Wheelchair Accessibility on Common Property

hammer66 – How was your contact with the EC first made – by personal contact, or by phone, or by written correspondence? Has your wheel chair bound neighbour contacted the EC?

I suggest that you phone the strata manager, on behalf of your neighbour, and ask for a progress report on your initial request and/or send another reminder letter just in case the other letter has gone astray. Your neighbour may also wish to contact the EC and strata manager.

It also could be that the EC is working on solutions and obtaining quotes which, being close to Christmas, may be proving difficult.

Unfortunately building modifications to common property always take a bit longer in strata buildings than a private dwelling as strata money is not permitted to be spent unless the spending has been approved via the correct processes. 

If you or your neighbour think that the process could be hastened then you or your neighbour could obtain your own quote(s) and submit them to the EC for consideration at their earliest possible convenience. This may involve a Motion and quotes being submitted to the next General Meeting. Changes to common property, such as the installation of a ramp, generally require a Special Resolution by the owners corporation.

See here for legislation etc relating to disability access to common property.

https://www.bannermans.com.au/articles/strata-and-development/224-disability-access-adjustments-may-be-required

Should your Owners’ corporation not want to pay for common property modifications such as a wheel chair ramp then they can be compelled to do so. 

Section 232 of the new Act is a catch-all provision that allows the Tribunal to order certain by-laws to be passed and work to be done.

Tell your strata manager that if you don’t see real progress on this within the next week or so, you will commence proceedings at Fair Trading with a view to seeking orders at NCAT.

The legislation that DOES apply is the anti-discrimination law and there seems to be an awareness of that in the response.

They aren’t saying you can’t have a ramp (that would be discriminatory) but they are saying you can have one with attached conditions.

The question is, are those conditions excessively onerous (and therefore discriminatory) and I am not in a position to answer that.  Perhaps a good place to start could be this website run by Family and Community Services.

If 4 steps are the only impediment to the entire building being wheelchair friendly, perhaps those four steps could be replaced by a permanent ramp? If the steps are wide enough, perhaps one side could be a permanent ramp and the other side remain steps. I would be putting it to the OC that this might be a good thing for the building in the long term, not just a benefit for the particular residents that need it just now. 

As an OC cost spread among all owners it should not cost too much. For those who think they would never use it, perhaps they can be consoled by the idea that the value of their unit would rise. 

I suggest doing the work for the EC. Find out what a good permanent solution would cost, talk to neighbours about it, then put a proposal to the next general meeting. If a general meeting votes to install, the EC has to do it. 

@hammer66 said:

I may be a bit naive but it is bizarre that an issue that should have unanimous approval becomes a complex issue with individuals being obstructive and more concerned about their own liability and well being than those less fortunate. 

Obstructive members of strata committees fall into five main categories.

1. This is going to cost us money and is of no direct benefit to me so I will object.

2. This was not my idea therefore it has no merit.

3.  I live in fear of imaginary litigants who will sue me/us if we make a bad decision so we we will make no decision (even though that is often the worst decision of all).

4. Some owners may not like this and, if they find out I agreed, they might not vote for me at the next AGM and that would be a disaster because I don’t actually do anything to merit anyone’s support.

5.  It’s different.  Different is bad.  Change is bad.  Progress is not permitted. The status quo must be maintained at all costs (and preferably at none).