Flat Chat Strata Forum Common Property Current Page

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #8168
    Concerned
    Flatchatter

      We live in a strata building (8 units), in Sydney, 3 of which have gardens attached – one of these garden units has a large  eucalyptus tree (H – 25 metres), in the garden area which was an original tree on the site before it was redeveloped as strata units and had to be retained – it is noted in the first AGM held in 2006 that the owner of the garden apartment is responsible for the maintenance of the tree and that they should contact the Strata Manager for details regarding risk etc – the local Council has it on record that the owners of this garden unit own this tree and they are responsible for its maintenance – the crown of the tree extends out over the footpath and the road.

      This unit owner is trying to divest himself of the responsibility of the maintenance of this tree and it has been suggested that all Unit owners should be asked to bare the cost of maintaining this tree which is in private property, and with the assistance of the Chairman of our Executive, who has his Proxy, has had it slipped in as an amendment to the Memoranda which has been put before the Unit owners.

      At a Meeting recently some of the amendments were discussed but the Meeting was disbanded before this amendment was discussed – We are horrified at this idea as the tree could cause enormous damage to the surrounding private and public area should all or part of the tree be damaged in a storm or struck by lightning.

      Is it possible for the responsibility of this privately owned tree to be transferred to all the other Unit holders – we have a very forceful Chairman who has too much influence as a number of Unit holders do not live in their units full time.

      We do not know why he would support the idea. Your advice on the matter would be very much appreciated – Regards “Concerned”

    Viewing 9 replies - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #15606
      Sir Humphrey
      Strataguru

        So, has a resolution been passed to make it OC responsibility? If so, I would very quickly check if NSW has a provision like the ACT provisions for a ‘reduced quorum’ meeting. Here if the meeting was actually attended by fewer than 50% of owners (it sounds like your was) you can overturn the decision by a petition of 50% of owners within 28 days of the meeting. If it was discussed but not yet voted on, I would ask your chairman why he supported the proposal and put a motion on notice for the next general meeting to maintain the status quo with reasons given. 

        #15613
        Concerned
        Flatchatter
        Chat-starter

          Thank you for your reply.

          The resolution has not been passed. The tree problem was not discussed however there is the assumption that this issue will be “rubber stamped” at the next AGM.

          The Chairman is unavailable at present; however, I will be asking him to put forward his reasoning for this amendment.

          What I would like to know is:-
          1. Is it possible for the responsibility of a tree, which is in a private garden, to be transferred to the rest of the Unit owners?

          A council representative suggested that the owner of the tree would have to transfer the title of the land, with the tree on it, to the body corporate in order for all Unit holders to take on the responsibility.

          2. A question regarding the insurance policy for the tree. How would the other Unit owners insure against possible damage caused by this tree if we didn’t own it? The tree, if blown over or struck by lightening, (not an impossible scenario) would cause damage to property, cars in the street and passers-by.

          Regards “Concerned”

          #15634
          imported_dech
          Blocked

            Without being thoroughly familiar with the legal issues nonetheless the following would be considered if such an issue occurred in my strata debacle.

            1.      The “very forceful chairman” could brusquely dismiss the question about his “reasoning” with – because it’s fair – while the only owner other than yourself who has turned up shows a slight waver in his bovine expression – which suggests agreement. (OC’s are more democratic than any other level of govt. and there is no rule I’m aware of that would not allow the tree owner to offer money, proxies or whatever as a success fee).

            2.      The square metre or less of land in which the tree trunk resides could be made common property which of course would be inaccessible to other owners except by trespassing on the surrounding land.

            3.      At least one council does not allow significant trimming of healthy trees overhanging footpaths or roads on safety grounds so in that case presumably the OC would be free from risk.

            4.      I’d start politely but assertively seeking proxies or better reasonable owners who are seriously willing to be active participants (get the proxy first, tell them it become invalid if they attend as participants) – partly on the “what next” principle and with only 8 units a chairman with a couple of proxies/followers can take control.

