- This topic has 11 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 10 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
I have 20 cracked tiles in the ensuite on the internal wall of a common property wall.
External wall is against earth.
I have requested Strata Managers obtain an engineers or building report to check waterproofing of wall due to recent extensive wet weather events. Apartment is 12 years old.
Committee have directed Strata Managers to advise via email that it will be put as a ‘discussion’ item at the next AGM (due May 2023)
Do I replace the cracked tiles? Who is responsible please?
NSW. Thank you
-
Replies
-
Unless you have good reason, asking for an engineer report is probably a step too far.
You describe that the common property wall has cracked tiles. Request the OC to replace th3 tiles. They then have to do it within a reasonable time.
If the committee is on the ball they will also find out why the tiles are cracking and whilst the tiles are being replaced check the waterproofing.
Dont replace the tiles yourself. By doing thst you are damaging common property, and you could then be responsible for any further rectification required.
Just take one step at a time before talking about NCAT. You will have to see what findings and recommendations come from your report and if you and your inspector are of the opinion that it is an OC issue with waterproofing, then present your report to the committee, and perhaps have your inspector address them at a meeting, which may be more $$ for you to bear for his attendance. The committee may get second and third opinions of their own. The silly season is almost upon us, and I don’t expect much will be done to further your issue until well into next year.
The complex being 12 years old is not really all that old, and there are second had tile yards with boxes of excess tiles that can be matched to your current ones out there somewhere. It’ can be a fun project for a person with some time on their hands to go rummaging through cartons. I’ve done it myself with tremendous results. Don’t forget to take a photo of you present tiles so the staff can assist to send you in the right direction.
Would depend if they are the original tiles and not a renovation somewhere along the line.
Reply from Victoria. I hope you are well and Happy New Year.
Two things that confuse me:
- What do you mean by ‘internal common property wall’? If it is an external wall, then I thought you as the owner were responsible for the internal property-facing side of the wall i.e. the internal wall, plaster, membrane etc. that is shared with the brickwork on the outside (which is the OC). Then if the tiles are internal, aren’t you then responsible for the upkeep and maintenance?
- Did the OC Manager or the OC Committee authorise you to go ahead and get a professional report? If they did not, then I suspect you will not receive any reimbursement as it was entirely your decision to proceed with those investigations ahead of the May 2023 AGM. Keep the invoices in case you can make a clearer case down the track.
12 years is not a new building but is not too old either.
I hope you get some resolution on this. I am just an owner and not an expert or lawyer.
What do you mean by ‘internal common property wall’? If it is an external wall, then I thought you as the owner were responsible for the internal property-facing side of the wall i.e. the internal wall, plaster, membrane etc. that is shared with the brickwork on the outside (which is the OC).
It’s different in Victoria. In NSW and, I believe, Queensland, any surface that backs on to common property or an adjoining lot is common property too. Another example of how Victorian strata law is behind the times.
The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
It’s different in Victoria. In NSW and, I believe, Queensland, any surface that backs on to common property or an adjoining lot is common property too. Another example of how Victorian strata law is behind the times.
Hey Jimmy, Is it really behind the times though? If I want to replace some tiles inside my property, or paint a wall purple, or anything else in between, I can do as I please without needing to go get approvals. What happens in the apartment is no business of the OC. It seems very messy if suddenly the OC has some say in internal walls. Just my two cents, from the backwaters of Victoria!
- This reply was modified 1 year, 10 months ago by .
Hey Jimmy, Is it really behind the times though? … What happens in the apartment is no business of the OC.
I think allowing individual owners to do too much within their units that does affect other lots, even indirectly, is a proven recipe for dissent and disaster.
The NSW system is far from perfect. But there has to be a process where work that compromises the integrity of the structure is monitored and responsibility clearly assigned.
Tiles in the bathroom are a case in point. If someone’s renovation affects the waterproofing of an adjoining wall, the ensuing battle of who pays to fix it when the damp starts to spread is a huge waste of time, money and emotional energy.
All of that can be avoided if there is a simple process in place where, when common property is involved, the owner tells the strata committee what their plans are, and the tradies involved have to be licensed and insured.
It’s all about the individual’s responsibility to the community and Victorian strata seems to have gone in a different direction and tried to treat apartments as if they were free-standing houses. They’re not and never can be, and I believe that trying to hang on to an irrelevant model of home ownership is “behind the times”.
The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
Having owned, lived in, served on committees and chaired in NSW in multiple stratas over some decades and having owned, lived in, served on committees and chaired in VIC in multiple stratas over some decades, I’m probably better placed than most to compare the two.
For me, the VIC system is by far the best. But it’s for sure not without its issues.
The main difference in VIC, compared to NSW, is the simplification of what is common and lot property and what are common and lot services.
In VIC apartments, the lot usually owns all the airspace of their lot including all of its surfaces (eg paint, tiles, wallpaper and surface treatments including waterproofing membranes). This is mostly due to definitions in the Subdivision (Registrar’s Requirements) Regulations 2021 (an update of the 2011 version). The lot also owns all the services (water, drainage, electricity etc) from the point where the service branches to exclusively service the lot, regardless of the service location. Those concepts are not unique to VIC. In VIC apartments, lots usually also have the legislated (s.132 of the OC Act) right to “to decorate or attach fixtures or chattels” to the lot’s interior side of common property walls, floors and ceilings.
Lots cannot damage or alter common property or common services without OC permission. And no, attaching fixtures or chattels is not considered to be damaging common property. OC common property inside an apartment lot will include structural walls, slabs, beams, columns and ducts. In other words, the integrity of the building. That again is not unique to VIC.
What it means is, for most lot interior works, as long as they do not affect common property, lots do not need OC permission. The lot must still meet all rules, laws and standards including council and building code requirements. Certain works trigger a legislated (s.133 OC Act) requirement to inform the OC of the works.
In comparison, the definition of what is common and lot property and what are common and lot services in NSW is much more complex. Lot owners in NSW need more OC permissions. Lot owners in NSW may need maintenance by-laws to be created. VIC doesn’t need the by-laws (rules in VIC) or similar for maintenance to be created as long as common property if not affected. The lot will always be responsible for lot property and lot services.
The situation in VIC is not perfect but it does, IMO make owning, living in, serving on the committee and chairing VIC apartments a much more enjoyable strata experience.
For me, the minuses of the VIC system, include the increased responsibility that lot owners have to maintain their lots and their services. That can lead to more lot v lot maintenance disputes if the OC itself is not affected.
The maintenance of outdoor balconies, terraces and courts of VIC apartments can also be a bit of a shock to lot owners. While VIC apartment owners are usually happy with the idea that they are responsible for the waterproofing of their bathrooms and laundries, they can be surprised when they discover that their responsibility extends to the waterproofing around the airspace areas of their outdoors balconies, terraces and courts.
The OC is still responsible for its common property and its common services. And lots can’t always just do as they like. There are definite limits.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.