#60500
Jimmy-T
Keymaster

    The NCAT member is right. Section 132 could not be much clearer. It says up front: “The Tribunal may, on application by an owners corporation for a strata scheme …”

    If you were advised to follow this line by a lawyer then they have an obligation to fix it.  If you didn’t use a lawyer, then maybe you should now.

    If it were me (and I’m not a lawyer) I would start a new proceeding under Section 232 seeking orders that the Owners Corp either create a proper by-law (which passes ongoing responsibility to the individual lot owners) or requires them to reinstate the walls.

    Ironically, the OC might have to use 132 to achieve the latter. I think it’s important to pursue this as it is about the fabric of the building.  I would worry, however that it may be timed out, so you may have to move quickly.

    In the meantime you might prepare a motion for your next committee meeting that the permission given for the work was incompetent.  In that case, the committee should take appropriate action, on behalf of the owners corporation, to require the lot owners to either reinstate the walls or agree to a by-law that would see them take responsibility for any deterioration of common property due to the work they have done.

    If the committee rejects the motion, that would trigger section 232.

    As an aside,  your actions should be framed as protecting the building rather than trying to punish owners who have taken advantage of their positions. The former has a solid legal basis, the latter is more likely to be viewed by external adjudicators as a petty internal squabble.

    The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.