Buying a unit is different from buying a house.
The key difference is the ownership structure.
With a house, your lot is your lot and that’s it.
With a unit the lot itself is only a part of the overall value of the unit.
As important is the common property of the body corporate within which the lot is contained.
So .. what is common property?
Picture an apartment building.
That building will be made up of several apartments.
How do people get to and from their apartments? There must be some sort of access point; a foyer, stairs or a lift, some way for residents to get to and from their homes.
The stairs, the lift or other access points are vital to all the lots within the building, but who “owns” those areas?
Those areas are common property.
And a body corporate, or owners corporate as it’s sometimes called, is created expressly to hold and maintain the common property for the benefit of all the lot owners.
Examples of common property
Body corporates come in more shapes and sizes that just apartment buildings. The defining factor is shared ownership which can be accomplished over almost any sort of property.
And as body corporates come in many shapes and sizes, so too does common property.
The most common shared areas are:
- stairways, lifts and foyers
- basement car parking
- gardens
- pool areas
- gyms
- access roadways
- infrastructure such as power, sewerage and water
- joint walls (where half the wall is a lot and half is common property)
- roofs
The common property of each body corporate is very individual. In Queensland defining common property is assisted by what type of plan the body corporate is registered under; Building Format Plan or Standard Format Plan. Different rules of defining common property will apply depending on your plan.
Who is responsible for common property?
One of the biggest issues that arises in body corporates is defining what is common property and what is a Lot.
It’s a big deal because the body corporate (or all the lot owners combined) are responsible for common property and the lot owner is solely responsible for the lot.
It’s much easier to fund 1/10th or 1/20th or 1/200th of a large problem that to fund it solely yourself. Conversely it’s frustrating to pay 1/10th or 1/20th of the cost of a problem when that problem is manifesting itself in another lot.
Consequently arguments can and often do erupt.
To quantify what is common property for your scheme refer to your plan. If you have further questions discuss the matter with your Body Corporate Manager, the Committee, or the Office Commissioner Body Corporate.
Common Property and Exclusive Use
The common property is often defined as “everything not contained within a lot”. Sometimes though areas of the common property are allocated as exclusive use to a particular lot owner.
Exclusive use allocations must be recorded, either on the title itself or within the Community Management Statement. Once recorded that area becomes an extension of the lot it’s allocated too. Other lot owners may not use the exclusive use area.
In most cases the lot owner will be required to maintain the exclusive use area, although it’s important to note that the area does still remain common property. For instance, a penthouse lot owner may be granted exclusive use of the roof area, however, should a leak develop within the roof itself it would likely remain body corporate responsibility to repair (I say likely because every body corporate and circumstance is individual).
Why Common Property Is Important
Buying a unit is different to buying a house. Most units are part of body corporates and that comes with additional responsibilities and risks, not least of which is the communal nature of the investment and living conditions.
The common property is used as a vehicle to offset the risk and responsibility of the body corporate by providing additional value.
And that value can be significant.
Some examples of added value include:
- location eg beach side or city centre
- building security
- resort style pool areas
- tennis courts
- on-site management
Quite simply the building or complex and it’s facilities, it’s common property, forms a substantial part of the attraction and therefore the value of any given unit
Of course all these “extras” must be financed by the lot owners jointly so it’s a double edged sword.
It’s particularly important if the common property or body corporate has developed substantial and expensive problems that will need to be rectified at the cost of a lot owner.
Which is exactly why savvy investors obtain a pre-purchase strata report; to make sure they know what they’re buying into.
Unless stated otherwise all the information on this website relates to Queensland legislation.
Can a body corporate committee give and owner of an apartment the right to mount an air conditioning unit on the outside common property wall of that apartment, the apartment has a designated air conditioning room in the as built registered plan. The owner wishes to take the air conditioning unit outside and use the room as living/storage hence increasing his unit entitlement and enjoyment over others. Further all air con units have been allocated designated covered space in the scheme.
I would have thought common property cannot be given away in favour of an owner.
Hi Ivor
Unless its a restricted issue the committee may give permission for an owner to mount an air conditioner on a common property wall.
Of course as another owner you may object to the installation and lodge an objection through Office Commissioner Body Corporate. Be aware your objection must be reasonable to suceed.
