#14508
Bongo drum
Flatchatter

    I wish I had found Flat Chat sooner than now. My experiences with the CTTT system are obviously not uncommon. I have been involved with presenting three applications to the CTTT and responding to one from the owners corporation. In each case, the Adjudicator sided with the majority of owners regardless that the owners corporation were not following the Strata Rules and regulations. Some of the cases put to the CTTT included, the owners corporation do not follow the council planning permissions for the development and the registered strata plan, the executive committee built infrastructure over owner car spaces without their written permissions by lodging DA's with council for infrastructure to be built over owner's lots (not common property) and did not disclose the relevant owners details in the applications. They also brought in a By Law that is in breach of other laws. All applications were dismissed by the CTTT.


    In the application to revoke a By Law case, the Adjudicator's order was solely based on another matter all together and he included examples and quotes from another matter lodged by the owners corporation in regard to the non compliance to a By Law that was overturned by the residing Member months before.


    I have sent a number of complaints about the basis of the Adjudicator's decision, to the Chair person for the CTTT and her response is that the matter has been dismissed and no other action can be taken. She has completely overlooked the complaint about the Adjudicator's conduct in basing his decision, not on the application before him but on another matter all together. He also thought being personal and insulting about the applicant in his orders that were published to all the owners, was relevant and in order.


    When this matter was then heard by the residing Member at a hearing, the Member saw that the By Law was unlawful as it breached another law but dismissed the application based on a precedent she had heard about for a commercial strata property and applied that precedent to this matter.


    Surely, if a precedent is to be admitted to a hearing, it should be lodged by one of the parties and not by the residing Member who is suppose to be unbiased.


    If the CTTT is to only side with a majority, not look toward addressing matters to resolve issues and to look for precedents from past cases, then there will always be complaints and problems in the strata world with this public service department.