› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Common Property › Common property – OC building works – loss of rental to unit owner › Current Page
Ok, I’m going to “jump down your throat”.
We have established that the building defect has been identified, it is covered by Home Warranty Insurance and that the extent of the remediation will require the apartment to be unoccupied for an unspecified period.
We have also established that under the terms of this specific insurance that the owner-occupier or tenant in this kind of situation is accommodated elsewhere. However, compensation for lost rent is not specifically included in the policy.
This is a grey area and might require legal action to establish that the Owners Corp has to pay this, either themselves or through insurance cover.
There needs to be clarification of this under the law whereby the clause in insurance that covers and owner-occupier also covers a landlord (based, say on the rent collected in the three months prior to the claim).
The strata lawyers I have spoken to all agree that there is the basis for a claim to be made in this kind of case – the question arises whether it’s more money and trouble than it’s worth to take this to court.
A decent Owners Corp would recognise the benefit to the whole building in having this done quickly and efficiently and recompense the affected owner without anyone having to hire lawyers.
Or is there a “hard cheese” clause in strata law that says if you are unlucky enough to be the only person who suffers while the rest of your building benefits, you just have to cop it?
In very simple terms, Rita C could come to an arrangement with the tenants for them to continue paying her rent while the insurers pay htheir rent elsewhere.
But what happens if the tenants pull out of the rental agreement (as many would)? There is little benefit in them being shunted around from pillar to post. If there are no tenants, there is no relocation so RitaC would be seeking compensation for an apartment she can’t rent out rather than relocation and accommodation expenses.
That’s why the easiest answer is for her to move back in. Also, it sounds like the EC and and strata manager aren’t being at all helpful. Maybe they have founfd the “hard cheese” clause.