DIRECT ACTION | Common Property | Flat Chat Forum: Your Questions Answered


These posts are now organised with the most recent post at the end. If you have already read the rest of the posts, to skip to the end, use the little bent arrow symbols to take you there. You must be registered and logged in to reply to posts or post new topics.

Please consider registering

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

— Match —

— Forum Options —

Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_Print sp_TopicIcon
29/05/2012 - 4:59 pm
Member Since: 15/08/2011
Forum Posts: 61
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

   Our OC has recently replaced a section of fence which was in excellent condition and two attached clotheslines have been refitted at a decreased height which makes them very difficult to use if you are over about 165cms tall (which makes me the only person likely to be affected).  A polite e-mail has attracted the expected non- response from the EC.  Neither the new fence nor the original fitment of the clotheslines was approved by Special Resolution.   I am seriously considering attempting to alter one at minimal expense which would probably result in a somewhat rough looking outcome i.e. bent over nails holding the top of the structure to the fence. My guess is that if when an EC member notices a tradesman would be summoned to return it to the previous location and to be true to the original intent I would have to repeat the alteration.  Personally paying a tradesman to alter it may be wiser but with my share of the OC funds at about $4000 it would leave a bad taste and the EC may well shift it again (yes spite could well be their chief consideration).  This is a "final straw" scenario and I wonder what the downsides could be.   


Full Members
30/05/2012 - 7:59 am
Member Since: 19/04/2011
Forum Posts: 556
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I assume these are clotheslines on common property for general use? If so, and the EC won't respond to your suggestion put in writing, I suggest 1) talk directly to someone on the EC in person, face to face. Perhaps they are are snowed under with other things? Offer to organise a tradesperson to move one to be higher. Point out the long term benefit of having them at different heights so that one better suits tall people and the other better suits short people. 2) If that gets you nowhere put it to the next general meeting. A decision of a general meeting overrides the decisions of the EC and they have to act on the GM decisions.

27/06/2012 - 2:51 pm
Member Since: 15/08/2011
Forum Posts: 61
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

PeterC said
... I suggest 1) talk directly to someone on the EC in person, face to face. ... ..2)..  put it to the next general meeting. 

The fact alone that I am making the request rules out any prospect of action on the part of the EC and they have near total control of GM's via proxies.  My real question is what if any legal difficulty could I get into for altering common property  - which has never been considered or approved at a properly convened meeting of the O.C?  Is there any difference between a clothesline frame lower than the height of the average man and a broken bottle on the same path i.e. both are "owned" by the OC but neither have been approved?

Forum Timezone: Australia/Sydney

Most Users Ever Online: 518

Currently Online: Kenny R, Madame_Chaire
33 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

kiwipaul: 613

scotlandx: 557

PeterC: 556

struggler: 458

Austman: 239

Billen Ben: 233

considerate band fair: 167

Kangaroo: 167

Millie: 156

FlatChatFan: 147

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 240

Members: 3690

Moderators: 1

Admins: 1

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4

Forums: 45

Topics: 3365

Posts: 15998

Newest Members:

King, hylands, oldandtired, [email protected], Martin10, DSW, Shirley, 45Newstart, RMARTIN, DdNorthSydney

Moderators: Whale: 1580

Administrators: JimmyT: 3429