- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 1 day, 11 hours ago by .
-
Topic
-
I am in a SP in NSW.
There are two main buildings in the complex, one was built in 1969 and the other in 1982. Both were refurbed simultaneously in 2002.
Each building appears to have its own SP yet the overall complex is generally referred to in meetings and correspondence as one SP and uses the SP of the older building.
My question now is when it comes to maintenance of common property items such as lifts and fire safety should the overarching approach to common property prevail or should each building under its own SP shoulder the costs?
Both buildings are unique and have their own needs but for things like lifts, there are 3 in the older building and 2 in the newer, and fire safety again the older building has more issues than the newer.
Each building has its own Common Property which is only accessible by those who live in that building. Similarly lift access is also restricted.
There is also shared common property between the buildings where various facilities are as well as garbage room and access to the underground parking, the latter is broken into the SP of the building it is under.
The reason I am asking is because the SM and Committee seem to take a whole of complex view to repairs and maintenance when it is quite clear the older building has the most issues. Which then raises the question of why have the separate SPs?
-
Replies
-
What do the strata plans say? I doubt that their areas overlap although they may well adjoin somewhere. How you administer them now isn’t relevant to the legal situation.
Each “ strata” needs to be administered separately. Each one is its own legal entity.
But you need to refer to the strata plan of each to define what belongs to each strata.
Areas common to each strata would fall under a community title. Again the plans will show what is community property.
Each strata contributes to the maintenance of the community property.
The community plan is also administered by a separate committee, comprising members from each strata building.
Nixjet
There is no such thing as a head strata plan.
Every strata is its own entity.
Stratas can be bound together by a community plan. Again that’s a separate entity that looks after property shared by the stratas
You may need to speak with a lawyer for a full explanation of your situation. It’s does require reference to land title documents, which are the ultimate source of truth.
There is no such thing as a head strata plan. Every strata is its own entity.
Obviously, in this case there is a community strata plan that encompasses the other strata schemes. They are all subject, to some extent, to the by-laws of the community scheme. I think it’s pretty clear what the OP meant by “head” strata plan.
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.