And certainly the legislators have said OC’s cannot discriminate against STHL lots in any way.
Where did they say this? I don’t recall STHL properties being given such blanket immunity from costs associated with their usage. I’d be grateful if you could point this out.
On the other hand, the Act (Section 82, below) says if the change of use of apartments causes your insurance premiums to rise, the owners can agree to pay the difference or may be compelled to do so by the tribunal on application by the OC or another owner.
It seems you have clear evidence that the Airbnbs have caused your insurance to increase, so the ball is in your OC’s court. If I were an owner in your block, I’d be filing my application for mediation as soon as I got the inflated insurance quote.
(1) If the use to which a lot in a strata scheme is put causes an insurance premium for the strata scheme to be greater than it would be if it were not put to that use, so much of a contribution payable by the owner of the lot as is attributable to insurance premiums may, with the consent of the owner, be increased to reflect the extra amount of the premium.
(2) The Tribunal may, on application, make an order for payment of contributions of a different amount to one or more contributions levied or proposed by an owners corporation on an owner if the Tribunal is of the opinion that the owner’s consent has been unreasonably refused under this section.
(3) An application for an order under this section may be made by the lessor of a leasehold strata scheme, an owners corporation, an owner of a lot or a mortgagee in possession.