If there are 2 stories on a small townhouse complex does the bottom level define the lot for both stories or are there 2 boundaries one for downstairs and one for upstairs if the upstairs is inside the lot as defined by the plan and the black lines. By inside I mean it is not as wide at the top level as the bottom level.
Hi Robyn
I’m not sure what you mean here.
Are the two stories within one lot? Then the boundary of the lot includes the top story as per the plan.
If there are two stories but upstairs is a separate lot then each lot has it’s own defined boundaries.
It doesn’t make any difference what the size of the upstairs and downstairs is: its the boundaries on the plan that make a difference. The only other thing that matters is where the boundaries of common property and lot are defined. If a BFP then in the middle of exterior doors, walls, ceiling and windows. If a SFP then by pegs in the ground.
Hi Lisa,
If there is a stair that only services one unit, is the maintenance of that stair the responsibility of the owner or the body corporate?
There is a small stair (only 6 or so risers) at our unit block that needs replacing, it only serves a small balcony that is within the boundary of an owners lot. Our title is defined by a building format plan.
The owner is trying to get the body corporate to pay for the replacement of the stair, but I believe it is the owner’s cost?
Hi Steph
You’re correct, infrastructure on common property that services only one lot is the responsibility of the benefiting lot owner.
When we talk about infrastructure we usually mean pipes, wiring, stormwater etc, but the Office Commissioner Body Corporate website notes
Thanks Lisa,
Just to make sure I understand… Would this mean if the stair is on common property but only serves the one unit, would the cost to repair/replace it be the responsibility of the lot owner or the body corporate?
The stair is just outside their lot boundary, connecting to a balcony that is within their lot. It only serves their unit (access to their back door).
Thanks in advance,
Steph
Hi Steph
Yes, that’s correct. Infrastructure on common property that serves only one lot is the responsibility of that lot owner.
If the stair is outside the boundary and on common property, then how can an owner be responsible? In an earlier example you advise that the roof on a penthouse is Body Corporate responsibility if leaking. Is it not arguable that the roof services the one lot and is outside the boundary of the lot, as are the stairs
Hi Ron
If the stairway is on the outside of the building, but only services the one lot it will be the responsibility of that lot owner. The guiding principal of body corporate legislation is that each owner pays their own way and the body corporate, or combined owners, are responsible for shared areas or matters that may impact more than one owner. That means if something can be defined as clearly being for one lot, that lot owner is responsible, even if the area is on common property.
The roof over a penthouse is a roof over the whole complex. You could abandon the penthouse to their fate but how then do you protect the floors below? Water always goes downward. The roof may be leaking but the evidence of said leak may not be in the penthouse; what then? The roof, though directly over the top floor, is protecting all the units.
Hi, I share a common driveway with only one other lot (in Victoria). We do not have a body corporate. I would like to pay for the sides of the drive way to be concreted so I can store a caravan there which will still give a 3m wide access path for vehicles to enter the property.
Do I need to gain the permission from the other owner first? And once the work is completed how do I go about ensuring that it is only for my use as I’m concerned that when the caravan is away my neighbour may park in or use the space leaving me nowhere to store the caravan.
Regards
Paul
Hi Paul
I don’t know about Victorian legislation. Here in Queensland you’d need to have the area allocated to the lot as exclusive use, assuming the land is common property. There might be a cost involved in that, sort of like buying the land. Alternatively it could be an improvement on common property for which the lot owner is responsible. Only by sorting the allocation can you make it truly yours to enforce freedom of parking.
In NSW you would need to make a by-law, though it achieves the same sort of thing. I’d consider talking to a Solicitor in Victoria and the other owner.
Hi Lisa,
I have a property in Gladstone. My lot has an old Queenslander on it and has road frontage. The previous owners have chopped the back yard off and built two townhouses at the rear. I have no need to access the common property. My driveway is at the front. The driveway to the two townhouses is at the side. There is a fence between my property and the side driveway. I’m tired of paying body corporate for something that I will never need to use. Is there a way out?
