I don’t understand why at least two and possibly three breach notices have been sent.
Me neither. This is one of the great myths of strata – that you have to send three warnings before you send a Notice To Comply … which is a warning.
The abstainer is being ridiculous in this case. The issuing of a Notice To Comply is merely sending the owners a message to abide by the terms of their permission or face consequences as decided by a Tribunal.
This is likely to be an order to make them control their pet better. If they don’t comply, then it could be a fine or, in extreme circumstances, removal of the animal.
It’s as far from being a death sentence for the cat as it it from being an eviction notice for its owner (which would never happen).
You could take action against your strata scheme for failure to enforce its by-laws, under section 232, which would invite NCAT to issue orders to send a Notice To Comply.
In any case, individual owners can take action under section 158 (below) against residents whose permitted animals constitute a nuisance. Even then, removal of the animal would be a last resort.
And you might look at how why your strata manager has failed to explain this pretty basic stuff about Notices To Comply to the fence-sitter. Repeat after me: “A notice to comply IS a warning.”
(1) The Tribunal may, on application by an interested person, make an order against a person who is keeping an animal on a lot or common property in accordance with the by-laws for a strata scheme, if the Tribunal considers that the animal causes a nuisance or hazard to the owner or occupier of another lot or unreasonably interferes with the use or enjoyment of another lot or of the common property.
(2) The Tribunal may order that the person—
(a) cause the animal to be removed from the parcel within a specified time, and be kept away from the parcel, or
(b) within a time specified in the order, take such action as, in the opinion of the Tribunal, will terminate the nuisance or hazard or unreasonable interference.