› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Common Property › Compensation for inconvenience › Current Page
ScotlandX
Thanks for the reply.
I will think through your suggestions. Meanwhile, I want to clarify:
A) The ownership of the balcony: my solicitor says it is part of the lot and is not common property. This is clear from the strata map.
B) As to who should pay to fix the leaks and the compensation, the crux of my argument, let me enlighten you about the dynamics of the strata, which (regardless of the law) seems to be dictating who the EC wants to pay:
There are 5 lots:
(1) Chairman (2) Me (3) Secretary (4) Former Treasurer (5) New Treasurer
Until recently there were 4 EC members (1), (3), (4) and (5).
Now there are 3 EC members (1), (3) and (5).
The balcony belongs to (5) who is friendly with (3). (3) is also friendly with (4).
As an aside: For your guidance, (3) and (4) used to manage the strata before we got an external agent. The impetus in 2004 to appoint the external strata agent was because the OC discovered that some years earlier (3) spent OC funds without approval on a kitchen stove in (5). I recently asked if the funds taken were repaid to the OC and was told by (3) that records are kept for only 5 years. I can only infer that he did not repay.
Regarding the $25,000 works on the balcony that may have started already as well as the $5,000 rent compensation, (3) and (5) did NOT obtain independent advice on what needs to be done on the balcony. They obtained advice from parties with a conflict of interest.
Tradesmen were approached.
Two quotes to fix what the tradesmen think needs to be done. Or were told by (3) and (5) to be done. Who knows? The quotes which were shown at the AGM are in the main for the laying of a membrane on the balcony. (I understand that no membrane was ever laid when the building was erected in the early 1980s).
So you see, you’re right. The EC should have engaged an independent person to diagnose the problem and prescribe a solution, which would be put to tender, instead the EC it seems hired contractors and told them what they wanted. Regardless of whether the job could have been fixed for a fraction of the $25,000 quoted. And that assumes the problem in the privately owned balcony stems from a common property source.