Megan
Hi Megan
Resolving this will depend on how your scheme was originally recorded. You could look at the possibility of having your lot excised from the body corporate and registered as it’s own lot. You will need to check that the block is big enough to be a lot in its own right. It might not be, which is why its part of a strata scheme.
Talk to a town planner or surveyor to proceed.
I live in an apartment with an Owners Corporation. The internal wall stair rail in my apartment has become detached – is it common property or am I responsible for repairing it?
Hi Anney
If its inside your apartment then it is your responsibility.
With the exception of the balustrade on an external balcony; except when the balcony overlooks exclusive use.
Honestly, I can’t think why people find this so challenging. Its so clear and simple. Oh, wait…
Hi Lisa, I was looking to buy a unit here in Victoria, which has residential strata insurance for common areas. I was advised not to go ahead with the purchase as it does not have active body corporate. What is difference between body corp and residential strata insurance? Thanks
Hi Sim
Insurance is … insurance. Here in QLD if buildings are joint in any way then they must have joint insurance. Presumably the same of something similar happens in Victoria.
If you have joint insurance then the premium will need to be paid by owners jointly. Who is responsible for collecting the money and how much do you collect? Where does it go? Who is responsible for negotiating and discussing with the Insurer or broker? Who follows up to make sure that claims etc are processed? This is the function of the body corporate. If no one is doing it then it makes things much harder for owners or, worse, things don’t get done, making the investment riskier.
I’d say that’s at the root of the advice not to buy.
Body Corporate in QLD are responsible for the ‘Building’ insurance? – there is a problem with my unit that seems to be with the footings and some shift in the building. The recommendation is for an engineer to look at this – will this inspection be the responsibility of the B/C or owner?
Hi Donna
It will depend whether the footings are common property or part of the lot.
If its part of the lot then its your responsibility.
If its common property the body corporate will be responsible.
Check out what sort of plan your scheme is registered under.
Maybe late to the party but buying my first unit and while carrying out the building inspection the inspector said I should apply for an exclusive right with the body corp if I’m going to reno the inside of the unit as the roof space above me is contained by a firewall – in other words there should be no reasonable objection to my acquiring it and building a ceiling stair into it for storage. I know roof windows from other blogs and websites (so glad I’ve found yours – reading the ebook tonight!) are generally approved without too much hassle long as they do not change the actual roof inclination. The conversation began because as a solar engineer I would like to install panels and batteries with a hybrid inverter in my roof space to power my unit (as well as installing an individual water meter – I am very environmentally conscious and find the roof space a waste in principle).
What would you propose I should do? Will there likely be costs involved? Any experiences or suggestions to share? Is renoing it expensive? Any leads or tips to look at (like articles or blog posts or episodes of shows and whatnot? Regulations etc…)? I am located in 4557. Thank you!
Hi Patrick
Exclusive rights is something they do in NSW. In QLD its going to come down to a question whether the area is common property or not and that will depend on the configuration of your scheme.
Either way you’re definitely going to need formal approval from the body corporate, both for the installation of the solar panels on the roof and the works to the interior of the lot.
As to transforming the void inside your lot: that’s a complicated question, and again, comes back to your lot configuration. If there’s a firewall then the area could be common property, or alternatively, there may be restrictions on what you can achieve without compromising fire safety. Some comprehensive discussions will be needed with the body corporate, and most likely, reports from professionals reassuring them that the renovation will not damage common property or compromise safety. This is normal for any renovation, but will be more crucial as you’re talking about the roof. Start the process by getting clear on whether the area is lot or common property and having plans for the renovation drawn up.
I have seen disputes on this matter. Sometimes, when roof voids are absorbed into lots, the body corporate may seek to amend contribution lot entitlements as a result of ‘increasing’ the size of the lot. The counter argument is of course you’re not increasing the lot so much as utilising it better.
This will be a complicated process Patrick and will require patience and negotiation with the committee. You’re discussing a complex change with, essentially lay people, and you will need to convince them it will work without problem.
I may have a leaking water pipe servicing my unit under the slab. It is not showing any visible signs on my property but some possible seepage to the terrace below on another units back yard. There is no damage just seepage. I have been told by the body corporate manager that it will be billed to me. The plumber may want to reroute the plumbing inside my unit – a very costly job even though the internal plumbing has no leaks. I feel this is an ifrastructure fault which should be dealt with by the body corporate insurance as my unit has no leaks.
