• Creator
  • #56396

      The OC, effectively the Chair, is refusing to comply with 106 (obligation to maintain and repair common property).

      The Unit’s lounge and kitchen ceilings have extensive mould caused by a failed membrane in the patio above the Unit with subsequent ingress of water.  Failed membrane has been verified by  Plumber’s, Consulting Engineer’s and Mould Removal Specialist’s reports.

      OC ignored Plumber’s report of late 2019. Forced by Fair Trading to engage Structural Engineer. Ignoring the latter’s recommendation.  Though legal assistance has been engaged, the behaviour of the Chair in continuing to obfuscate indicates that there is likely to be no action to obey 106.

      The Solicitor has requested from NCAT an Interim Order for the cleaning of the mould prior to the 106 issue being considered by NCAT.

      Can you please outline a likely scenario as there is concern that the OC (Chair) will continue to desist in their duty forever.  How can they be forced to comply?

    Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
    • Author
    • #56398

        If the chair is blocking both moves to fulfill the OC’s duty to maintain and repair common property, and is ignoring NCAT orders to do so,  I would think there would be very solid  grounds for having them removed from the committee under Section 238.

        238   Orders relating to strata committee and officers

        (1)  The Tribunal may, on its own motion or on application by an interested person, make any of the following orders—

        (a)  an order removing a person from a strata committee,

        (b)  an order prohibiting a strata committee from determining a specified matter and requiring the matter to be determined by resolution of the owners corporation,

        (c)  an order removing one or more of the officers of an owners corporation from office and from the strata committee.

        (2)  Without limiting the grounds on which the Tribunal may order the removal from office of a person, the Tribunal may remove a person if it is satisfied that the person has—

        (a)  failed to comply with this Act or the regulations or the by-laws of the strata scheme, or

        (b)  failed to exercise due care and diligence, or engaged in serious misconduct, while holding the office.

        If not, you’d have to wonder why Section 238 exists.
        I would file for mediation on those grounds (it’s free).  Just doing that might scare them into action.
        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.
      Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
      • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.