• Creator
    Topic
  • #10704

    We live in a small block of 4 units so everyone’s on the EC – we are all owners. Whilst we have 2 (50%) votes of okay, 1 (25%) vote of subject to trial outcome and unanimous vote, we have 1 (25%) which is an absolute no without negotiation as one of the tenants has reportedly a dog phobia, who lives in a courtyard apartment facing the main road 2 metres away from lot boundary, where dogs pass by throughout the day. Around the corner in a stone’s throw literally (1 min walk – 20 metres away), there’s dog friendly cafes and a vet (expectedly more dog traffic).

    I argue that the dog phobia is a debilitating condition given the abovementioned items. It also takes me 35 seconds to get out of my unit down the stairs to the driveway, and 20 seconds out from the driveway to the back gate, minimising proximity contact with the tenant – when we do see her. We don’t see her much in person at all to date, given our different lifestyles etc. So, in 2 minutes, *poof*, I will be out of sight. And we clarified we will make “conscious and deliberate efforts” to minimise contact with the tenant – i.e. we will be the first to back off, not be in the stairs, walk quickly away etc. shall we ever cross paths.

    We have had a few discussions to date, addressing all raised concerns re. our application for a labrador puppy who will be with people majority of the time – at home with us on weekends and work from home days, and at doggy day care otherwise. We know labradors are gentle, affectionate, family dogs good with young kids, and they love being with people. They are highly intelligent, trainable and in fact, bribe-able (with food!).

    We believe the decision is no more than self-serving without consideration of our personal circumstance, and commitment to address all concerns raised. In fact, we will also be happy to pay the fees to help Unit 1 attend a dog-phobia treatment course – apparently partly also Medicare rebatable. This can also be aided if the tenant so wishes, to be exposed / socialised with the dog at puppy stages – surely all willing, this is a free phobia treatment which must be crippling most of the tenant’s life.

    We are very unfortunate for a member of the exec committee who makes decision on pets in strata, to have a dog phobia. Imagine this isn’t the case, and another owner/tenant in the strata has a dog phobia but no power in the decision as they are not in the exec committee?? Isn’t this when we think that the person who claimed to have a dog phobia, NOT consciously choose to live in a strata environment and dog central? If so, the phobia is clearly debatable. It must be manageable for the person to be able to LIVE in the apartment.

    STRATA BY LAW in our block

    “16 Keeping of animals (1) Subject to section 49 (4) of the Act, an owner or occupier of a lot must not, without the approval in writing of the owners corporation, keep any animal on the lot or the common property. (2) The owners corporation must not unreasonably withhold its approval of the keeping of an animal on a lot or the common property.” 

     

    Has anyone successfully challenged neighbours with dog phobias?

    Suggestions, please? Thanks.

Viewing 1 replies (of 1 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #25673
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

      There is another way to approach this.  While a dog can be allowed under your by-laws, a dog that has been allowed  can be removed under section 151 of the current Act (see below). So the dog-phobic doesn’t need to feel this is set in concrete – it can be changed if the dog proves to be a nuisance.

      Also, you can agree to certain conditions under which, if they are breached, the permission will be rescinded.  

      This would include all of the things you have mentioned including, perhaps, texting the other owner to let them know that you are about to move through common property with the dog so that they can stay indoors (or ask you to do so) to avoid any accidental encounters.

       

      151   Order relating to animal kept in accordance with by-laws

      (1)  An Adjudicator may make one of the following orders if the Adjudicator considers that an animal kept on a lot or the common property in accordance with the by-laws causes a nuisance or hazard to the owner or an occupier of another lot or unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of another lot or of the common property:

      (a)  an order that the person keeping the animal cause the animal to be removed from the parcel within a specified time, and to be kept away from the parcel,

      (b)  an order that the person keeping the animal take, within a time specified in the order, such action so specified as, in the opinion of the Adjudicator, will terminate the nuisance, hazard or unreasonable interference.

      (2)  An application for an order under this section may be made only by an owners corporation, lessor of a leasehold strata scheme, strata managing agent, an owner, any person having an estate or interest in a lot or an occupier of a lot.

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