You must be registered and logged in to reply to posts or post new topics. Click on "How to Use This Forum" for simple instructions on how to get on board. NB: Please do not use your real name or email address as your screen name - if you do it will be changed to something less insecure.
I’ve just been notified that a lot owner has changed common property in their unit. The Sliding balcony door and all windows (they claimed they were all damaged during their renovations)
the issue is the windows were common property and now open outwards not sliding
I would think if they were sliding and the same colour no one would have an issue but the outward opening has annoyed the block.
what can we do to get them to change to sliding doors?
also we will look for them to pay for a bylaw to say these are now their issue if there are leaks as currently it’s been body corporate (1970’s build)
I have a similar issue, so I wanted to give this a bump and add something.
Do I have to provide the tenants with a product that will be acceptable, or do they need to bring options that will then be approved?
Which is best or necessary?
Our body corporate had a special strata meeting without the offending apartment as they have decided not to talk to anyone.
Our strata manager has sent a letter demanding that they use the same brand that the rest of the building has. This company was used in 1970 and is still in production
but the main reason the OC are really upset is because not only did they rip out all their windows and balcony door, they have also done extra work outside the approved scope, damaged another lot by drilling into the slab into another lot and changed internal plumbing
so all of this together looks like it’s going to get messy here unless they fix the common property ASAP
Hi gbrownie & lFaulkner, I have similar issues here too. In my block we have one business/commercial Lot who some time ago informed the old S/M that they were conducting some minor “internal” renovations – so old S/M said there was no need for approval. At the end of the work I noticed the Lot owner had painted pillars on the balcony a different colour to the rest of the building and also remove glass panes and replaced it with glass sliding doors.
So at a recent meeting I overheard the above Lot owner inform the new S/M that the new sliding doors cost 5K and was it covered under Strata to which the S/M said yes? How can this be?
just adding to our bylaw breakers – not only have they done their windows and doors, they have now taken out their front door (Common Property Fire Door) and replaced with their own door
They said they’ll just pass a bylaw for all the breaches!
they don’t understand that it needs to pass and so far every owner is so angry there is no way this is passing
such a headache that we need to go to NCAT over this
anyone have any advice on what else we can do?
People can be naive or devious doing their reno and often think they can just do it and will get away with it when the dust settles or the owners corp just concedes not wanting to cause a fight.
Usually the offenders only see it all from inside their apartment and don’t consider the impact it has on the exterior or other peoples investment. If everyone played it that way it will be death by a thousand cuts and then when it looks horrible eventually you all pay a fortune in whole of building rectification costs or the unseen lesser sale price when you sell due to your building looking like a hack job. Investors also potentially lose out in higher rents and better quality rental tenants.
I strongly suggest you ride your committee to go in real hard, and if they dont you should take it on yourself and go the offender yourself. That in itself sends a strong message to others there who also think they can do the wrong thing.
Hi there. I am a newb to this forum and to strata matters in general, but I am a resident who is hoping to replace my 1970’s common property doors and windows. I’m sorry not to be answering the original question, but I hope you don’t mind me asking for your perspective on my situation.
My current doors/windows are in poor condition and have completely ineffective noise and heat insulation. Because the committee has no plans to upgrade, I wish to do it myself – but with uPVC double glazing. I am trying to keep the design as close to the originals as possible, but there will of course be differences. And I need to know whether these differences will be show-stoppers BEFORE I spend $700 on a By Law.
The problem I have is that my committee almost refuses to communicate with me on the issue. If I ask a question, they tell me I need to present my By Law at an EGM, then they will vote on the matter. Yet I need questions answered in order to draft the By Law and ensure that it will be agreeable to everyone. I am being completely transparent with them, yet they are being unhelpful and obstructive. What can I do?
Are the doors and windows common property in a 1970s building?
With the exception of your fire rated front door, I suspect they aren’t, in which case I would be sending them an email saying that you have made every effort to consult with them and due to their lack of engagement you are going to go ahead and change the windows and balcony doors, albeit with due consideration for the look of the building.
If they are common property, tell them that you intend to take them to Fair Trading for mediation, followed by seeking orders at NCAT under Section 232 (2), compelling them to fix all the windows in the building.
I would add a rider saying you apologise for the firmness of tone but they have a duty of care and that involves discussing and negotiating with owners over matters related to common property.
Are the doors and windows common property in a 1970s building?…
Yes I believe they are common property. Unfortunately the main issue for me is heat and noise insulation (it’s a cold shady flat in the winter and faces the road), so I feel that single glazing is no longer enough. Even if I demanded new windows, I couldn’t reasonably expect them to be double-glazed. So I’m happy to bear the cost and let the doors and windows become my responsibility.
I guess I’m interested to know whether the committee are obliged to answer my questions (without requiring some sort of special meeting). For example they have told me no “bottom opening windows”. My proposed windows were all going to be sliding, but now it looks like I might need a single pane top-hinged kitchen window. So I have asked for the reasoning behind “no bottom opening windows”, but they keep replying with “present your By Law at an EGM”. Do you think they are obliged to give me an answer?
Many thanks for your advice.
Most Users Ever Online: 518
Currently Online: Ethicsfirst
Currently Browsing this Page:
Billen Ben: 205
considerate band fair: 160
Guest Posters: 243
Moderators: Sir Humphrey, scotlandx, Christopher Jones, Lady Penelope, Stratabox.com.au, Jimmy-T