› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Living in strata › Who’s responsible for guttering that damages a car? › Current Page
We seem to have been diverted to concentrating upon whether or not the Owners Corporation’s (O/C) insurers will accept a claim for the costs of repairing its common property roof gutters and for repairing consequential damage to Keep Calm‘s motor vehicle, and who if anyone has been negligent.
The salient point in my opinion remains the O/C’s unfettered responsibility to properly maintain, repair, and replace its common property and to repair any damage consequently caused by a failure of any component of that property.
As I earlier observed, the decision to lodge an insurance claim is at the discretion of the O/C and irrespective of whether or not that’s accepted by the insurer, the O/C’s responsibilities remain.
If negligence is an issue, then provided Keep Calm‘s motor vehicle was legally / correctly parked (e.g. not contrary to a By-Law) that too is a matter for resolution between the O/C and its insurer, albeit possibly compromised from the O/C’s perspective by it seeking more frequent cleaning of weeds from its roof gutters after the event (ref: post #12).
So returning to Austman‘s point (post #15), even if two (2) insurers decline to accept a claim by the O/C for reasons of negligence or anything else, the O/C’s responsibilities aren’t diminished and Keep Calm‘s claim against it should be tested as earlier suggested in a Community Justice Centre and if necessary in a Local Court, particularly due to the O/C’s tacit admission of negligence arising from its acknowledgement that unattended weed growth placed extra weight and therefore stress on the roof gutter and its supports.
Back on topic…. I’m inclined to the opinion that the recent works to relocate pipework on another carspace add weight to Keep Calm‘s argument to have the O/C perform those same works at his carspace, and YES photographic evidence showing both of the above would assist at Mediation and afterwards at the NSW Civil & Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) if that proves necessary.
PS – I’m suggesting that the matter of a monetary claim against the O/C is a civil matter to be pursued in a “real” court, and that carspace access is a strata matter to be taken if necessary to the NCAT.