             

            5.    If it comes onto an agenda for a general meeting but is not clearly marked as a special resolution, do your best but knowing that if passed it should be rejected at the CTTT if someone is willing to pay $75/$150 for mediation /adjudication – but could be reversed if more than 25% of entitlements don’t vote against it later at a properly convened meeting.

             

            6.  I’d also start reading the Act, it’s searchable so reading the sections around words such as common, meetings, properly, special should be relevant.

            #15636
            Sir Humphrey
            Strataguru

              @dech said:
              …2.      The square metre or less of land in which the tree trunk resides could be made common property which of course would be inaccessible to other owners except by trespassing on the surrounding land…

              I’m not sure that would work. I expect the NSW Act has something about access or opportunity for owners to use and enjoy the common property. What if an owner wants to climb the tree?

              #15645
              struggler
              Flatchatter

                I know that in our townhouse complex, trees that are in private courtyards, not accessible to anyone else nor seen by anyone else that with trees, the OC is responsible for the airspace above the courtyards therefore is responsible for the part of any tree in the airspace (I think about 3 metres above the ground).  This is for the purpose of pruning/removing or trimming trees, overhanging branches etc.

                 Here we have paid for the removal or tree branches over hanging another courtyard/roof or fence.  Any tree that needed removal, costs were split 50/50 with owner and OC (with council approval or course).

                General maintenance of a tree in a private garden/courtyard I would think is the  responsibility of the owner.

                #15646
                Sir Humphrey
                Strataguru

                  @struggler said:
                  I know that in our townhouse complex … the OC is responsible for the airspace above the courtyards therefore is responsible for the part of any tree in the airspace (I think about 3 metres above the ground).

                  Ah yes, I think that is an ACT/NSW difference. In the ACT I own and am responsible for everything above my unit, possibly a wedge extending out beyond the solar system. Elsewhere on the forum I think I saw a mention that only some meters above a townhouse in NSW belong to you/is your responsibility.

                  #15647
                  Concerned
                  Flatchatter
                  Chat-starter

                    Thankyou for your imput – I mentioned in my original letter that the large tree was on the original site before development and had to be retained and that according to Council records and the first Meeting held,  the tree was in the private garden attached to a unit and that the owner has probably purchased the tree and the responsibility for maintaining it  – this would be detailed in a sale contract but I have no acess to that – the tree did not grow into common property thus having to be approved but was already a 25+ metre high tree – I would imagine there could be lots of problems raised if the rest of the unit holders took on responsibility – eg insurance of a tree owned by an individual. Any further imput appreciated – Concerned

                    #15644
                    struggler
                    Flatchatter

                      Our complex is surrounded by trees.  They are large established trees both in common area and in private courtyards.  The council insisted these trees remain when this complex was built.  Therefore they existed before the complex.  There are units that have their decks built around these huge gum trees.

                      We have had problems with overhanging branches, over the neighbouring courtyard and/or over the neighbouring roofs.  The OC has taken care of removing  these.

                      With the OC being responsible for any large overhanging branches, at least they are in control of protecting against damage to common property (eg the roof, fences, walls).  Don’t know how easy it would be to get an owner to pay for a branch removal if it was needed.

                      #15650

                      Hello concerned,

                       

                      You mention in your first post that it was ‘noted’ that the tree was the owners responsibility. It doesn’t sound like there a bylaw enacted to enforce this?

                       

                      While you say the council has a record that the tree is the owners responsibility, that is probably more to do with the fact that the tree is registered with council (being 25m+) and has to be in the ground ‘somewhere’ on enclosed land rather than an OC bylaw transferring the responsibility to the lot owner: councils – particularly the department that looks after trees and tree preservation – generally are not concerned with that.

                       

                      If there is no specific bylaw or absolutely specific clause in the sale document then really the absolute bulk of this tree is always going to be common property. The owner is responsible for everything from the ground up to about 3m; the remaining 22m with all the branches and limbs + the roots that extend everywhere else are the OC responsibility.

                    Viewing 9 replies - 1 through 9 (of 9 total)
                    • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

                    Flat Chat Strata Forum Common Property Current Page