@Mr Strata said:
I am suggesting, rather than having that battle, why don’t the OC and Owner work together to take action against the shoddy builder who should be the one paying all costs to fix defective building works. 2 years non structural and 6 years structural warranty requirements under the home building act. The contractor should have been licensed etc, and dependent on the contract and cost of works should be providing warranties.
Just some food for thought…. It’s easier for all to work together to resolve their common issue, use the energy to get it solved rather than fight against the other owners and strata manager, put the shoe on the other foot, how would you feel as an owner, paying to fix someone else’s shoddy renovations, that benefit no one, but just that apartment…
I agree that working towards a common solution is better than going to war but it seems like the EC has come in very heavy-handed on Masked2014.
Your example is very specific … a restaurant is by definition a public place so everyone would have been able to see the changes that were made. However, the OC got an order requiiring by-laws if the new owner wanted to keep the changes. That doesn’t alter my point at all. In fact it proves that the OC still had responsibility over common property and could, theoretically, have reinstated common property at OC expense.
If you trawl through these pages, however, you will find plenty of examples of owners whose ECs have tried but failed to order them to fix or remove changes to common property. And yes, other owners have to pay for fixing up just one of their neighbour’s messes – that’s why I am always warning against owners corps allowing changes on a nod and a wink.
But the fact remains that common property is the responsibility of the owners corp and changes are the responsibility of the person who made them. If that person has sold up and moved on, the responsibility reverts back to the OC.
They can order that it be repaired and reinstated … but it would be at OC expense. In the vast majority of cases the outcome described in your restaurant example is negotiated rather than taken to a tribunal. The owner can keep the alterations if they agree to a special resolution by-law shifting responsibility for the upkeep to them.
That’s perhaps what Masked 2014 should be seeking – but he certainly shouldn’t be paying for repairs or remediation that are the OC’s responsibility.