- This topic has 6 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
The EC issued all residents with a Reminder Letter re various issues. It did not ‘target’ anyone – just a nice general friendly reminder with a copy of the by-laws attached (noise, parking, etc) – it was okayed by the Strata Manager and placed on all residents doors. One tenant has reacted very badly telling anyone who will listen that it is targeted at them and they are embarrassed. Note they are whooping it up as they have been evicted making life miserable for everyone else and bringing innocent people doing the right thing into their problems. They are threatening to sue the EC and the OC. These letters in the past have just reminded people that what they are doing is affecting others in such close proximity – no-one has taken them this badly. Would appreciate any views on the matter. I’m in Sydney.
-
Replies
-
Hi Louie,
In the normal course (I will qualify this below) my view is the tenants would not have any action against the EC or the OC. Their contract is with the individual owner. If they were evicted in a proper way, I can’t see what possible action they would have even against the owner.
The only possible course the tenants would have against anyone other than the owner would be if they could prove that body or person acted maliciously or dishonestly with the intent of inflicting pain on them. A very hard thing to prove in my opinion.
What are they going to sue the EC and OC for?
People often say they are going to sue someone, with no basis or understanding of why or what for.
From what you have said, neither the EC nor the OC have done anything wrong, so don’t worry about it.
Tenants can take action against the Strata or BC in most states but the range of issues they can object to a limited. They could take action against the Strata if they were being discriminated against is one, or if they were denied permission to keep a pet when others are allowed, etc.
But suing the strata for being given a copy of their bylaws is absurd and the strata has absolutely nothing to worry about.
In fact the strata might be considered negligent if it didn’t issue a friendly reminder to a resident who was breaking the bylaws.
The only time I have ever heard about an owner actually suing the EC _ rather than just threatening to – he lost $400,000 in a misguided defamation case. Having threatened legal action, he wouldn’t back down even when they didn’t blink.
Apparently it was very scary – the objects of his ire genuinely thought they might lose their homes – but there was this lovely moment in court:
Prosecuting Counsel (to defendant): “Have you ever used strong language when referring to my client.
Defendant: “I don’t know but I’m sure you are about to tell me that I have.”
PC: “Under what circumstances might you have written to your strata manager and said ‘f… him, bring it on’?”
Defendant: “I’m guessing that was when we found out he was only suing four of the nine EC members in the hope that our strata insurance wouldn’t kick in.”
PC: (Embarrassed cough) “No more questions, your honour.”
It’s a sad fact of life that justice in this country comes at a hefty price but that only means you can say “bring it on” to anyone except for very rich hobby litigants who don’t mind losing a few bucks.
But some miscreant nobody who is already on their way out of the building? Oh dear, poor little muffin wants to sue. How sad!
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.
“It’s a sad fact of life that justice in this country comes at a hefty price but that only means you can say “bring it on” to anyone except for very rich hobby litigants who don’t mind losing a few bucks.But some miscreant nobody who is already on their way out of the building? Oh dear, poor little muffin wants to sue. How sad!”
Well said JimmyT. I couldn’t have put it better myself.
There was a case many years ago where a couple identified (probably correctly) members of the EC as the instigators of whatever their problem was; they took it to the CTTT where it was dismissed on the grounds that the Owners Corp. were the relevant authority. They then – presumably at significant expense- took it to court where it was soon dismissed. They obviously couldn’t get their heads around the fact that the EC are functionaries of the OC in law even if in practice most members of the OC are putty in their hands.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.