Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 71 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • in reply to: Very slow strata manager and committee #73174
    Just Asking
    Flatchatter

      Another approach might be to claim the additional rent incurred due to the delay in fixing the leaky windows by way of damages as per s.106(5) SSMA 2015.

      Warning the strata committee of this intention may be sufficient to get them moving.

       

      in reply to: Blanket ban on air con #72501
      Just Asking
      Flatchatter

        Hi 3dpotato,

        Suggest you research the the reason for the implementation of this by-law. Hopefully an adequate explanation will be in the notice of meeting for the meeting at which it was approved. As raised by Jimmy, there may be physical or engineering constraints.

        It specifies split systems only? Ducted systems also have outdoor units, and these days box units jammed in windows are very unfashionable. Again, the “why” for this by-law may be helpful, as simple aesthetics is not consistent with only banning split systems.

        One would think that the right to enjoy and use one’s property would include, as well as having a pet, the ability to heat and cool the premises.

        in reply to: Stair lift in strata block of units #72500
        Just Asking
        Flatchatter

          Perhaps this should be considered as an access issue? An owner needs to be able to access their unit.

          Maybe this could be an opportunity to consider whether a lift servicing all floors is feasible, benefitting all owners and improving the value of the building?

          in reply to: Common Property By-Law & Water Ingress #72495
          Just Asking
          Flatchatter

            Hi Waterboy,

            I agree with Jimmy, from your floor plan it appears to be an internal problem, and thus for you to fix.

            However, I do note it seemed odd to me that the wetness penetration is on the opposite side of the bathroom to that where the tiles were removed. The photos show the shower spray directed at the floor. I am wondering if the water is being introduced into your apartment’s floor slab through the shower floor?

            To investigate this you would need to engage a high level waterproofing consultant to conduct methodical testing, likely including dyes. Then, if the problem is found to be in the floor waterproofing and you do claim against the owners corporation it is possible they will apply a sealant to the shower floor. You would save time and money just moving ahead now and doing this work yourself, especially as the apartment is tenanted and you cannot leave your tenant living with water and mould problems.

            It may be worth asking your neighbours if anybody else has a similar problem? If bathrooms generally have been poorly waterproofed it is only a matter of time before the apartments below start to show damage.

             

            in reply to: Common Property By-Law & Water Ingress #72447
            Just Asking
            Flatchatter

              Hi Waterboy,

              It would be helpful to know whether the affected wall is part of the boundary of your apartment, or is internal to your lot?

              Waterproofing in a shower is not reliant upon the tiles and grout, it is the membrane underneath that does the work.

              If the problem is in a common property wall, notwithstanding your obligation to maintain tiles and grout, it would be for the owners corporation to repair defective waterproofing. Your costs for repairing the carpet and skirting would be claimable from the owners corporation. Hence the question about the location of the leaky wall.

              Likewise with the adjacent balcony, it is the membrane beneath the tiles which does the work of waterproofing and replacing sealant on a joint may work but will likely need re-doing when the sealant deteriorates. You may indeed have water ingress from 2 sources, the adjacent balcony and your shower.

              You should address your concerns to the Secretary of the owners corporation and the strata managing agent. The owners corporation remains responsible for the waterproofing to common property even though the builder has gone, and you have only 2 years to claim for new damage to carpets and skirting.

               

              Just Asking
              Flatchatter

                Hi Stu,

                I have pm’ed you.

                Best regards.

                in reply to: Can Strata Committee fence off my courtyard access? #72355
                Just Asking
                Flatchatter

                  It would be a good idea to consult the strata plan in order to verify your understanding that you have an entitlement to access the terrace from your balcony.

                  Why does the strata committee wish to upgrade the balustrades to the current building code? Usually this is not necessary, unless the balustrades are obviously unsafe (for example missing or too wide spacing between balusters) or other works have necessitated a DA and the Council has conditioned an upgrade. Also, works subject to the new Design and Building Practitioners Act can have the consequence of upgrades being made.

                  If as you say your balcony is less than 1 metre above the ground, there would be no necessity for any change to your balustrade but for matching the rest of the building?

                  The strata committee would require approval by way of a special resolution, that is not more than 25% of votes against the resolution, in a general meeting, in order to proceed with the project.

                  in reply to: Common area key replacement cost for whole building #72358
                  Just Asking
                  Flatchatter

                    There is usually a by-law dealing with loss or damage to common property due to an action or negligence by an owner. Perhaps that may be a place to start looking?

                    in reply to: Forum: Can an unseen screen alter ‘appearance’? #71831
                    Just Asking
                    Flatchatter

                      Hi Jimmy, please cut me a slice of humble pie. I gave a reflex response, not a considered one.

