OP = Origional poster
I don’t consider it fair and equitable that the EC can suddenly turn around and demand all these condition on alterations when previously it has turned ablind eye
UNLESS it address these previous violations first. Have any of these violations been done by people on the committee if so that makes the situation even worse (corruption).
I agree 2 wrongs don’t make a right but the EC needs to address the original alterations rather than ignoring them. The OP could claim precedence if he goes ahead without a bylaw unless they have addressed the original alterations.
Even if the OP spends thousands on doing what the EC requests their is still the possibility that he will fail to obtain a 75% majority to pass the new bylaw for his enclosure.
It has to apply the rules fairly to everyone and it cannot discriminate.
As to the opinion from the other forum he makes a good case and he has not been contradicted by anyone on that forum. How about a sol on here commenting on this option
… submit a motion to the EC for the upcoming EC meeting asking that all owners that have have made alterations without a relevant bylaw must within 2 weeks show that they intend to submit a relevant bylaw within the following 4 weeks covering said alterations.
Be interested to here whether it’s legal or not but it would be a solution to unauthorized alterations which presently doesn’t exist in NSW