Blockdown blitz on high-risk high-rises

› Flat Chat Strata Forum › From the Front Page › Current Page

  • Creator
    Topic
  • 07/09/2021 at 1:26 pm #58237
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

      Regarding our blockdown regulations story, it’s worth mentioning that it is an attempt to interpret the regulation in plain English. As usual with government regulations and legislation about strata, there is confusing terminology throughout.

      Terms like unit, apartment, flat or home are nowhere to be seen while “dwelling” and “premises” seem to be interchangeable, for instance, the regulation refers to police knocking on the front door of the “premises” which elsewhere in the regulation means the unit block.

      I think I know what they mean, but good luck to anyone trying to translate this into the many languages spoken at home in the affected areas when the authorities don’t even have much of a handle on plain English.

      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.
    • Creator
      Topic
    Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • 07/09/2021 at 2:28 pm #58245
      Jimmy-T
      Keymaster
      Chat-starter

        On the same topic, this is what the Public Health Order says about police questioning residents’

        …  if a police officer knocks at a door of the premises—a person … is required to open the door and comply with the request of the officer, and a request for information may include a request to provide the name and contact details of persons residing or present at the premises, whether at the time of the request or generally.

        Now, given that elsewhere in the PHO the word “premises” means the unit block, are you expected to open the door of the block to the police? And are you then expected to give the contact details of everyone you know in the block?

        Obviously not, but this is the kind of loophole through which anti-vaxxers will ride their legalogic train.

        FYI, the PHO doesn’t define “premises” but it says “dwelling” is the same as is defined in the Local Environmental Plan Act, which is: ‘a room or suite of rooms occupied or used or so constructed or adapted as to be capable of being occupied or used as a separate domicile’.

        So “dwelling” clearly doesn’t mean the same as “premises”. This is just sloppy writing than can easily lead to unnecessary conflict and confusion.

        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.
        08/09/2021 at 12:49 am #58276
        Jimmy-T
        Keymaster
        Chat-starter

          This is what the relevant section of the new Public Health Order, now online, says:

          Self-isolation

          The Public Health (COVID-19 Self-Isolation) Order (No 3) 2021 requires persons diagnosed with COVID-19 and close contacts of persons diagnosed with COVID-19 to self-isolate and specifies requirements for self-isolation including duration and location.

          On 6 September 2021 the Minister made the Public Health (COVID-19 Self-Isolation) Order (No 3) 2021 which repeals and remakes the directions in the Public Health (COVID-19 Self-Isolation) Order (No 2) 2021.

          The revised Order continues existing self-isolation of cases and close contacts but now includes additional provisions to support apartment lockdowns.
          The new lockdown provisions are:
          • The Minister can declare a building  as a “high contact risk premises”. A building is defined as containing  2 or more dwellings, at least 1 of which is a “COVID-19 premises” (a dwelling where at least one person is diagnosed with COVID-19 or a close contact). The Minister is able to declare a premises as high risk for a maximum period of 14 days, but can be re-issued;
          • The Order applies to an “affected person”, being a resident or any other person who is on the premises at the time the declaration is made;
          • The Order imposes tight restrictions that reflect quarantine order provisions, including confining residents to their home, subject to an emergency or instructions of an authorised medical officer or Commissioner of Police, and restricted access to the building to permitted persons;
          • provision is made for an affected person to be transferred to a quarantine facility or hospital or medical facility after assessment by an authorised medical officer;
          • provision for testing of affected persons during the lockdown, with those who refuse testing being required to stay in their residence until medically cleared;
          • provision for a person involved in the management of the building to provide information that will assist in the identification of affected persons.
          Any requirement to quarantine under the previous Order continues under the new Order.

          The Order requires compliance with the NSW Health self isolation guidelines, which may change from time to time.

          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.
          11/09/2021 at 1:03 pm #58320
          The Hood
          Flatchatter

            This is the type of ones and zeros behaviour that we are seeing from Government. Yes, it would be hard to make the PHO customized to suit every configuration of strata but as a potential victim of ones and zeros I will just say my strata plan is almost 800 acres, it is the size of a suburb. There are around 12km of internal roads. There is no building per se. It is large rural lots within an area larger than some LGA’s.
            This PHO if applied here is equivalent to locking down a whole suburb, in hard lock down, because one resident in one street has a positive test.
            Not impressed.
            Trust the experts – a nice cliché line for those who have no understanding of the statistical fact the medical profession is rife with error and that experts when scrutinized are often far from expert.

            11/09/2021 at 1:13 pm #58326
            Jimmy-T
            Keymaster
            Chat-starter
              The Hood wrote:

              This PHO if applied here is equivalent to locking down a whole suburb, in hard lock down, because one resident in one street has a positive test.

              Yes, but the key phrase is “if applied here” and since the Minister has the discretion to decide whether or not to lockdown a block, presumably on the advice of people on the ground, it’s unlikely to happen in your circumstances.

              It’s also unlikely to happen in multi-block schemes where one is infected  but others have no physical connection.  The townhouse scheme in Melbourne that was locked down, was hit purely because the dwellings shared an undercover carpark which is where they believe the cross-infection occurred.

              The real challenge for strata managers, building managers and secretaries in all this is the obligation to provide “true and accurate” lists of the residents of apartments when asked for them.  They can only go by their strata rolls and we know that there are plenty of people living in strata who are not listed on the rolls (despite there being a fine for not registering residents, including tenants and sub-tenants).

              Expect a blitz on strata roll registrations and breach notices as strata managers realise that they could be fined for not trying to get up-to-date information.

               

              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.
            • Author
              Replies
            Viewing 4 replies - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
            • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

            › Flat Chat Strata Forum › From the Front Page › Current Page