                      We do not know the type of screen proposed. I had assumed a privacy or solar screen made of metal with either frosted glass, slats or louvres. It could possibly even be an insect screen. Nor do we know the proposed scope of works, whether the screen is part of a refurbishment of the balcony area.

                      Even if the erection of the screen can be characterised as a renovation, situated on the corner of the balcony it is likely to alter the external appearance of the lot. It may be out of the line of sight of other owners, but it will at least be visible by the owner. The proposed installation of the screen would probably fall outside s110 SSMA as the section does not require the change to the external appearance to be visible from any given viewing position.

                      I do look forward to reading the chronicling of the adventures (or trials and tribulations?) of Strataboy.

                      Just Asking
                      Flatchatter

                        Clause 9(3) of Schedule 2 provides that a decision of the strata committee has no effect if owners of one-third of unit entitlements give notice in writing of their opposition before the decision is taken.

                        Before heading in to NCAT, if you have the agreement of owners holding one-quarter of unit entitlements then a qualified request for a general meeting can be made pursuant to s19 SSMA. This would provide an opportunity for the decision/s of the strata committee to be overturned by the owners corporation. As the meeting must be convened within 14 days of the qualified request, this is much speedier than applying for mediation then filing in NCAT.

                        in reply to: Forum: Can an unseen screen alter ‘appearance’? #71804
                        Just Asking
                        Flatchatter

                          Strataboy needs to do some StrataSkool revision. It is not about “appearance”. The screen would amount to an addition or improvement to common property, as covered by s108 SSMA 2015.

                          In addition to passing a special resolution it would be wise to sign the owner up to a bylaw to ensure the owner is responsible for ongoing repairs and maintenance to the screen, and any consequential wear or damage to common property.

                          • This reply was modified 5 months, 2 weeks ago by .
                          Just Asking
                          Flatchatter

                            Attending the strata committee meetings is not likely to be of much help as only committee members can vote, and owners cannot speak without prior permission.

                            The lack of notice of the meetings given to the owners has the effect of denying the owners their right of veto of agenda items, which means that owners can prevent a topic from being discussed and voted on by the committee.

                            Then there is the question of whether the works approved by the committee were necessary repairs, or opportunistic improvements to the penthouses.

                            NCAT would be unlikely to invalidate committee decisions purely for a technical breach, it would need to be clear that but for the non compliance the decision of the committee would have been different. If there were sufficient owners who would have vetoed the agenda item, then a basis for overturning the decision of the committee exists.

                            Further, if the committee has gone beyond its jurisdiction and approved an improvement rather than a repair, and it is clear that a majority of owners would not have voted in favour in a general meeting, then there is another ground for overturning the decision.

                            It would be best to act before the work is commenced, by lodging an application for mediation.

                            in reply to: Class 1 vs Class 2 Debate #71756
                            Just Asking
                            Flatchatter

                              The new Design and Building Practitioners Act can make life much more complicated for owners of Class 2 buildings. A seemingly straightforward job like replacing a balcony requires designs by registered practitioners, including for the waterproofing system, before any works can commence. Then the tradesmen engaged to do the work need to have the right “tickets” to work on Class 2 buildings. This adds to the total time needed for the project, and the expense.

                              Owners of Class 1 buildings are in the same position as owners of freestanding (non strata) houses and can simply engage trades and get on with it, subject to passing the necessary resolutions.

                              Just Asking
                              Flatchatter

                                Ziggy,

                                If your secretary has worked hundreds of hours on this, it would be a terrible shame for all that work to go to waste. You have given warnings, why not now issue the Notices to Comply? It seems you will not get the miscreant’s attention until this step is taken, and it may yield the desired results.

                                If the miscreant continues in defiance, then hopefully all the groundwork done by your secretary will provide context and evidence for orders at NCAT.

                                in reply to: SC member offering to do work for OC #71475
                                Just Asking
                                Flatchatter

                                  What type of work is this strata committee member proposing to do? Gardening or cleaning? Plumbing or electrical? Other repairs? For relatively small monetary payments?

                                Viewing 15 replies - 1 through 15 (of 71 total)