• This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by .
  • Creator
    Topic
  • #61261
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    UPDATED: Feb 10. With Australia’s borders about to open to overseas tourists, there is considerable confusion over who can and can’t let their flats a
    [See the full post at: Strata residents dodge holiday let by-law bans]

Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #61338
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster
    Chat-starter

    I’m wondering if I should hand in my Strataguru badge.  I have committed the worst sin of which anyone writing about strata can ever be guilty – I assumed.

    I assumed that by-laws banning short-term lets in Sydney apartment blocks applied to everyone.  But no. Resident owners and full time tenants can side-step any ban by showing that the flats are their principal place of residents.  It’s only absentee investors who will be affected by the bans.

    We shouldn’t be surprised – the NSW government had to be dragged kicking and screaming to any restrictions on airbnb and their ilk.

    Now we find they don’t exist for residents, apart from the limit of 180 nights in Sydney.

    I’m off to write “Assume makes an ass of u and me” 1000 times as punishment.

    #61343
    TrulEConcerned
    Flatchatter

    If a by-law allows a full time tenant to do something that is not available to an absentee investor, is such a by law “harsh” as per s. 139(1) that provides that a by-law must not be “harsh, unconscionable or oppressive” and hence ripe for a challenge?

    #61349
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster
    Chat-starter

    … is such a by law “harsh” as per s. 139(1) that provides that a by-law must not be “harsh, unconscionable or oppressive” and hence ripe for a challenge?

    I believe the NSW Planning thinking is that a tenant or owner has a current and ongoing relationship with the building and its residents and so can be held personally accountable when things have gone wrong (and they get back from skiing in Aspen). So it doesn’t discriminate against investors because they are not subject to community scrutiny and pressure.  But, hey, anything can be challenged and this one surely will be, one way or another.

    • This reply was modified 6 months ago by .
Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.