Flat Chat Forum Common Property Current Page

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #50150
    tibx17
    Flatchatter

    An owner has requested the OC pay for repair of paved courtyard as pavers along the boundary edge are sinking. Overall the paving is in good condition.

    The garden’s  cement foundation was  not completed to the edge of the boundary,  it is along this edge the pavers have dropped into 30cm sinkhole. She has quote for void to be filled with polyurethane, and paving to be redone ($6000+). No cause has been determined. The villas built around 1985 and this issue looks like it’s got worse over 10+ years and now have some pavers falling into 30cm deep hole

    The Strata Plan specifies ‘strata of the garden area extend 2 below and 5 above the upper surface of  the ground floor’.

    I assumed this would mean responsibility would be the lot owner? The strata manager believes it can be claimed on OC insurance. Are garden foundations lot or Strata responsibility?

     

    thanks

     

Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Replies
  • #50154
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    The Strata Plan specifies ‘strata of the garden area extend 2 below and 5 above the upper surface of the ground floor’. I assumed this would mean responsibility would be the lot owner?

    The 2 (metres) below and 5 above refer to common property.  This is almost definitely an owners corp responsibilty.  Wish the strata manager luck getting an insurance claim through.

    #50157
    Just Asking
    Flatchatter

    We have experienced a similar problem at our complex as it is common for pavers to move over a long time period when laid on soil rather than concrete. In our case the courtyard areas form part of the adjacent lots. Does the strata plan have something which looks like an “S” drawn on the line between the main area of the lot and the adjacent garden area? This would indicate the garden area, as described, forms part of the adjacent private lot.

    The next question we encountered was whether the pavers were in place at the time of registration of the strata plan, or a later installation by an owner? In our case the pavers have been laid over the top of the original grass, by the current (not original) lot owner.

    We have not yet adopted the Common Property Memorandum, which lists pavers as a lot owner’s responsibility. We have not yet done so because the strata plan takes precedence and we want to have a solicitor check for inconsistencies between the strata plan and the Common Property Memorandum.

     

    #50159
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    The 2 (metres) below and 5 above refer to common property. This is almost definitely an owners corp responsibilty.

    I’m going to partially correct myself here – what I said before would only apply if the courtyard was common property.  If it were lot property, then the 2 and 5 figures refer to lot responsibility.

    #54936
    cachexian
    Flatchatter

    The 2 (metres) below and 5 above refer to common property.

    This would only apply if the courtyard was common property. If it were lot property, then the 2 and 5 figures refer to lot responsibility.

    Hi Jimmy T,
    Thanks for running this forum. I’ve searched the forum for an answer to my question and this post come the closest.

    Who is responsible for repairs to the waterproof membrane, tile bed and tiles?

    Our strata plan has the squiggly S between the adjacent lot and the relevant “Terrace” which I understand means that the lot owner is responsible for the maintenance and repair of the Terrace.
    The Strata Plan further states: “WHERE NOT COVERED, PLANTERS, TERRACES, STAIRS AND PORCHES ARE LIMITED IN HEIGHT TO 2.5 ABOVE THE UPPER SURFACE OF THEIR CONCRETE FLOOR”

    Does this confirm that everything above the upper surface of the concrete of the Terrace is lot property?

    Also, we have a similar soil subsidence issue in the courtyard to the OP. The soil and its grass covering have subsided some 30cm. The Courtyard is joined to the adjacent Terrace by the S on the Strata Plan – so is lot property.
    The Strata Plan states: “WHERE NOT COVERED, COURTYARDS ARE LIMITED IN HEIGHT TO 2.5 ABOVE THE UPPER SURFACE OF THE CONCRETE FLOOR OF THE BUILDING OF THE RESPECTIVE LOT ON BASEMENT LEVEL AND, WHERE NOT CONCRETE PAVED ARE LIMITED IN DEPTH TO 2 BELOW THAT SURFACE”

    I understand that to mean that the soil is the responsibility of the lot of the surface is less than 2.5 above the concrete level in the basement. Is this correct?

    If the soil surface is more than 2.5 above the concrete level in the basement, who is responsible?

    • This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by .
    #54945
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    The 2 (metres) below and 5 above refer to common property. This is almost definitely an owners corp responsibilty.

    I’m going to partially correct myself here – what I said before would only apply if the courtyard was common property. If it were lot property, then the 2 and 5 figures refer to lot responsibility.

    #54946
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

    Who is responsible for repairs to the waterproof membrane, tile bed and tiles?

    Here’s my interpretation based on the information provided.  You might want to check with a professional surveyor.

    Firstly you have to think of your terrace as being contained in an invisible box and everything in that box is your responsibility, because it has been defined as lot property.

    In your specific case, if the terrace isn’t sitting on part of the concrete slab (maybe the roof of an underground car park) the box extends 2.5 metres above the floor of the terrace and two metres below it.

    If the terrace IS sitting on a concrete slab, your lot “box” only extends downwards to the surface of the concrete.

    Anything that extends above the 2.5 metres above the surface of the terrace has strayed into common property air space.

    The Strata Plan states: “WHERE NOT COVERED, COURTYARDS ARE LIMITED IN HEIGHT TO 2.5 ABOVE THE UPPER SURFACE OF THE CONCRETE FLOOR OF THE BUILDING OF THE RESPECTIVE LOT ON BASEMENT LEVEL AND, WHERE NOT CONCRETE PAVED ARE LIMITED IN DEPTH TO 2 BELOW THAT SURFACE”

    I understand that to mean that the soil is the responsibility of the lot if the surface is less than 2.5 above the concrete level in the basement. Is this correct?

    Yes.

    If the soil surface is more than 2.5 above the concrete level in the basement, who is responsible?

    Do you have a hill in your terrace? If the soil in the terrace floor extends upwards into common property air space, and you haven’t passed a by-law agreeing to the use of that air space, then it is in common property and the strata committee could ask you to remove it.  Again, how soil would get so high is beyond me.

    To answer your question, if there is a concrete base then everything above the upper surface of the concrete base is your responsibility, that would include waterproofing and tiles.

    By the way, the references to the terrace being covered or uncovered probably refer to structures like awnings and overhangs above the terrace, not coverings of the terrace floor.

    #54960
    cachexian
    Flatchatter

    Hi JimmyT,

    Thanks for your answer. The “Courtyard” soil surface is on the Ground Floor Level at the same level as the adjacent “Terrace”.  The soil is deep soil and there is no concrete slab underneath it – it goes right down to the earth. However, there is a basement level underneath the “Terrace”.

    This all means that the soil surface of the Courtyard is 3.27m above the surface of the basement, which is below the adjacent Terrace.
    This deep soil above the courtyard has subsided so we need to know who is responsible for filling it back up again.

    Quoting JimmyT: To answer your question, if there is a concrete base then everything above the upper surface of the concrete base is your responsibility, that would include waterproofing and tiles.

    That is not the answer that I wanted but thank you for clarifying this. Could you advise me how we would go about getting a binding ruling so that the lot owner cannot come back and sue the strata to repair this area later?

    • This reply was modified 4 months, 2 weeks ago by .
Viewing 7 replies - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Flat Chat Forum Common Property Current Page