- This topic has 6 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 11 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
I am secretary of a large complex consisting of 163 apartments, 16 retail shops, a Coles supermarket, & council car park. We are having tenders to replace the roof membrane which will be expensive, well over one million dollars & we have a dispute in the allocation of the cost between the four stratums. Our Strata management statement lists Building Facade allocation as 97% Residential, 1% Retail, 1% Supermarket & 1 % Council car park but no mention of roof.
The residential Owners Corp feel that this allocation is not fair as all entities should share the the cost more equitably.
We have suggested that the allocation would be more equitable if the costs are allocated on the ratio of relative floor area that each entity occupies i.e. Residential 68%, Retail 5%, Supermarket 5% & Council carpark 12%.
My question is are there any similar complexes that have cost allocations specifically related to roof or where can I go to get this information.
I would like to have this information before reverting to mediation as the three entities will not agree to the change suggested.
-
Replies
-
i’m not sure of the fine details of your strata plan, but in the absence of specific provision in relation to the roof/roof membrane, I would assume that allocation would be in accordance with unit entitlements?
That is – if you have to raise a special levy to replace the roof membrane, the owners would be liable in accordance with their unit entitlements.
I don’t believe that you can change an allocation for a specific cost without changing the unit entitlements.
As Scottie explained, generally you can only divide payments for repairs to common property according to unit entitlements.
If you think the UEs are unfair – perhaps they were set artificially low in the commercial sections of your building to attract purchasers (a tactic far from unknown) – you can apply to NCAT to have them altered.
If you think contributions for a specific payment are unfair, you can apply for a Section 149 variation (see below). However, they would have to be grossly out of kilter to maske it worth the effort and expense, not to mentio0n the risk of an NCAT adjudicator ruling against you.
149 Order for variation of contributions levied or manner of payment of contributions
(1) An Adjudicator may make either or both of the following orders if the Adjudicator considers that any amount levied or proposed to be levied by way of contributions is inadequate or excessive or that the manner of payment of contributions is unreasonable:
(a) an order for payment of contributions of a different amount,
(b) an order for payment of contributions in a different manner.
(2) If an Adjudicator considers that the consent of an owner referred to in section 77 has been unreasonably refused, the Adjudicator may make an order for payment of a different amount of one or more contributions levied or proposed to be levied by the owners corporation.
(3) If a contribution which is the subject of an order under this section has been wholly or partly paid:
(a) an order to pay more has effect as if the owners corporation had decided to levy a contribution equal to the difference, and
(b) an order to pay less imposes a duty on the owners corporation to refund the difference.
(4) An application for an order under this section may be made only by the lessor of a leasehold strata scheme, an owners corporation, an owner or by a mortgagee in possession (whether in person or not).
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.
As I noted, I am not familiar with the intricacies of this type of complex, management statements are a whole other area. When statements are prepared it is very important to make sure all items are included and specified if they are to be treated differently to the usual items.
FBITZ you seem to be focussing on what other complexes do about roof repairs. We have two buildings in our scheme which is residential – we just replaced the roof on one building and everyone paid the levies for that in accordance with their entitlements. A few years ago we replaced the back stairs and one owner objected to paying because she doesn’t use them. She didn’t get very far on that argument.
I think your suggestion is fair and sensible. Take it to mediation and thereafter to NCAT for orders.
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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.