Question: In a standard format plan, who should pay for regular termite inspections of the dwellings? Is this the responsibility of the body corporate or the lot owner? More importantly, is the body corporate allowed to pay for this?
Answer: In a standard format plan, the lot owner is responsible for the cost of pest control at their unit, however, the Body Corporate should want to do what it can to minimise the risk.
In a standard format plan, the lot owner is responsible for the cost of pest control at their unit.
However, when it comes to termites, placing that responsibility on the owner might not be in the best interests of the Body Corporate.
In a site where the risk of termites is high – most of Queensland – it makes sense that the Body Corporate should want to do what it can to minimise the risk. If it doesn’t and termites enter a scheme, they can quickly do large scale damage that won’t be covered by the scheme’s insurance.
Risk mitigation usually means checking all lots on a periodic basis as the start point. If the body corporate pays for this, they can guarantee the risk is minimised. If they leave it to owners, as the legislation indicates, some might do it and some might not and the risk to the body corporate as well as individual owners, increases.
Is there a way out of this dilemma? It’s not easy to do it and remain within the boundaries of the law, even though strict adherence to the legislation can produce a sub-optimal outcome.
The simplest solution here would be for a legislation change to occur to accommodate this kind of situation. Don’t hold your breath waiting for this to happen – legislation change tends to be glacier slow at the best of times. In the interim owners have to make real life decisions.
As such, some schemes just have the body corporate pay for the inspections regardless. It’s not technically allowed, but it may be hard to say that the body corporate is acting unreasonably – bearing in mind that ‘reasonability’ is one of the standard tests of body corporate decision making. If a scheme wants to do this, I think they may be OK provided they have established the risk, clearly advised owners of the situation and that there are no major objections from owners. You have to acknowledge that this solution is not technically correct, but is it better than having termites attack the scheme?
Otherwise, schemes might need to look at whether owners can be required to conduct the testing. The risk level would probably have to be high to the point that safety was endangered to make this a requirement. Perhaps owners could be advised that they would be considered negligent in the event that termites attacked their building and that the body corporate would pursue them for costs in that event. However, while warnings like this might provoke some owners into action, they don’t stop the termites who are not known for respecting body corporate boundaries.
Probably the best thing Body Corporate can do is to make sure they are having a clear and open conversation with owners about what is required at the site and the best way to control it. Work with your pest controller to establish your risk levels and make sure owners are aware of the situation. Raise the issue regularly and work through the issue until you get to a framework that protects your site.
This post appears in the August 2022 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
William Marquand Tower Body Corporate E: willmarquand@towerbodycorporate.com.au P: 07 5609 4924