Reply To: New owner’s liability for delayed repair

An update: our contact at our strata management company (who has admitted to me on the phone that they are “new to strata”) is providing advice that doesn’t make sense to me. They are insisting that the roof replacement is a “pre-existing matter” and that the new owners of the unit “are not required to contribute or be involved” for that reason. [That could be ambiguous, but in the context I’m interpreting contribute as “contribute funds”.]

As has been pointed out, much may depend on the date of settlement (if six weeks after sale it’s probably imminent) and how that aligns with our current decision-making (quotes have been received for consideration, we will shortly need to work what new special levy will need to be raised, so also imminent). Given past experience with the speed at which our SC moves, the levy discussion will likely follow settlement, so – for the sake of discussion – let’s say the new owners would be installed.

Given that, I can’t see how it would be right for the cost of the roof to be split between five owners rather than six, which is what the strata manager seems to be saying, simply because the roof’s bad state of repair was known prior to the sale and the process of having it replaced (but not the work itself) had begun.

I would have thought that, if a new special levy needs to be raised – post settlement of the sold unit – that the new owners would need to contribute their share. (And if pre-settlement, then the previous owners would be contributing.) I can’t imagine a scenario where it would be appropriate for that levy to be split only five ways. The fact that the roof was in need of replacement at the time of sale (“pre-existing matter”?) or that we’d attempted to take action on the matter would surely not be relevant, especially since we are effectively starting over. Am I wrong to think this?

I’d like to go back to the strata manager, or perhaps their senior manager, for clarification. My gut feeling is that “new-to-strata” person has misunderstood or even just explained things poorly. But I’d like be better prepared for such a discussion.

Is there a published source to which I can refer that covers this kind of thing? Or a recommended source of alternative advice?

[Background summary: Roof in need of replacement. Quotes sought, work order issued, additional funds raised through special levy over a year ago. Work was never begun or even scheduled. We are now effectively starting over, and have obtained new quotes. The money from the original special levy is sitting in the kitty, earmarked for the roof replacement. Looking at the quotes that have come in, we will almost certainly need to raise additional funds with a new special levy. This will be a decision we’ll likely be taking before the end of April or early May. One of the units was sold in early March. Settlement on that sale may be imminent, i.e. also before the end of April.]