• Creator
    Topic
  • #8422
    giri
    Flatchatter
      The leak issue is still being sorted but now there’s a ripple effect. The strata mamager and exec member came into the unit to check out the leak situation. I think they had known about the alterations, but turned a blind eye before.

       

      Now they are upping the ante – unauthorised alterations by the previous owner have been put under the radar. 

      Apparently about 5 years ago, the previous owner did various internal renovations – eg kitchen renovation (cupboards, sink, stove, false ceiling etc); bathroom (cover added to shower screen, top pf vanity replaced). Tiles and flooring were not altered. The consultant said the alterations are irrelevant to the leaks.

       

      Nevertheless, pressure is being applied and they have put a motion on the ECM meeting listed after the upcoming AGM

      Motion  “unauthorized works carried out to (my) unit… be discussed and appropiate action be decided upon”.   

       

      What’s my position? What are my rights? Can they make me pull out all unauthorized alterations done by previous owner? I think the alterations were all internal not common property but don’t really know.

      any advcie greatly appreciated on how to approach this motion at the ECM. 

       
    Viewing 6 replies - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #16615
      Jimmy-T
      Keymaster

        giri said 

        … pressure is being applied and they have put a motion on the ECM meeting listed after the upcoming AGM.

        Motion  “unauthorized works carried out to (my) unit… be discussed and appropriate action be decided upon”.   

        What’s my position? What are my rights? Can they make me pull out all unauthorized alterations done by previous owner? I think the alterations were all internal not common property but don’t really know.

        First of all, the Executive Committee can’t force you to do anything although they can apply to the CTTT for orders (which they are unlikely to get in the circumstances you describe).

         

        Secondly, they have no comeback over non-common property changes that were made within your apartment by you or anyone else.

         

        Finally, if unauthorised changes were made to common property by the previous owner, the Owners Corp has to maintain and repair them (or return them to their original state) at their expense.

         

        In short, all you have to worry about is the hassle you might get from people who don’t know what they are doing. I suggest you send a letter to the EC telling them politely that the non-CP changes are none of their concern but you are happy to discuss how they plan to fulfill their legally enforceable obligation to maintain and repair common property that has been changed.
        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.
        #16618
        giri
        Flatchatter
        Chat-starter

          thank you so much JimmyT

          it is a big relief to know what’s what

          regards

          giri

          #16619
          Anonymous
            JT said: “First of all, the Executive Committee can’t force you to do anything although they can apply to the CTTT for orders (which they are unlikely to get in the circumstances you describe). Secondly, they have no comeback over non-common property changes that were made within your apartment by you or anyone else.”

             

            JT, these points sound simplistic and unlikely to be true just on the surface of it. Are you sure? What if there was a load-bearing wall dispensed with or something affecting the structure? Or, say, the balcony was re-tiled and was now higher than the inside so water could drain in? There are a thousand things that could have been done affecting the integrity of the building. (Or something involving wiring issues, such as the ones which it seems may have caused the awful fire.)
            #16620
            Jimmy-T
            Keymaster

              @Juan Durection said:

              JT, these points sound simplistic and unlikely to be true just on the surface of it. Are you sure? What if there was a load-bearing wall dispensed with or something affecting the structure? Or, say, the balcony was re-tiled and was now higher than the inside so water could drain in? There are a thousand things that could have been done affecting the integrity of the building …

               

              I thought Juan had left the building.

               

              Thanks for taking the time to point out how simplistic I am.  But, hey, wait a minute … I said “non common property changes …” Could this possibly include changes that don’t affect common property?

              To be clear, perhaps what I should have said was “any internal changes that don’t affect common property in any way shape or form, including the structure of the building, electrical wiring, load bearing walls, balconies, bathroom seals etc etc etc.”  My problem is I prefer not to get all ‘bush lawyer’ when general principals are all you need.

               

              Obviously anything that affects load-bearing walls, walls that carry common property (like water pipes and electrical cables to other apartments) and the integrity of the building would obviously be classed as common property changes.

               

              But the relevant point is, in a dispute with the EC – which is what we are talking about –  it’s not Giri’s problem if he or she didn’t make the changes and a previous owner did without permission.

              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.
              #16624
              FlatChatFan
              Flatchatter

                @JimmyT said:

                I thought Juan had left the building.

                 

                 

                Please Jimmy, change the locks!

                #16632
                Anonymous

                  [Comment partially removed for being unneccessarily abusive- yellow card! – JT]

                  JT, I’m afraid it’s not much good telling half the story. It’s the sort of thing the Office of Fair Trading do and it gets people into lots of trouble. Be fair.

                Viewing 6 replies - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.