Hi Jan
You’re always free to argue your point about responsibility, or even necessity, of works. You can object via Conciliation or Adjudication to any works being charged to you, though do please note that this may attract additional legal costs.
I would point out “I’m not affected” is not a valid defence. If the infrastructure that is leaking is pipes that service only your lot then you are responsible for rectifying the issue, regardless of whether the symptoms are apparent on your lot or not.
The big question is whether the infrastructure services only your lot. That the pipes travel through your lot is not conclusive proof they’re not carrying waste/water from/to other lots as well. You need to verify where the leak is and what the pipes are that are leaking. If they service more than one lot then they are common property and body corporate responsibility.
Thank you so much for your prompt reply Lisa. The fact that the leak may be deep under the slab was my moot point. Obviously a second plumbing opinion is needed and further investigation. Thanks again. What a wonderful site this is. Cheers Jan.
Can a new owner of a unit four on the block build a extra room a on common ground which has been done all the units are owned but all the areas behind them and driveway is common groundthe new owner has built a extra room on the common ground behind her unit how does affect the body corporation insurance she claims shes paying her own insurance we all pay to a body corporation insurance iam writting this for my neighbor whos 93yrs old so we can work out her insurance and to try and find out if she is still liable with anyone get injured in this room thats built on common ground
Hi Trudy
An owner may make an improvement on common property if the lot owners approve a resolution without dissent at a general meeting. Essentially the owners are allocating the area to that lot owner so it’s as if the land is being sold. Please note a resolution without dissent doesn’t mean everyone has to agree it means that no one owner votes no to the motion at the meeting.
Check minutes of meetings to see if the common property was allocated to the lot owner.
If it wasn’t then the owner must object to the lot owner taking it. Its common ground and they have no right to just take it. When objecting consider what outcome you’d like, such as return of the ground or approval given. Selling or giving away common property is one of the few areas where the body corporate may seek a financial restitution.
This is complex legal area and if you choose to pursue it might be worth seeing a lawyer. The place to start is to check if permission was granted. If not, talk to the other owners. Ask how they feel. Let the owner who’s done it know you disapprove. See what comes of it. From there seek Adjudication or legal advice.
Can a new owner of a unit four on the block build a extra room a on common ground which has been done all the units are owned but all the areas behind them and driveway is common groundthe new owner has built a extra room on the common ground behind her unit how does affect thcorporation insurance she claims shes paying her insurance we all pay to a body corporation insurance iam writting this for my neighbor whos 93yrs old so we can work out her insurance and to try and find out if she is still liable
Hi Trudy
An owner may make an improvement on common property if the lot owners approve a resolution without dissent at a general meeting. Essentially the owners are allocating the area to that lot owner so it’s as if the land is being sold. Please note a resolution without dissent doesn’t mean everyone has to agree it means that no one owner votes no to the motion at the meeting.
Check minutes of meetings to see if the common property was allocated to the lot owner.
If it wasn’t then the owner must object to the lot owner taking it. Its common ground and they have no right to just take it. When objecting consider what outcome you’d like, such as return of the ground or approval given. Selling or giving away common property is one of the few areas where the body corporate may seek a financial restitution.
This is complex legal area and if you choose to pursue it might be worth seeing a lawyer. The place to start is to check if permission was granted. If not, talk to the other owners. Ask how they feel. Let the owner who’s done it know you disapprove. See what comes of it. From there seek Adjudication or legal advice.
I have a unit in a townsville community. The unit has a veranda and a Balustrade boundary that separates my lot from common property. The common property outside the balustrade is about 300mm wide and forms a gutter which diverts water from the veranda to to side outflows diverting the wateraway from the front of the building. The body corporate accepts that damage to this common property (lifting tiles) is its responsibility but claims that these same tiles on common property are my responsibility. How can this be when the Body corporate is solely responsible for common property. There is no exclusive use or other limitation on the common property. The tiles on my lot and those on the common property are identical.
Hi
I’m not sure what you’re saying about the “same tiles on common property”. It sounds like they’re agreed to fix infrastructure that serves more than one property, the external drain, but leaving the tiles that service your lot to you. I agree with that: tiles on a lot owner’s balcony are lot owner responsibility.
