- This topic has 3 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 4 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
A person in my building has gone full Karen on the committee after feeling, rightly so, that they have been doing the wrong thing regarding fixing her apartment’s bathroom after water ingress from the roof and by the cracked in-slab pipework.
I thought the owner had to do the usual steps as I believe are outlined in the Qld Act: approach the committee (which she did and they didn’t do the right thing by any of us – her, and us paying for it), then seek adjudication if still required (and I’m sure the committee would get their rightful pants-kicking), and then if still not sorted, go seek enforcement if still unresolved. She tells me her solicitor is by-passing all that to raise hell in court-action pending, but that seems in my mind not possible if the steps I mentioned are not first followed in correct order.
Can anyone tell me if she can do that, or if they can only on some specific issues, or must she follow the set trail? We are Queenslanders.
-
Replies
-
The court will soon inform this women and her solicitor whether they have to adhere to any prescribed process.
In NSW you have to take matters through NCAT. Some owners have gone direct to the supreme court. They won but the court did not award them costs because they went about it the wrong way.
The court will soon inform this women and her solicitor whether they have to adhere to any prescribed process.
Will they? As you say, in NSW the “winning” side has been penalised for not following correct procedure AFTER the decision was handed down.
I am told that the tribunals and processes in QLD are, at best, unreliable and decisions can be inconsistent. I think what Flame Tree is looking for here is any evidence that by-passing the system has worked in the past.
I can see why. I’m reminded of the decision regarding short-term letting where a QLD adjudicator said he was ignoring the on-point precedents of both the highest court in WA and the Law Lords in the UK, in favour of a dubious ruling in a case with very specific and irrelevant issues from a tribunal in Sydney.
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.