Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 50 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • in reply to: Improper Strata Committee Meeting. #47701
    Costa
    Flatchatter

      Information on the NSW Office of Fair Trading web page headed Meetings of The Strata Committee suggests notice should have been given to all owners for the SC meeting you mention and ways this should be done. It doesn’t say what to do do if the Strata Committee and / or Strata Manager goes about things in the wrong way. I do hope a clever Flat Chatter knows and weighs in, because we have similar problems where I live all to often.

      Also, I’m sure I’ve read here on Flat Chat and in other places agendas and minutes need to be succinct and it doesn’t sound like they were in your case. Again, what’s to be done?

      Costa
      Flatchatter

        Interesting question. Can I please have some things cleared up?

        From memory, Sir Humphrey is in the ACT, yes?

        In saying ‘managing agent’ does Sir Humphrey mean ‘strata manager’?

        In NSW it is my belief that any owner (or possibly anyone) has the right to ‘inspect the records’ and may ‘discover’ and copy the strata roll. Is that right?

        And one might thing the OC secretary could indeed be supplied the strata roll by the strata manager, wouldn’t one?

        I think strata managers bend and misquote the rules to protect their turn and so, income.

         

        Costa
        Flatchatter
        Chat-starter

          So the path forward is clear thank you very much. Get a couple of like-minder owners on the committee and be proactive. Whether or not the part of the By-Law is gotten rid of or not. But probably not needed.

          Did JimmyT once say something like ‘You’re only as good as your Strata Committee’? Whatever it said, it was a good, memorable quote.

          Costa
          Flatchatter
          Chat-starter

            We found this in our contract with the Strata Manager which one of us just unearthed. It’s what I was thinking of and wondering how to reverse it or indeed if it needs reversing if a new Strata Committee was simply on-the-ball and more hands on.

            APPOINTMENT OF STRATA MANAGER Item 3.1.b.II. The Owners Corporation delegate to the agent all the functions of its chairperson, treasurer, secretary and Strata Committee, necessary to enable the agent to carry out the agreed services and additional services as defined in the written agency agreement… BLAH BLAH BLAH.

            Costa
            Flatchatter
            Chat-starter

              Thanks Sir Humphrey and Jimmy-T.

              Jimmy-T I appreciate your thoughts very much but I am particularly interested in the mechanics of it or legalities. Can’t seem to find out what’s the go. I won’t bore you with how screwed up this strata is 🙂

              in reply to: Can we make our neighbours shut their blinds? #30351
              Costa
              Flatchatter
              Chat-starter

                I’m surprised at most of these replies other than Flame Tree, and thanks Flame Tree.

                I hope Sir Humphrey is joking about Lady Humphrey’s reply. If she’s being genuine tell her I think that’s a most grotesque and unfairly insulting accusation. 

                These people are by no means “attractive people” and their bodies are not worth “celebrating”. 

                There’s a lack of grace, dignity and consideration for others in hanging about in next-to-nothing where others can see you who may not want to. It not the beach or The Cross (JimmyT) or a music festival. It’s home to lots of different types.

                Anybody want to reconsider?

                in reply to: Tradesmen scamming Strata OC #29826
                Costa
                Flatchatter

                  Quotable quotes:

                  “Owners Corporation work is like a license to print money.” — A plumber who once lived in our building.

                  “You’re only as good as your Strata Committee.” — Possibly JimmyT, if not he’ll know who 🙂

                  in reply to: implied exclusive use #20718
                  Costa
                  Flatchatter

                    Sir Humphrey, in reference to the fences you mention: “If you want a fence it must be not [sic] extend beyond the actual unit area boundary.” It sounds like said fence would NOT be on Common Property and so OK.

                    Having said that, your approach in OUR strata wouldn’t work. The land grabbers would push and push the envelope until the ugly phrase from Peter Gray’s original post became applicable: “implied exclusive use”.

                    Common Property, wherever it is, is there for the benefit of everyone and serves to add aesthetics and space etc. even if it is ‘adjacent to a unit’ and ‘nobody else is ever likely to want to use it’. 

                    I’ll never forget hearing a noise in the middle of the night and looking down from three floors up to see our hippy dippy ground floor neighbour starkers on a bare mattress, dragged onto the Common Property lawn surrounded by candles. It was a hot night. 

                    in reply to: implied exclusive use #20228
                    Costa
                    Flatchatter

                      As an owner-resident in a Sydney strata of 32 apartments for 20 years plus now, I reckon I’ve seen just about everything when it comes to dodgy behaviour.

                      I find Lady Penelope’s laissez fair approach, backed up by technical tribunal decisions, most disturbing.

                      Any efforts, however subtle, to snavel Common Property by stealth such as is obviously occurring at Peter Gray’s strata should be nipped in the bud fast, especially if it is mucking up the place. If the Strata Manager won’t act and the Strata Committee won’t act, grab the stuff yourself in the dead of night and spirit it away somewhere. Neighbour should get the message.

                      in reply to: Pet posers in these more permissive times #29377
                      Costa
                      Flatchatter

                        We live in a Sydney North Shore block of 38 early 70s apartments. These days there are two young couples each with two little dogs plus 5 young couples each with a little dog. That’s 9 happy little dogs. Plus an unknown number of cats, possibly 9, at least 5, most of which roam.

