- This topic has 5 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 7 years ago by .
-
Topic
-
We have not yet adopted the common property memorandum – small block 4 lots.
There doesn’t appear at first glance to be anything troublesome in the memorandum from either an OC or lot owners perspective. It does clear up nuisance claims on the OC – e.g. kitchen plumbing but this is not an issue for us to date.
However, devil is in the detail, does anyone have any tips or experiences?
-
Replies
-
The “Who’s responsible” memorandum has come up fairly often in this forum (but I don’t recall many if any problems).
But here’s a way to do a quick check for previous mentions of this and any other specific issues.
1. Scroll to the top and type “Who’s responsible” in the search box.
2. Click on “advanced search”
3. Check the box marked “All forums”
4. Check the box marked “Match phrase”
5. Click on search.
That will take you to a list of every topic in which that phrase has been used.
If you don’t do the advanced search routine, the search will only be in the forum you are in and it will list every post that has either of the words “who’s” or “responsible” in them, resulting in too many irrelevant posts from too narrow a search.
Obviously you can use this for any word or phrase but try to be specific so as to filter out irrelevant results. Searching for the word “problem” will give you half of the entire 20,000 posts in the forum.
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 Sydprop
We have a motion on our agenda to adopt the common property memorandum. As you say, it does clear up a lot of issues – such as pipes and taps.
In our case, the only change that will affect current practice is the ‘intercom handset’ which is deemed the responsibility of lot owners.
We recently passed two special bylaws with regard to aircons & hot water services on common property.
In reading the Common Property Memorandum, I see it lists both of these as the responsibility of the owners.
Am I right in thinking if we had merely adopted the Common Property memorandum, we wouldn’t have had to have the two by-laws and saved money?
I know the two by-laws we passed have a great specificity but i am inclined to think the memorandum would have sufficed.
david2708,
I am not a lawyer and maybe someone will need to correct me but, as far as I understand, the memorandum is only about the reponsibility for maintaining things that already exist.
Special by-laws cover more than the future responsibilities to maintain the alteration/addition that they refer to. They also cover things like the standard of work, who can carry out the work, the specifics of the work (eg.location, appearance, materials.), the impact on the strata scheme over the time of installation, and the need to have any mess created made good.
Even where you have a blanket special by-law, I assume you still need to have the specifics of each case passed by a vote. For your example of a hot water system on common property, your fellow owners would still want the chance to vote on where you put it, what it will look like, how you get it installed, and the need to have it installed by a professional. The memorandum has nothing to do with these details.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.