We have a common area with a lawn and paved driveway. Four units use this area to access their lots. The other six units access their lots from the street. The six units decided not to contribute to the reserve fund because they never used the common lawn or paved driveway. Would the decision about which units contribute to the reserve fund have been made at the inaugural AGM when the units were first built in 1991?
I own a lot in a strata complex of 102 lots. My mother lives in the apartment. The committee published a list of all "residents" contact details (lot number and phone number). They obtained these details from the body corporate records.
I purchased my lot in 2016 and have never received a request from the committee or strata for my mother's or my contact details to be published this way.
The committee updates the list regularly. Recently when they updated the list, my name and mobile number were included - even though my mother still resides in the lot and I am the owner.
We are a small 14 unit complex in NSW where bylaws were created to allow enclosing of balconies for some units. Just over half of the units have been enclosed from the top floor to ground floors.
Drainage is via a pipe at one end of the balcony that does not extend very far out and there is no “lip” on the balcony edge to contain water. When hosing down windows, frames and ceilings of the balconies to clean off salt and grime, the water flows over the edge onto the enclosed balcony's windows below.
At our last AGM, our strata manager put forward a motion to obtain a new valuation and adopt it for the owners corporation's insurance renewal. The new valuation is significantly lower than the valuations obtained 8 and 3 years ago, despite rising construction and labour costs.
Industry experts suggest the valuation underestimates reinstatement costs by about $1M, or $200K per dwelling. The new insured amount is $662k less than last year's policy. I raised these concerns, but the strata manager responded that the owners had already voted at the AGM to adopt the new valuation.
In Brisbane, our body corporate has introduced a new CMS by-law that applies to renovations of balcony flooring. The by-law requires any lot owner who renovates their balcony to significantly upgrade the exclusive use common area by installing under-tile soundproofing, even though this was not part of the original building. In addition, the by-law requires the owner to arrange and pay for noise testing to prove the new flooring meets a specific sound transmission standard.
I purchased a villa in a strata complex. My sales contract includes a survey of the lot.
On the survey, the distance between my back shed and the fence says the width should be two mts to the fence. When I measure it, the space is only 1700mm.
I raised the discrepancy with the secretary of the owners corporation. The secretary measured their fence and found they had the same problem at their villa.
The secretary says the owners corporation will not investigate the matter further.
I’ve lost approximately four sq mts along my backyard, worth around $20,000.
We have a standard by-law regarding pets. A VOC fee was levied by the body corporate manager (BCM) unless the matter could be decided at a usual meeting.
Historically, fees were paid by all owners. That was considered unfair. The general principle is more relevant than the amount involved. Some feel that all owners should not pay for something that is personal to one owner.
A decision was made that the respective owner should bear any fees.
The owners corporation sent a plumber to investigate a leak in my bathroom, and the plumber reported that the waterproofing had failed. They repaired the same bathroom in 2017 after a previous leak and installed new waterproofing.
Our Strata management company is slow to act. If they act, they rarely help solve council of owners'(CoO) conflicts.
Ongoing mould issues have not been resolved by the strata management company despite numerous requests for action. As a member of the CoO, I know we have requested the manager find contractors to fix the defects.
A valid resolution, detailed on the AGM notice of meeting, was passed unanimously by attending owners. The incoming council of owners (COO) decided not to act on the resolution.
Does the COO have the right to ignore the vote because they disagree with the outcome? Should resolutions that comply with the Act and by-laws passed at meetings of owners be regarded as COO instructions?