- This topic has 2 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 12 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
In my complex, there is one owner who continually complains about the Strata Managers, extended times to have repairs done etc. All efforts are made by the EC to communicate immediately with our Strata Managers, who are very responsive to our requests for repairs, quotes etc. Earlier this year, this owner informed the Strata Managers that there was a long-standing issue with a blocked toilet in his townhouse (1st notification). The Strata Managers worked to arrange tradespeople to attend to rectify the plumbing issue ASAP. In short, the tradespeople were refused entry, with the owners saying they now didn’t want to bother having the problem fixed. The EC asked for a letter to be drawn up, outlining that as the owners had refused access to 2 plumbers, that a cap of costs amounting to the original quote of $5K would be placed on any future repairs, in the event that refusal to complete the work resulted in more major (and expensive) plumbing costs at at later stage. Adequate time for reply was allowed, however the owners never did agree to have their toilet fixed (??). Of course, 6 months later, there are now major plumbing issues in the building, affecting 3 townhouses, with the above owners also having more issues.
Can the EC enforce the conditions in the letter regarding capping costs, given that more than reasonable attempts were made in the first place to fix this issue, and it seems from today’s reports that refusing this initial work has resulted in much more extensive emergency plumbing work to be required, and had possibly affected the other units on the same line?
-
Replies
-
That's a difficult one given the prescribed obligations of an Owners Corporation (O/C) to maintain its Common Property, but in this case it appears to me that as your O/C did attempt to make the repairs, and those attempts were frustrated by the Proprietors, your E.C's letter regarding the capping of costs should be enforceable.
I say “should be” because IF the matter was taken to the Consumer Trade & Tenancy Tribunal (CTTT), it may be claimed that your O/C could have used the Provisions of S65 1(a) of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act to enter the Lot and make the repairs.
One further point in your O/C's favour may be that IF the original blockage was between a Lot Owners' Fixture (e.g. a toilet suite) and the “gully trap” where the pipe meets the Common Property Sewer (i.e. one serving more than one Lot) and the cause of the blockage was not structural (i.e. a failure of the sewer), then the original repair would have been the Lot Owners' responsibility.
Good luck, and I for one would be interested to read about the outcome.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.