• Creator
    Topic
  • #11347
    Penny Hill
    Flatchatter

      At a recent mediation, one of the senior staff members told my applicant/friend that, on the Mediation office’s wall was a large sign stating ‘DO NOT BUY INTO STRATA’… right from the horse’s mouth.

       

      If the NSW govt. wants 4 mill of us to live in strata/community type accommodation, it MUST lift its game… and restore to normal/ordinary humans their consumer rights, criminal/police protection rights, their Human Rights rights, their Aged Care/Disability rights, Health Care and safety rights, etc.  A gaolbird is safer in gaol with his shower set at 50*C than a strata owner where the committees refuse to install the common property hot water service according to the manufacturer’s instructions… i.e. with a tempering device… etc…. all forced to ensure 678C scalding, freezing or no water at all in showers…

      ALL these and other protections are Gone… once one becomes a strata owner – especially a full-time owner-occupier. The bullies/psychopaths/crazies/fraudsters/ incompetents rule…  

       

      How to get rid of a psychopath/mentally ill control freak who has bullied for 25+ years?

      After struggling since 2009 with CTTT/NCAT, positive actual enforcement of strata and other law is nothing short of a miracle…

      The theory is that an owner does not need legal representation.  What a joke!  Either a self-represented person is trashed/bamboozled or thrown out because of an error of law… often on the part of the tribunal… or the opposition… and one is faced with an appeal to a quagmire of higher authorities… with no enlightenment from NCAT…  Internal appeals do not seem to work…

       

      Strata law is wonderful in theory… a disaster in practice… far too often.  Where is the ‘social harmony’… the aim of the legislation?  Where is the justice?  Massive legal costs which continue to be a nightmare issue…  My last application re legal costs was thrown out because the Adjudicator relied on the wrong section of the SSMA…  One could spend one’s life appealing against the tribunal.

    Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #28176
      stressed
      Flatchatter

        I  wholeheartedly agree with Penny Hill’s comments.

        After failed mediation, in February 2017, instigated by the OC in October 2016; I made an application to NCAT pursuant to sections 126 and 127 of SSMA 2015. The Tribunal Hearing was held on 21 August 2017 with a reserved decision, for which I am still waiting!

        I bought my unit in March 2011 in an uninhabitable dilapidated state and it is still in that state today. The OC has continually refused to authorise my internal renovations unless I wrote a common property rights by-law, previously an exclusive use and special privilege by-law, covering all my proposed works.

        In 2014 the OC eventually signed our DA, which was approved by Council and a Construction Certificate was issued. Under local Planning laws it was necessary to lodge a DA because:-

        1. the building is located in a Heritage Conservation Area and is a Heritage Item, and

        2. we wanted to remove a non load-bearing wall

        I maintained that a by-law was not necessary since we were not altering, adding to or erecting a structure on common property and there was already a building works by-law covering lot owner works. Other lot owners’ works were authorised by the OC under this by-law, prior to the new legislation coming into effect.

        I also disputed what was and what was not common property in my lot.

        Since strata legislation was first enacted in NSW, various government employees and others have been stating what is and what is not common property, without any of these pronouncements having the force of law.

        They are only opinions and assumptions which have been made ignoring logic, what the legislation states and without any real understanding of what are the structural elements of a building.

        The rights of a lot owner are subsumed by the rights of the OC. Strata Committees think they have an unfettered right to control lot owners and that a lot owner should not dare to disagree with what their strata lawyer says!

        Over the years strata lawyers appear to have had a bias towards OCs in their interpretation of the strata legislation. They have advised OCs that common property rights by-laws are required in situations where they are not necessary. 

        This bias is also evident in their interpretation of the new strata legislation. OCs are requiring lot owners to write common property rights by-laws for works which are clearly covered by the provisions of sections 109 and 110 of SSMA 2015.

        Most lot owners will write the by-law, even though they are now responsible for any problems with common property in the future which could be linked to their renovations. The only alternative is to go to NCAT and there is no guarantee of the outcome.

        Going to NCAT costs time and money, but before you can apply to NCAT, you must go to Mediation, which is a complete waste of time. The OC always has the upper hand.

        Supposedly, the new legislation, in respect of lot owner works within their lot, was enacted in order to make it easier for lot owners to do this work. Most lot owner works would involve work to a kitchen and bathroom, so why exclude waterproofing from being a minor renovation. Did the legislators still want to make it difficult for lot owners to do minor renovations in their lot?

        #28181
        Lady Penelope
        Strataguru

          If you want more certainty and clarity as to what is, or isn’t, the responsibility of the OC or the Owner then perhaps you should write a Motion for the next General Meeting, and have the OC adopt the Common Property Memorandum. Your Motion could state: 

          That the Owner’s Corporation adopts the Office of Fair Trading Common Property Memorandum.

          You would need to include a copy of the Common Property Memorandum in your Explanatory Material when you submit your Motion. The Memorandum is linked below. 

          https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/biz_res/ftweb/pdfs/Tenants_and_home_owners/Common_Property_Memorandum.pdf

          Fortunately the new legislation (SSMA 2015) makes it clearer as to the obligations on the Owner and the OC with regards to renovation approvals. 

          #28183
          stressed
          Flatchatter

            Lady Penelope

            I think you may have misunderstood what I meant concerning common property.

            The Common Property Memorandum is only another arbitrary generalised pronouncement of what is and what is not common property in a strata plan and who is responsible for its maintenance.

            Each strata plan must be looked at individually. Generalisations are not helpful.

            What is common property in a strata plan can only legally be determined by reference to the strata plan and what was in the building at the date of registration of the strata plan and any subsequent by-laws where the OC has added to the common property.

            OC is responsible for the maintenance of the common property and they should not be trying to abrogate this statutory duty which was imposed on them at the date of registration of the strata plan.

            #28194
            Banned
            Blocked


              @stressed
              said:

              Supposedly, the new legislation, in respect of lot owner works within their lot, was enacted in order to make it easier for lot owners to do this work. Most lot owner works would involve work to a kitchen and bathroom, so why exclude waterproofing from being a minor renovation. Did the legislators still want to make it difficult for lot owners to do minor renovations in their lot?  

              Apparently as we are finding out.

              #28196
              Lady Penelope
              Strataguru

                A kitchen is not designated as a wet area according to MBA NSW so it should not require waterproofing. Therefore a kitchen renovation is classified as a Minor Renovation.

                Designated wet areas for waterproofing are: Showers = high risk; Bathroom/Ensuite = medium risk; Laundry/Laundrette/ WC = low risk.

                Pre-formed showers with base and hob do not require waterproofing. The concrete flooring surrounding this type of shower only needs to be water resistant. 

                This document provides some guidance as to when and where waterproofing is required. See particularly the pages headed BCA Volume 2 Table 3.8.1.1

                https://www.justice.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/341956/MBA_NSW_Waterproofing_of_Domestic_Wet_Areas_Compliance_Practical_Applications_Half_Day_Course.pdf

                #28204
                Banned
                Blocked

                  A pre formed shower base requires the floor waste to be in a position the same as the base so they line up. This usually is never the case. So a pre formed shower base may require relocation of the floor waste. That requires a by law and perhaps some very understanding neighbours in the unit below when you have to tear out their bathroom ceiling for access to the waste 🙂

                  #28210
                  Whoopi
                  Flatchatter

                     Hi Penny Hill and Stressed, Dingo 

                     

                     I want to tell you I feel exactly what you are going through, we can private message each other find out if we are in the same building or same area. Gather our forces to go to the minister with our issues.

                     Cheers 

                    Whoopi

                  Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
                  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.