I may have the wrong end of the stick there. Let me know.
The lot’s veranda has a balustrade boundary, Common property about 300mm wide extends from this boundary to the edge of the building and serves as a drain. The tiles on the lot are identical to those extending beyond the boundary into the common property. I would have thought that the common property beyond the balustrade was the responsibility of the body corporate. regardless.
Thank you for the reply
Hi
We are the caretakers of a complex and one lot owner has blocked off the stairwell inside his townhouse to the lower level and is renting it out. He has not obtained any approval from the committee for this or other extensive renovations including replacing the blinds visible from common property with shutters. He maintained he doesn’t need consent as he is the original owner. However the developer is listed as the original owner on the by laws. Now he is refusing access to other owners exclusive use area via common stairs outside his townhouse and has padlocked gates to his exclusive use area which enable lot owners to access their backyards. He is angry that other lot owners who are landscaping are going through. Is this a breach of any regulations or is he entitled to do this.
Hi Richard and Susan
Its immaterial whether this man is an original owner or not. The original Owner has obligations to the body corporate at time of registration – documentation and building warranties. There is never a right of special treatment. The by-laws apply to all owners equally regardless when they bought into the scheme, or if the by-laws change.
Refer to your by-laws. Presumably you have a by-law regarding appearance. Send the lot owner a letter regarding the blinds. He must either apply for the change, and be approved by committee, or change back. If he does not take action the committee must engage the dispute resolution process set out in the legislation – breach notice followed by Adjudication.
If the stairs are common he is not able to block access. Again follow the dispute resolution process. No owner, or committee for that matter, is able to restrict usage of common areas. They are common areas.
Access through exclusive use areas is more problematic, is that’s whats happening: owners are travelling through his area to reach theirs. You’ll need to review the wording of the exclusive use allocations. If this is the case the committee may need some legal advice about how to proceed.
Thank you.
Yes owner she do need to travel through his exclusive use area to access the gate through to several back yards
I will have a look at the allocations as suggested
Unfortunately this is not the only owner occupier to put in different window coverings and as most of them are on the committee I do not think any further action will be taken.
Thanks again for your prompt reply Regards Richard and Susan
Hi,
I have a town house with exclusive use of a small garden. I wish to put in a small window to this garden area. It will match other small windows at the complex but will be lower than my neighbour’s because his floor is higher. Is this a significant change (plan of subdivision does have outside of walls as common property)?. Do I need OC approval and if they don’t approve is there an avenue to dispute the outcome (as others have made changes to balconies etc in their garden areas.
Thanks for any advice
Hi Penny
You need to seek legal advice for this question. If you’re in NSW you’ll need to get a by-law for the change, which will mean approval from the OC. The matter is best handled professionally.
Hi… I’m in ACT and being told the space underneath a common space stairway can’t be used for common storage (a shared bike rack). They are stating ‘safety regulations’. Any clues on what I am looking for to confirm or discuss this? Only things I can think of would be maintaining a walkway width for fire/safey. But can’t think of anything else that would prevent it.
Hi Jason
Areas do need to be kept uncluttered to prevent fires, however, a bike rack with bikes in it isn’t exactly clutter, or flammable for that matter. If it would impede a fire exit or any walkway for that matter, then I could see the safety implications. If there was clutter of any sort.
The best way to find out what they were thinking is to ask them.
Hi Lisa
We have 10 units in our block. There is side access along both sides of the building however one side is now “exclusive use”. My question is in relation to sliding glass doors and screen doors that open from two of their bedrooms and lead out onto the side area that is “exclusive use”. My question relates to locks on the glass doors and screen doors which corroded and recently required replacing. Is this cost the owners or is the body corporate responsible? (All other sliding doors lead to private balconies so understand individual unit owners responsibility) To complicate matters the lot owner is also the chairman and since the dollar value was within his authority no other approvals were obtained. The invoice was simply presented to the management company and paid. Is there also not some sort of conflict of interest or additional step that should apply when one person is able receive payment or reimburse themselves especially where there own unit is involved? Thanks
Hi Rodney
If the sliding door opens onto an exclusive use area it will be that lot owner’s responsibility to maintain.
