- This topic has 9 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Im new here and would appreciate some advice. Im a member on the E.C. There have been ongoing grievances in complex re parking on common property. Recently because of some inconsiderate tenants the situation escalated again and I received complaints that the Cttee should really sort this out.. Some E.C. members are not interested, but after discussion we had a majority to proceed to sort the parking by-law. I spoke to the Strata Manager for some assistance. I felt he was continually throwing hurdles at me with his responses that it has been an ongoing problem and there was an implied attitude that the complainers were the problem. After persisting I was told by him that he had never issued Notices to Comply despite ongoing complaints and that we must provide names photos times etc. He said he did not have a current register of tenants.
I suggested he update his register, and that we wanted to put forward a motion for a resolution that where any occupier consistently ignores a polite letter to observe the by-laws that Notices to Comply will be issued to signal we are serious to ensure harmony within the complex. I asked him for a “general type” motion that can be used for any and all breaches of parking by-law.. that its not just one resident but on occasion several. I asked for a general approach not a target towards any one individual in the motion to be put.
result: he has sent out to all Owners as required by law, a motion for resolution to issue Notice to Comply re parking on common property to a “named” individual.. I feel that this could have been handled better and more diplomatically and i feel that because of his initial reluctance to assist he has made me part of the problem instead of part of the solution. E.C. members have to now vote on a paper meeting .. I have a conflict with voting this way towards one individual.. Also I feel he has done this to ensure repeated costs each time it may be necessary. Im really annoyed and feel this agent has deliberately handled it badly …
Concerns against parking on common property are: the block is on a steep incline. All units have a garage. parking outside garages and anywhere within complex is on an incline and presents a potential risk of a vehicle running away again. .. there has been one serious incident where a collission occured when an illegally parked vehicle's brakes failed. We have several children in the block as well as several elderly residents.
grateful for any feedback.. thank you
-
Replies
-
macpost – your Strata Manager has certainly made things difficult, especially as most Strata Management Agency Agreements delegate the responsibility for issuing Notices to Comply (NTC) to the Strata Manager (SM).
So there may have been no need for an Executive Committee Meeting, or even if there is no delegation of that authority to the SM, the Agenda need only have been sent to Executive Committee Members, with a copy posted on the Owners Corporation's Notice Board for all and sundry!
Nonetheless, a way forward would be to first check the delegations under the terms of that Strata Management Agency Agreement, and if the issue of a NTC is delegated, then cancel the Executive Committee Meeting (ECM) and ask your SM to issue the NTC.
If there is no delegation, then it's difficult for anything other than a specifically worded Motion at an ECM to authorise the issue of a specifically worded NTC.
The Meeting could resolve to amend the Motion by substituting the reference to a “named individual” with a reference to “the Occupant of Lot #” ; that's quite acceptable so long as the intent of the original Motion is not altered, and the Minutes of the Meeting record the fact that the Motion was amended.
Your Owners Corporation may need to review / amend the delegations of its Strata Manager at the next General Meeting, and you will need a Motion on the Agenda to achieve that.
Hearings are underway right now about revamping the CTTT (and other tribunals) HERE and into bringing strata law up to speed HERE. Chip in with your suggestions while you have the chance.
Meanwhile, your EC should be sending a polite notice out to all residents telling them that you have issued an Notice To Comply to one resident about parking on Common Property and others will follow if abuses continue. If the NTC is ignored it could lead to heavy fines and these notices apply to tenants as well as owners. That should save you the hassle of having to have a meeting every time another opportunist rogue parker notices that the space is suddenly free.
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.
Hi Jimmy
I rent a car space close to where I work. There have been notices put up recently regarding the use of visitor car parking spaces (an issue it seems many of us have to try and deal with), quoting that a recent decision at the CTTT ordered costs of $1800.00 against the offending car parker. I've had a look on austlii but cannot seem to locate this. Do you happen to know if it is true, and if so, could you point me to it? I would really like to be able to include some actual decisions where costs are incurred by offenders in a letter from the OC to owners, in an attempt to try and get some action from those (mostly owners and EC members) who continually abuse the visitor spaces. Of course we will include the intention to issue the Notice to Comply, as well as our intention to proceed to the CTT if these are ignored. It would, however, add some weight if we could include some examples of what the financial consequences may be. Or, am I dreaming……..?
Given that the CTTT can only award costs in the case of mischievous or vexatious applications – and even then are reluctant to do so – I find it unlikely that such an event ever occurred. However, if a matter went to the CTTT and was then appealed at a proper court – like District or Supreme – costs may have been awarded.
I reckon you’ve got a bit of creative signage going on there. The idea is probably more to deter rogue parkers than inform them of what the real penalties might be. And hey, you can’t be fined for putting up an inaccurate sign.
My personal favourite is “Warning – cars parked illegally here have been vandalised” although ‘Polite Notice – No Parking’ is frequently misread, especially if the top bit of the t in polite is a bit indistinct.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.
What about the use of common property parking spaces by members of the general public, i.e. who are not residents, lot owners or their visitors, who persistenlty park in common property visitors’ spaces because it is convenient for them, e.g. they are close to public transport &/or their homes? It would appear that an OC has no powers whatsoever to take action against them or even to determine the registerde owner of n offending vehicle.
@Mike said:
What about the use of common property parking spaces by members of the general public, i.e. who are not residents, lot owners or their visitors …Three words, Mike: pop-up bollards. Give residents identical keys so that only their genuine visitors can access the spaces.
Either that or a sign saying “Warning: cars parked here without permission have been vandalised in the recent past. Park illegally at your own risk.”
Not sure if that’s strictly legal … but it’s fun.
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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.