                        The dogs yap inside often but almost invariably yap outside when their owners take them for their late evening and early morning walks (sometimes at 5am!) to wee and poo, usually in the common property garden areas. Even if they diligently clean up the poo, and they don’t, it’s pretty disgusting.

                        I don’t get this; young, working couples with trendy, status symbol style puppies who have to stay at home, locked in all day most days while their ‘masters’ go away to work. It seems cruel and self-indulgent to me. (Far as I know, only one dog has an outing with a dog walking service, every couple of days.)

                        We had the old by-law, ‘no pets without permission but permission couldn’t reasonably be refused’ but a few years ago an ‘enlightened’ committee engineered a change to something similar to the newly gazetted by-law “you can have pets but they have to be registered, documented, OKd or whatever”.

                        I think the new situation with pets here ‘sucks’. We chose apartment living and this apartment 20 years ago with the understanding there would be no, or few sensible and approved, pets. But now we suffer.

                        I don’t reckon any of these 9 dogs here are for companionship or comfort. They are all inbred status symbols and it’s cruel on many levels.

                        in reply to: Pet posers in these more permissive times #29352
                        Costa
                        Flatchatter

                          We’ve had a similar version of the new NSW pet by-law since before the new rules came in and now I reckon we’ve reached peak puppies and pussies in our Sydney block of 38 units. The by-law won approval narrowly. I lived here with pets not allowed for 18 years.

                          There are now two couples with two small dogs, that’s four; and six other dogs. So a total of 10. The dogs are at home locked up all day, which I think is cruel. (One only, has a dog walking service every couple of days.) There are, as far as I can see, 9 cats too most of which roam.

                          But the dog thing: they are all young, working couples with trendy breeds of dog (Boston Terriers etc). I suggest they are not for companionship or comfort but status symbols. I don’t get that! They all seem inbred and devoid of sense and personality to me. Early one morning last week one ‘dog daddy’ in his pyjamas chased his terrier escapee down the driveway cursing and I actually hear him yell at the terrier “F—- you Miffy” as he struggled across the gravel in bare feet. Would’ve been funny if it wasn’t about half past six in the morning.

                          The little dogs yap a lot while they are locked inside all day, alone; again that seems SO cruel. They yap when taken for late evening and early morning (how about 5am yapping?!) toilet excursions, usually on the common garden areas. Even if the poos are picked up it’s unsavoury and doesn’t seem right. About half of these owners also have their dogs off the lead in common areas which breaks the rules.

                          So in my humble opinion, I think people in apartments shouldn’t be able to have dogs where they both work externally full time and the dog is home alone more often than not. If it can be shown they are for reasonably full time comfort and companionship, well OK. But limit the number of dogs per strata.

                          Maybe house cats are OK but when they’re alone more than not, that seems cruel too. Roaming cats? Don’t get me started.

                          in reply to: What to do with proxy in a tricky situation. #28705
                          Costa
                          Flatchatter
                          Chat-starter

                            scotlandx I should have known you were right. The NSW Office of Fair Trading confirms in a ‘small strata’ such as ours, it really is only 1 proxy allowed for everyone, even the meeting’s chair, who may not always be the actual committee chair. While I think the new rules were needed and are worthwhile, there does seem a ‘gap in the legislation’ as you said.

                            An alternative, according to the OFT is ‘electronic voting’ so I scanned our proxy and sent it to the committee secretary and CCd all and sundry; committee and non-committee, friend and foe. As the OFT said, in an unofficially-sounding way, ‘so long as your voted intention is clear on each item’.

                            Thanks!

                            in reply to: What to do with proxy in a tricky situation. #28702
                            Costa
                            Flatchatter
                            Chat-starter

                              Thank you very much scotlandx. So the Corporations Act wouldn’t mean I could  could simply get our proxy form, with every agenda item clearly voted on, to the Chair and have our vote count? 

                              (This meeting is not going to be fun, as you may have gathered, we are not keen to subject any of our friends to this sort of thing. Other like minded owners already hold proxies.)

                              in reply to: Bloodless coup needed at our block. #28028
                              Costa
                              Flatchatter
                              Chat-starter

                                Thanks Lady Penelope. No they don’t hold committee meetings and everything’s done by email with no documentation to be ‘discovered’. Almost all communication is characterised as ‘private email conversations’ or something like that.

                                BTW it’s 10:45am on an otherwise quiet Sunday morning. Our chairman has a small electrically powered cement mixer operating downstairs in our car park area. Noise here echoes in the ‘canyon’ where he is between two sections of our building. What an inconsiderate p – – – ka.

                                Costa
                                Flatchatter
                                Chat-starter

                                  Thank you for responding Sir Humphrey.

                                  The Strata Committee is 7 in our Sydney block of 40. The meeting was characterized as a ‘strata committee meeting’. I say ‘characterized’ because it doesn’t really seem to be a meeting of any sort. It was back in April. No notice, now quorum, no minutes posted as required; just hidden at the back of the AGM agenda which has just been mailed out for next week’s AGM. 

                                  As I say above, ‘voting papers’ were apparently received by 2 out of the 7 SC members.

                                Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 50 total)