#25612
Jimmy-T
Keymaster
Chat-starter

    It’s a very valid point you make and I have been thinking about a few options.  All the legal advice I have had on this recently has been that it is not strictly legal to ban non-residents from common property but it is legal to charge owners for additional services above an beyond what everyone gets anyway.

    Taking the first part first, the proposed laws would expect us to wait until something goes wrong and then pursue the “host” through the Tribunal, with no guarantee of success (NCAT being the chocolate wheel that it is).  My view is that we  could pursue policies that are “extra-legal”  – i.e. have a questionable legal basis but aren’t actually criminal – and let the “hosts” pursue us through the Tribunal process, with them taking the gamble on their time and money.

    Barring non-residents from common property facilities would be just such a policy, as well as a highly zealous policing of noise and safety to the point of cutting off electricity to noisy apartments.  These are tactics that might not withstand a serious legal challenge but might drive out short-stay hosts whop can’t be bothered to jump through all the hoops that the inquiry committee wants us to negotiate.

    Another tactic might be, as you suggest, to charge owners for additional services related to their apartments’ guests.  Phone calls to the building manager asking where the bins are and approaches to the concierge (if you have one) could all be charged to the lot owner under a set scale established by a by-law. For instance, a request to hand over keys or allow access to the garage could incur a charge of $100, payable by the lot owner.

    I believe that anything that would not be a usual interaction with permanent residents could be covered by a service charge by-law.  This is covered by section 111 of the current laws and section 117 of the incoming strata laws, both of which say the same thing. 

    111   Can an owners corporation provide amenities and services to a lot?

    An owners corporation may enter into an agreement with an owner or occupier of a lot for the provision of amenities or services by it to the lot or to the owner or occupier of the lot.

    Therefore, using the instrument of a by-law, you say “we will provide the following services to short-stay rental guests (i.e. those who do not have residential tenancy agreements) on the following basis …” and then you have a menu of charges for everything from answering a phone call to putting a sticker on a car parked in visitor parking.

    Is it entirely legal?  It doesn’t matter. The way things are set up at the moment, some residents flout our by-laws then thumb their noses at us as we laboriously pursue them through NCAT.  It’s time we used the system to our advantage and let them pursue us.

    Oh, by the way, there’s another battlefield – are short-stay guests “visitors” as far as visitor parking is concerned? Look forward to losing all your spare parking if and when we are forced to accept short-stay rentals.

    Meanwhile, I would strongly recommend that any building that doesn’t want short-stay letting passes a by-law stating the short-stay letting is not appropriate for the building and instructing the strata committee to pursue any breaches of by-laws and strata laws by short-stay hosts and guests with the utmost vigour and to the full extent of the law. 

    The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.