This topic contains 3 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Jimmy-T 2 months ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #37675
    Avatar
    leighton
    Flatchatter

    Our top floor owner has a large exposed area as a balcony as part of her title. The wooden decking of this area has rotted and an inspection shows that the drains are blocked and this has meant that the bearers and decking need replacing plus the waterproof membrane is old and probably should be renewed at the same time

    The Strata Manager says the any repairs to an external balcony are the responsibility of the Body Corporate but some of us feel the we should only look at reimbursing for the drain clearing and membrane replacement as theses are things that protect the fabric of the building. and that the costs associated with any surface work (new timber or tiles) should be borne by the owner who hasn’t maintained things well. Any thoughts?

    • This topic was modified 2 months ago by Jimmy-T.
    #37682
    Jimmy-T
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    I would say at first glance, your strata manager is right.

    However, if you can prove that the owner’s neglect has contributed to the failure of the decking, then you can bill them for that (then fight it out at NCAT).

    #37693
    Avatar
    Andy
    Flatchatter

    With all due respect to Jimmy T and his answer above I’d like to make some comments.

    Who laid the decking? Was it the OC or the builder when the place was built, or was it added on top of the existing surface as an option or by a subsequent owner? If the latter then I’d say it’s the responsibility of the owner.

    If the owner had sole access to the area then I would assume they are responsible for ensuring any drains are not blocked. If they neglected to keep drains clear I assume the subsequent stagnant water damaged the decking.

    #37700
    Jimmy-T
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    With all due respect …

    Who laid the decking? Was it the OC or the builder when the place was built, or was it added on top of the existing surface as an option or by a subsequent owner? If the latter then I’d say it’s the responsibility of the owner.

    If the decking was laid by a subsequent owner and fixed to the slab, and there is no by-law passing responsibility to the lot owner, then it’s more than likely the owners corporation’s responsibility, regardless of who installed it.

    You are right, however about the lot owner being responsible for at least checking the drains.

    #37725
    Avatar
    Whoopi
    Flatchatter

    Hi flat chatters,

    I am currently in the same position. The OC were given orders to replace the membrane on our roof terrace. There is a timber deck on the roof that has been there for three decades. It did not cause the leaks, this has been proven. Our OC are refusing to remove the deck claiming it is our responsibility.  We do not have a bylaw  making us responsible for the deck nor did we install the deck. There is no documentation proving who installed it. We believe it is common property. Multiple owners have enjoyed it over the years.

    We believe the Oc should remove it, they have the orders to repair the membrane. We are going to the tribunal for the 7th time now  after fighting to get them to repair the membrane  now we fight to find out who is responsible. It is $20,000 to remove  the deck and then there is the argument of replacement, another fifty thousand once the other items on the roof have been included.We believe also we bought a lot with a landscaped roof terrace which affected the cost of our apartment. The OC intend on leaving us with a bare membrane where the deck used to reside. It would help if the tribunal were more detailed in their findings,  the loopholes left after orders are handed down are being taken advantage of. I will let you all know how we go in the tribunal.

    With all due respect I agree with Jimmy.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login Register