A A A

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.

Avatar

Please consider registering
Guest

Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





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

Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_PrintTopic sp_TopicIcon
Can the committee just let someone change the look of a lot
Avatar
Dally
FlatChatter
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
26/09/2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
10/11/2018 - 12:10 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Can the appearance of the garage roller door to the apartment carpark be changed by a member of the Strata committee without the knowledge of the rest of the Strata committee?

Communication and decision making is problematic and decisions often get made by the same one or two people (Chairperson and Treasurer).

I and others on the committee knew nothing about the garage roller door renovation until suddenly one day the garage door had a completely outlandish new look.

As yet I’ve not contacted our Strata manager as he often refers back to these same two people, who do not like their actions being questioned. 

Any advice on what to do would be greatly appreciated .

Avatar
Sir Humphrey
Canberra
StrataGuru
Members

Full Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 1068
Member Since:
19/04/2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
12/11/2018 - 11:04 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory

I would look to your rules/by-laws/articles on unit alterations. In many places it takes an unopposed resolution or a special resolution of a general meeting to approve altering the appearance of a unit. In some places a committee decision is sufficient or it is empowered to make certain classes of decision within guidelines. Rarely has an owners corporation resolved to allow a complete laissez-faire. 

Avatar
watcherman
FlatChatter
Members
Forum Posts: 4
Member Since:
03/03/2017
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
3
13/11/2018 - 9:30 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

I would interpret this as the primary garage roller door which provides access to the underground car parking or similar. What may of happened is that the roller door was damaged by a vehicle which rendered it inoperatable (the door that is) and had to be replaced asap to preserve security and in that instance the fact that they were unable to source same as original became a minor concern ?

Avatar
Dally
FlatChatter
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
26/09/2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
4
13/11/2018 - 10:10 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Thanks 

Am I correct in thinking that a change in the appearance of the apartment car park garage roller door is a change in the appearance of the lot?

As far as I know there has been a financial limit only placed on the committee for maintenance work . There are no other rules or articles giving permission for specific members of the Committee to make other decisions. Is there somewhere I could check this though? 

 

Thank you so much

Avatar
Jimmy-T
Admin
Forum Posts: 5208
Member Since:
06/01/2014
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
5
14/11/2018 - 2:17 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

The entrance door or gate to a communal car park is common property, not lot property. In fact, many doors on individual garages are common property too. 

Avatar
Dally
FlatChatter
Members
Forum Posts: 3
Member Since:
26/09/2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
6
14/11/2018 - 5:33 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

Thanks for the clarification.

So a member of the committee has changed the appearance of common property without discussion with anyone. What should have been the process for changing the appearance of common property?

thank you 

Avatar
Sir Humphrey
Canberra
StrataGuru
Members

Full Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 1068
Member Since:
19/04/2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
7
19/11/2018 - 2:24 pm
sp_Permalink sp_Print

If the door to the communal parking area were damaged and the committee repaired it by replacing it, then I would say the committee is carrying out one of its functions which is to repair and maintain the common property. It often occurs that an identical replacement is not available and a committee has to do the best it can to find a reasonable, near equivalent. So far, so good. 

If the committee has replaced a part of the common property with something of “a completely outlandish new look”, then the committee would seem to have gone beyond proper repair and maintenance. Presumably, the committee don’t think it looks ‘outlandish’ and perhaps they have a reason for the non-identical replacement. Perhaps the door needed replacement anyway and this door functions better in some respect or perhaps it was the only sort they could get for the situation?

Forum Timezone: Australia/Sydney

Most Users Ever Online: 518

Currently Online:
24 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Whale: 1584

kiwipaul: 584

struggler: 458

Austman: 344

Millie: 213

Billen Ben: 205

Cosmo: 196

considerate band fair: 160

Boronia: 144

FlatChatFan: 140

Newest Members:

HABD

darshika.dwivedi

cfclarke

SharonB

Kesa

JD Thomson

hanbug

Lord Justice Galah

property360view

Weitomtom@hotmail.com

Forum Stats:

Groups: 3

Forums: 40

Topics: 5005

Posts: 23667

 

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 243

Members: 5712

Moderators: 6

Admins: 1

Administrators: Jimmy-T

Moderators: Sir Humphrey, scotlandx, Christopher Jones, Lady Penelope, Stratabox.com.au, Jimmy-T