Leak from above

Getting the owner of the lot to take the matter seriously is the problem here. They simply don’t understand the implications of the new minimum rental standards have on them, even though they are not the landlord. The liability they are exposed to – your loss of rent, repair to your property and if that involves mould, this could be significant.

By the same token, you need to be able to show that you expidateded the matter in way that didn’t increase those costs unfairly.

The quickest way for you to get the owners attention and hopefully resolve the issue is to apply to VCAT seeking an order to stop water flowing from their apartment to yours.

This is because most people will reach out and try to resolve something like this before it gets to the next stage as soon as they receive a letter from VCAT rather than let the matter proceed to VCAT.

Section 16 of the Water Act is your better friend for this matter, followed closely by Section 129 of the Owners Corporations Act.

I would also specify that the balcony be water tested to identify the leak, rather than have a plumbers best guess. You don’t want this to drag on, you need it fixed.

You can find a guide on the VCAT website for filling in the application form or you can speak to a lawyer for their guidance and assistance.

Some might suggest getting the owners corporation involved but without knowing the property boundaries of your lot this has not been suggested. Adding another party to the matter just increases the time taken to resolve as it requires many more people to be involved and can be easily derailed and it will cost more but it is also a plan B!

Pancho wrote:

Do you know if a pending VCAT application will make it difficult to sell or rent out my property?

It might make a potential buyer hesitate.  A tenant will be none the wiser but you are required to tell potential buyers and  renters about issues that might affect their comfort and safety etc.

If the leak was an insurable event eg burst pipe, then a claim by the lot with the damaged floor can be made. If the damage was caused by failure of common property the OC pays the access.

If the damage was caused by failure of lack of maintenance to the common property eg gutters were full then the insurance may not respond. The OC is responsible for the reinstatement.

However  in either case the OC may turn it’s mind to the benefit principle and recover some or all from the lot. For example if the floor is 15 years old and new floor is to be laid, then a proportional contribution may apply.

If it is a failure of private property then you have a damages claim against the lot owner above unless it is an insurance claim. In which case the excess is paid by either the lot owner or by you depending on the benefit received but often is negotiated.

If the excess is very high for unresolved common property water claims, then the OC may also contribute to the excess payment. For example excess for water damage is $10,000 when normally it is $1,000, if the work required is greater than $10,000 the OC needs to contribute to the excess as well.

Hope that helps