#13678
Ray2U
Flatchatter

    When you live a Strata Scheme, you enter into a contract where you agree to abide by the by-laws. On the other side, and to protect you, there is also an expectation that those by-laws will be enforced.

    Rather than an individual taking a vigilante stance, it’s better to get the EC/OC to be active in the administration of by-laws, so a bit of lateral thinking is required to push them into action

    Queensland has a nice set of explicit steps laid out in their Act where it’s possible to take an EC/OC to the CTTT for inactivity when they fail to respond to the complainant/applicant within a set period.

    NSW has the same intent within its Act but it’s obscure. A few facts:

    1. The function to enforce a bylaw via section 45 is clearly only available to the EC/OC, so it’s their function; nobody else’s.

    2. A person may request the EC/OC exercise a function and the EC/OC has to respond to the applicant within 2 months [s138(2)]. The EC/OC can be taken to the CTTT for failing to respond.

    3. And / or the EC/OC can be taken to the CTTT for failing to ‘Exercise a function’ [s138(1)].

    But there’s a kicker; Most people will complain to the EC/OC expecting them to take over the policing and enforcement but as an owner/tenant you are equally responsible to police the by-laws. That is, there is no ‘designated person’ within the Act who is responsible to enforce the by-laws. As the complainant, you have to be prepared to collect and document evidence and provide sworn statement to the CTTT. If you are not prepared for this, then your application can be legitimately rejected by the EC/OC due to unsupported claims. Put simply; if you’re not prepared to do the dirty work, you can’t expect others to do it for you but the EC/OC is legally obliged to assist you with the administration.

    I’ve not heard of anyone taking this course of action but all the elements seem to be there within the Act to support a frustrated single owner/tenant.