AGM retrospective approval of CP wall removal

The NCAT member is right. Section 132 could not be much clearer. It says up front: “The Tribunal may, on application by an owners corporation for a strata scheme …”

If you were advised to follow this line by a lawyer then they have an obligation to fix it.  If you didn’t use a lawyer, then maybe you should now.

If it were me (and I’m not a lawyer) I would start a new proceeding under Section 232 seeking orders that the Owners Corp either create a proper by-law (which passes ongoing responsibility to the individual lot owners) or requires them to reinstate the walls.

Ironically, the OC might have to use 132 to achieve the latter. I think it’s important to pursue this as it is about the fabric of the building.  I would worry, however that it may be timed out, so you may have to move quickly.

In the meantime you might prepare a motion for your next committee meeting that the permission given for the work was incompetent.  In that case, the committee should take appropriate action, on behalf of the owners corporation, to require the lot owners to either reinstate the walls or agree to a by-law that would see them take responsibility for any deterioration of common property due to the work they have done.

If the committee rejects the motion, that would trigger section 232.

As an aside,  your actions should be framed as protecting the building rather than trying to punish owners who have taken advantage of their positions. The former has a solid legal basis, the latter is more likely to be viewed by external adjudicators as a petty internal squabble.

waylor wrote:

No, I have not gone down the lawyer road. I am batting for the OC yet it is they who, through the Chair – no meetings for authority – have lawyer-ed up to oppose my claims. I have tried not to get personal at all and this may have been my biggest mistake. I am almost certain the details of this have not gone outside of the (3) SC and two of them may not know the real situation.

It strikes me that if you were to inform other owners that they are paying lawyer bills to defend an illegal change to common property that benefits only the two owners who organised it, and leaves all the other owners liable for any future problems with the building, they might wake up and support you.

People respond to the hip pocket nerve being tweaked.  Tell the other owners to demand that the hole-in-the-wall gang don’t use OC money to defend their illegal renos.

And then persuade them to either instruct the lot owners to restore the damages walls or pay for a by-law taking responsibility for the changes they have made.

In a building near us, a couple of owners had persuaded the committee that they should be allowed to build an enclosed room on their terrace, with zero consideration for the people immediately above.

It was on the point of being approved by a EGM with the chair’s tacit support when the affected neighbours did a leaflet drop.  The other owners in the building reacted so strongly that the plan was withdrawn before the meeting.

Asking reasonable people to behave reasonably isn’t so hard.  All you need is the signatures of 25 per cent of owners to call a general meeting.  That meeting will have two items on the agenda.  Stop the legal action and demand a by-law or restoration of common property.

You might also consult our sponsors Strata Answers for their (paid) advice on how to proceed. Perhaps you can get a future, renovator-free committee to refund you the relatively modest cost.