the owners of the Opal Tower I am hoping this incident will raise awareness of how vulnerable owners are and make change for the future. The Government have been ignoring the plight of the individual owner because we do not have a lobby worth worrying about. Now this situation has turned a spotlight on the issues.
I send best wishes to the owners in the Opal and hope the Government does something to support them. My metaphor for this is when we have drought or fire or calamity in this country we send support from the Government to the people in need this should also apply to owners who have lost homes and lost hundreds of thousands of dollars through no fault of their own.
Self regulation does not work: developers, certifiers, committees and Strata managers. We need a specific government department for Strata and residential living. We need enforceable laws more power to Fair Trading. The individual owner should not be forced to uphold Strata laws at their own expense. Accountability and consequences must apply.
Thanks Jimmy and OCN
Hi Newlsie
We have met before and I am in the same boat. The system is a joke. The tribunal does not have consequences for this kind of behaviour we are in the middle of the same issue as you. Sending you all the best with it. We will be four years very soon. The individual, who is the victim of the ingress, should not have to bear the expenses.
The committees know they can get away with doing nothing and drag it out with the help of legal guns for hire who know the loopholes and ways to prolong stall and cost you more and more money.
PM me for a catch up and some ideas.
@Cheeseman2017 said:
Maybe I’ve read that JS Mueller article one too many times :(. Have you seen many instances where NCAT decided similar matters as you’ve portrayed it above?What JS Mueller article is that? I am interested.