- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 9 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Under the Act, an adjudicator's order is required to enter a unit unless it is an emergency situation. We are trying to do a complete audit of the building to fix leaks etc. Often the problem is above the unit experiencing the leak.
Even though we have someone who is prepared to take keys to let the plumber in, about a third of residents do not comply. This results in having to call the tradesman back numerous times, making the exercise frustrating, expensive and time-consuming.
How do others cope with this without invoking the emergency power of access – or should we do this?
Thanks in advance
-
Replies
-
We had a situation where owners were responsible for regular maintenance issues where they needed to obtain a report and send the report back to the SM. Each year they were reminded to get this done. And each year the SM had to send out another, and another, and another reminder.
SM told the OC they were not happy sending out these reminders, to the same owners, over and over, year after year. So they told all owners that they will send out a reminder and if they did not comply with the maintenance checks, they would be charged $50 for a further reminder.
We have also had instances of group inspections where the owners were told that should they not allow the inspection to be carried out on that day, then they would be charged for the full cost of a follow up inspection.
This seems to have worked. People only need to be charged extra once to be more responsive in the future.
When it hits them in the hip pocket, they will usually respond/comply!
It’s a bit of a grey area but if it’s an ‘administration charge’ rather than a fine then many believe this is legitimate, especially if it’s backed up by a by-law.
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.
No its not a fine it is an admin charge for the extra work the SM has to do in continually sending out reminder notices. They do the first one for free. And if their is a group inspection organised and an owner does not allow entry, why shouldn't they pay for their own rescheduled inspection. Many tradespeople do charge for “inspections”.
We had one owner who, after complaining about an issue (waiting until the AGM to complain) the EC organised someone to come out, do an inspection and a report. The owner declined to open the door on the arranged day saying “I'm too tired today!”. They should pay for an additional inspection themselves! If adequate time is given for inspections and the owner has not indicated that this day is not suitable, then why should other owners have to “pay” for another inspection, and another in some cases.
I do believe that adequate notice needs to be given for inspections. Many residents do not like leaving keys with someone and may not have a close family member or friend to come over, especially at late notice. So I think that two dates should be given (perhaps one weekday and one weekend?), therefore two inspections arranged and at least a couple of weeks notice. Sometimes it is just a matter of giving people enough time and options to arrange their lives to be there.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.