- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 6 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
The neighbour above me moved into her apartment 4 years ago. The ceiling in the lounge room had been damaged during a storm and come down and had been re-gyprocked, the carpet dried and the external roof repaired after storm damage! The heavy rain that February had flowed backwards as the roof had not been pitched at the recommended level (so the insurance company advised my neighbour). This surely is a building defect.The next year the February rains were very mild, however the following February she experienced exactly the same problem. Once again the assessors said it was due to the incorrect pitch of the roof. It was repaired externally and internally and the neighbour had to replace a lounge and the carpet as it had gone brittle and was full of mildew.This year in February the same situation again! The Insurance assessors of the neighbour again giving the reason of the incorrect roof pitch. This time the neighbour was home to witness the curtain of rain pouring down from the ceiling, and was able to catch it in buckets, the bucket parade continued for 3 weeks! No floor or furniture damage this time.The neighbour went to the committee with her frustrations: the committee did not appear to be addressing the real issue. My neighbour is now out of pocket for 3 x painting, new lounge and flooring (totaling $8,000). The committee suggested she approach her insurer to have these monies recouped. The insurer replied ‘we do not cover loss, damage, injury or death arising from: faulty design or workmanship.’ When she raised the issue of the roof being pitched incorrectly, the Committee chose (yet again) to go with the cheaper option of replacing the flashing and inserting backing foam, in the hope that this would prevent the back flow. The neighbour is still waiting for the internal damage to be repaired!Is the roof not a common property insurance claim? Why is the committee not having an insurance assessor come and assess the building issue? The Strata Manager is not doing anything to help. Are they and the OC liable for further damage to my neighbours unit? I have suggested she make an application to NCAT regarding this ongoing issue as a matter of urgency. What is your expert advice please?
-
Replies
-
Responses please………..
Yes the roof is common property and it is the responsibility of the Strata to repair it such that it doesn’t leak again. If that means removing the roof and increasing the pitch (or some other method) then it is up to the strata to do so.
At the first occurrence of the problem you might be eligible to claim on the insurance but subsequent flooding is down to the strata and they would be liable for that damage and any further damage to your property.
Don’t blame the SM as they work for the strata and take instruction from the strata.
I’d immediately start proceeding at NCAT against the strata for failing to maintain the common property and ask for all your damage claims to be paid by the strata.
Strata cannot turn a blind eye to design faults and just hope they will go away they need to fix the cause of the problem.
Is the building still covered by the original builders insurance ie less than 10 years old.
It’s the Owners Corporation – they are the party responsible under the Act. So any application for an order is in respect of them.
(the EC and manager are essentially the OC’s agents)
The Insurer holding the policy for the Owners Corporation would not cover the costs associated with any rectification of the cause of a leak. The policy will only cover the costs associated with the reinstatement works.
this however leads to a an issue where the insurer may decline a claim made by the OC where the relevant works on the roof are not undertaken. The OC has a responsibility to mitigate damages caused by the flow of water as soon as practically possible. I have represented OC’s in VCAT (Victoria) where an OC, although did their best to make the relevant repairs to a roof, all the while following the Act in relation to resolutions and due diligence, where subject to an order to make the relevant repairs and pay a ‘Loss of Rent’ to the owner of the affected apartment.
In my opinion, the costs associated with the repairs, if no longer claimable under the OC’s insurance policy, can be claimed through the Owners Corporation. And you may need to apply to the relevant competent court of jurisdiction to do so. However before doing this I would be writing to the committee and detail that you would like them to action a plan to rectify the leaks permanently, and cover the losses incurred by the persistent leaking.
If they then fail to respond or engage you, this will strengthen your case.
No you’re not covered by strata insurance, so far as it relates to fixing faulty/defective building work.
However if your builder went into liquidation then you should be able to claim to fix the faulty roof under Home Warranty Insurance. It isn’t clear if you have already done a claim under that for the other issues, but the OC has an obligation to fix something that is defective. If they are covered by HWI then they had better get their skates on as time is running – I get very confused re how long you have but in your case it might be 6 years.
As I said, regardless, the roof has to be fixed now the OC is aware of it. Otherwise as has been pointed out you could find yourself in a position where the strata insurer refuses to pay for damage as a result of it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.