• Creator
    Topic
  • #8712

    An issue has arisen in which owners are seeking to lift and replace tiles in bathrooms/kitchens/hallways at BC expense on the excuse there are “drummy” tiles.  Are internal tiles/flooring cover replacements (renovations?) done at owners expense (as quite a few have done thru’ renovations) or should the BC be expected to pay for any of these costs?  We think it is normal “wear and tear” over time (our buildings are about 20 years old) and that all owners shouldn’t have to pay for others through our BC fees.

Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #17933
    kiwipaul
    Flatchatter

      Assuming you are in NSW otherwise this advise could be wrong / irreverent

       

      According to the “Identifying common property in a strata scheme: update on common Memoranda” provided by NSW

      c. Original floor tiles and associated waterproofing affixed to common property floors. Strata responsibility.

      So the original floor tiles are BC (Body Corporate (for Jimmy’s  ref)) responsibility, but the BC as a whole at an AGM decides whether to replace ALL the tiles in ALL the lots by a majority vote. Individual lot owners can at their own cost replace their tiles if AGM votes against doing them all but from then on these lot owners become responsible for the new tiles.

      a. Floor tiles affixed after the registration of the strata plan. Lot responsibility

      If some owners have damaged their tiles it’s an insurance job to replace the broken tiles (and just the broken tiles providing they were original).

      If some owners don’t like the tiles that are fitted I believe they should be allowed to replace them at their own cost (unless a majority at AGM vote to replace them all for everyone).

      Also any lot owners who have already replaced the tiles at their own expense are no longer eligible for them to be replace again at BC expense because they are now lot owners responsibility now.

      #17937
      Whale
      Flatchatter

        Kathsoo – If I can use my infamous shoe-box analogy……..where that box depicts a Unit / Lot in the Strata Plan with numerous dividers fitted internally to create compartments (rooms).

        Unless your Plan has in the past resolved to create and register a Special By-Law covering the replacement of floor and wall tiles, then (in NSW) convention dictates that the tiles fitted to the inside base of the box and on the inside of the perimeter sides at the time when it was built are the Owners Corporation’s (O/C) responsibility, and those anywhere on the dividers are the Owner’s responsibility.

        Tiles fitted anywhere on the base, perimeter sides, and dividers of the box since it was built (i.e. renovations) are the current Owner’s responsibility entirely, and the O/C’s consent should have been obtained before those replacements were fitted, and must now be if further replacements are now proposed by Owners.

        By the way, any consent that the O/C may give to Owners wishing to now replace tiles anywhere should include a proviso that the on-going maintenance / repair / replacement of those is the responsibility of the Owner from time-to-time of the Lot; just in case workmanship is poor or they use expensive tiles on areas for which the O/C would otherwise be responsible.

        Finally, as Kiwipaul said, the O/C could resolve at a General Meeting to replace tiles that aren’t the originals and/or are on the dividers, but that would be a dangerous precedent in my opinion as that type of resolution only (and infrequently) arises when there’s a maintenance issue (e.g. structural) within the shoe-box that’s affecting the one next door / above / below.

        I hope that this analogy has simplified rather than complicated my reply.

        #17938
        kiwipaul
        Flatchatter

          Agree with Whale but you can use the law to your advantage. The BC is reasponsible for replaceing the floor tiles with like for like so if owners want better quality tiles that requires a Special Resoloution (as it’s considered an improvement) which means it requires 75% (of votes cast) to vote in favour of motion.

          So explain to all owners that wouldn’t it be better to let them all decide for themselves what tiles they want fitted and when rather than the BC doing it and installing the same tiles for everyone.

        Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
        • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.