Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Hi Jimmy T. Great article regarding complaints. From your posts I feel like you and I are on the same page with most issues and I know you get pleas for help day in and day out, but here is another plea for help. What should I do? Our current strata manager and committee are not following the Act for committee meetings, for general meetings and general codes of conduct. Don’t get me wrong, they’re not a lazy committee, but they consistently breach the Act and our bylaws – notices for GMs posted late, incorrect number of proxies allowed at meetings, not indicating certain motions require special resolution on the notice, committee meetings with no agendas, attempting to rig committee elections, minutes for GMs supplied 12 months later, poll votes conducted incorrectly, committee members parking in visitor spots day in and day out, filming from hidden cameras in the car park by a committee member, and so on…you’ve heard it all before, I know. We had our AGM last weekend and a special resolution got passed by 1 vote (to have hard floors – ouch), but a proxy allocated to me emailed to the SM was withheld, and another owner voting for the motion had 3 proxies (we have 56 lots). By now it’s hard to believe the actions reflect incompetence, and easier to believe they reflect trickery. I know the Act, and I know why the provisions and clauses are there; to protect owners and to create transparency. Despite my protests at the AGM and letters to the SM and committee over the last few years – still no change. If anything it’s getting worse. I’ve already taken the OC to NCAT to adopt a 10 year plan – which ruled in my favor (amazing I know) and the SC agreed to adopt a plan and follow it, which is now in place. I really could use your advice, should I pour myself a glass of wine and let it slide or should I fight on and try to make the OC re-run the AGM given the mistakes and incorrect rulings, which I assume will require another trip to NCAT? It’s a lonely battle.
I’m with JimmyT on this one. Nothing is as quiet as quality carpet. I’m yet to hear a reason to install hard floors that benefits the strata community, only reasons that benefit the individual installing the hard floors.
Noise transfer is greater, complaints are more likely, heartache and stress for the affected resident/s and more work for the strata committee.
The installation company will tell you what you want to hear to secure the sale.
The batons need to be secured to something sturdy, like the concrete slab rather than the 40 year old crumbling magnesite. The magnesite will do little to assist in noise insulation.
I have had a similar discussion with a Work Health and Safety inspector regarding this topic. He assured me that if a safety assessment of the strata plan were carried out by an independent consultant, and it was identified in a report that the railings were too low, and that a climbing aid existed (like a foot hold), it was necessary for the owners corporation to attend to the risk.
His argument was that although the Building Code of Australia is not retrospective, the Work, Health & Safety Act is unconcerned with time of construction. Instead, the WHS Act concerns itself with ensuring the current place of work is safe, and identified risks have been managed, regardless of any other Act or regulation. For instance, if a trade attended to fix a light or perform work on the balcony for the owners corporation, they are obliged to work in a safe environment. If an injury or a death were to occur due to the balcony being too low, and the owners corporation knew a safety issue existed, then liability issues may arise.
May seem far fetched, but an owner has fallen over the balcony railing while tending to plants resulting in death. This issue has been of major concern as an owner and a committee member, particularly with young kids about.
That’s strange. Balconies are typically part of common property. When was your building constructed and when was the Strata Plan registered?
It would seem sensible to have an independent Engineer Consultancy Company investigate and write a scope of works. Once the scope of works have been written, they will tender the work to 3 or 4 contractors. The Strata Committee can then decide which contractor they will choose. All transparent, all independent, and clear to all owners that a diligent process has been followed.
The engineer consultancy will cost around 8 % of the cost of the works, but they may save you much more by ensuring you have a competitive tender and quality assurance. They will also be the on-site works supervisor to ensure the work meets BCA and AS throughout each phase (demolition/removal of tiles etc, waterproofing, resurfacing…). It takes stress out of refurbishment or repair work.
I’ve seen the headaches and over spends that occur when Strata Committees try to project manage common property works. There are always one or two ‘experts’ on the Strata Committee that think they know best, and want to help save the owners corporation money. But, their knowledge shortcomings get found out by the owners corporation in the form of excessive costs, draining sinking funds dry or requiring special levies.
As I understand it, unlike large strata schemes (greater than 100 lots), the committee on small schemes in NSW have no spending limits and don’t need to get more than one quote, unless there are special restrictions placed on the committee at a General Meeting. Best to ensure a clear process has been executed.
Community living requires a fairness test. Seems fairer that people who live in the building pay for the use and wear and tear of common property, spread over time. Loans and special levies are in the mix for raising funds, but don’t they kick the can further down the road? New owners buy and then are faced with unanticipated special levies or loans, while the people who sold their unit after thirty years of low levies, selling their apartment at a premium, and then move on to the next under funded strata plan in a hope to dodge the responsibility of a little lifting over a long period. Over 85 % of strata plans in Australia are currently under funded, hence s75A of the SSM Act. I prefer David Bannerman’s interpretation of this section of the act. Striking levies must be done taking into account the Sinking Fund Plan, in good faith. This section was added to the act, because all of the buildings constructed in the 60s and 70s are at a precipice of decay, and common property works will be a major feature of the next building boom. Get prepared OCs and start saving I say.
The slab remediation is definately the responsibility of the Owners Corporation not the responsibility of individual owners. Common property includes slabs, shared walls, balconies, and in most instances windows and exterior doors (depending on when your Strata Plan was registered). Check your Strata Plan’s common property definitions with the Department of Lands. To cover the costs of the remediation, no doubt special levies will be called in addition to the special levies you mentioned for the balcony upgrades. So unfortunately, in the end you will be paying indirectly.
Oh, and magnesite is not a floor covering an individual unit owner would have installed. It would have been laid to level the slab and act as a sound proofing agent during construction. It doesn’t get used anymore, due to its destruction of concrete slabs. It leaches magnesium chloride ions into the slab when it gets wet, and that causes the steel reinforcing to rust. The swelling associated with the rusting causes the concrete to spall or blow. The slab is weakened and needs to be replaced. If the ceiling downstairs is cracking, then the upper and bottom layers of steel are rusted, and the entire slab (full thickness) may need replacing.
Magnesite only leaches magnesium chloride ions when it gets wet. That means the building maintenance has not been up to scratch (another reason why it is not a lot owner’s responsibility but the responsibility of the OC). That’s what the insurance company will tell you, and that’s why nobody can claim for concrete cancer repairs through insurance companies. Bugger!
Yep, that is bad news
. Unfortunately, as I am sure is not an uncommon theme, prior sinking fund plans have not accumulated cash for this rainy day. Prior remediation costs have been up to 100 K, and that was just for 1 lot. The current EC are trying to structure a 10 year plan that will account for these costs in addition to all the usual issues (lift upgrades, external refurb…etc), but we hadn’t calculated the cost of 15 to 20 kitchens as well. Up to now, access to the slabs has been coordinated with owners renovating their units without concerns about demolition.
As I indicated earlier, the areas requiring attention have 40 plus year old kitchens that will definately disintigrate during the de-fit. To restore the kitchen back to the previous state is likely unachievable. Instead, new cabinets and benches etc would be required, exceeding the state of the worn, tired original kitchen by a considerable amount.
Any suggestions on how to restore to the previous state given this situation?
For example, could we have the kitchens valued and give the lot owner the valued amount, so they can put the money toward a new kitchen?
As an aside, I would hate to think what would happen in blocks that have hard floors (timber or tiles). If the OC are responsible for replacing to the state that existed before removal, the OC may be forced to replace floor coverings through the entire unit, even though slab work may have been contained to a relatively small area, because of the inability to match with the existing materials (end of line, floor board colour and wear) to the satisfaction of the owner. Ouch!