Any of the Councils’ websites should provide sufficient proof, such as in the link to the City of Sydney’s website that tharra provided in post #2, where the following statement is included there:
Fire Safety Schedules list the measures required to be installed and the standard they need to achieve. A Fire Safety Schedule can be issued:
- by the City or an accredited certifier,
- by the City with a fire safety order,
- by the City in some cases with a development consent, such as for a change of use in an existing building.
A Fire Safety Schedule is only applicable if any of the above occurred after 1988.
Additionally, the significance of the date of 1st July 1988 is that it’s when Part (#59) titled Maintenance of Fire and Other Safety Measures was added to Ordinance 70 of the NSW Local Government Act (1919), under which Local Government was for the first time given the ability to require “essential fire safety measures” and “annual compliance certificates” within the Conditions of their Consents for Development Applications.
The above has now been superseded by Reg. 182 of the NSW Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation (2000).
You mentioned in your last post that a recent fire safety audit inspection would make sure that your “unit is compliant”. I assume you meant so that the Common Property would be compliant, but again I wonder that if your Plan doesn’t have a Fire Safety Schedule (FSS), what fire-safety related items the Inspector is auditing, how they decide whether those get a pass or a fail, and how they determine what if any additional items are required.
Finally, as I mentioned before, the absence of a legal requirement to undertake annual inspections against a FSS doesn’t mean that your Owners Corporation (O/C) shouldn’t regularly cast a collective eye around its Common Property to check for fire-related hazards, or even that it engages a properly qualified person to do that against a scope-of-work provided by the O/C; but that’s prudent, not compulsory action, and the outcome is not externally reportable (i.e. outside of the O/C).
I think that this topic has just about run its course now; don’t you?