A matter is a conflict of interest if the committee members interest in the matter would conflict with the performance of their duties in considering it. Its highly subjective. As Hynes Legal put it, “its a question of fact and degree”. Essentially committee members are almost always going to benefit from decisions they make. So do other owners though. The whole point of the committee is to benefit all owners by maintaining the scheme.
Were other door locks replaced at body corporate cost? Was it only the Chairperson? It seems more of an oversight than a conflict. I think it would be counterproductive to accuse the Chair of anything untoward and simply focus on reimbursement of an error.
Thanks Lisa.
No, All other sliding doors in the building open onto private balconies.
Hi Lisa,
I am in a development that is a mix of commercial and residential where exclusive use has been allocated for carparks.
One of the car parks was required under the Development Permit to be allocated as residential visitor parking.
The developer has registered the CMS and allocated this car park as exclusive use to a commercial lot owner. The CMS showing this allocation was endorsed by Council.
Council has now issued a breach notice to the Body Corporate to rectify this breach of the Development Permit and allocate the car park as residential visitor parking.
The commercial lot owner who has been allocated exclusive use refuses to approve the change required to comply with requirements of the breach notice.
The costs and liabilities associated with rectifying this problem currently rest with the Body Corporate.
What are the Body Corporate’s rights to hold the Council responsible for endorsing a CMS in conflict with its their Development Permit and the Developer responsible for contracting with a lot holder to provide and exclusive use car park to a lot holder in conflict with the Development Permit without getting into costly legal action?
Hi Francis
I’m not aware of any requirement for the Council to sign off on a CMS. It really doesn’t have anything to do with them.
The Department of Natural Resources and Mines is our titles office where documents relating to property are registered. They don’t have any requirement to check the document either.
Essentially the body corporate makes its own decisions and records the CMS, which DERM will do if it meets their criteria. That criteria doesn’t include most content. They’re not checking to see if its legal re the BCCM Act or Development Application.
The Developer is the one who’s made the mistake. Unfortunately the Developer was most likely made the error when they were the original owner, meaning they acted as the body corporate, as they were able to do at that time. That’s the same as saying the body corporate made the error.
Rectifying the issue will require a motion by resolution without dissent at general meeting. I assume you’ve already done that, as the current owner has not agreed. The next step will be to seek Adjudication that the dissent to the motion was unreasonable given the circumstances. An Adjudicator can order the motion be passed, should they agree it should be done.
Unfortunately I cannot think of any way to resolve this that won’t result in legal action.
Hi Lisa,
We live in a block of 6 units on the Gokd Coast. We are the only owners living here – the rest are tenants. My husband is the BC Chairman and I organise the building maintenance but we are new to this.
When we moved in, there was an existing satellite dish on the roof of our unit, with cable feeding to the unit below.
Yesterday we returned home from work to find a cable company technician installing a second dish to the side wall of the unit block directly adjacent to our balcony and for the use of the unit below us.
When we questioned the technician he advised the tenant had said she had permission. We confronted the tenant and she insisted she’s always had approval for a satellite dish. When we advised the common property side wall was not the appropriate place, we were told it wasn’t her problem.
We have spoken to the BC Treasurer who has owned a unit here since it was built over 40 years ago and sent photos of the second dish. He has no recollection of any approval at all for any dish and is equally as unhappy with the installation on a common wall.
We are wanting to approach the owner first to try and settle this, but are unsure of what ‘demands’ we can make to ensure the new dish is removed quickly and the wall repaired. We know we have to troll back through the BC records to check on the original approval for the dish that is still up on the roof, and providing we find that approval, what would be the appropriate ‘wording’ for us to approach the owner with to ensure the tenant gets the second dish removed quickly and has the wall repaired. If the original approval is there, we feel it’s appropruate for us to insist to the owner that if the tenant wants a replacement dish for the original one on the roof, we hen they need to arrange the removal of the original one, provide sufficient evidence that any screw holes in the roof are repaired to prevent leaking then have the replacement dish removed from the wall and relocated up the roof, ensuring the wall is also repaired.
We eeel this is a reasonable request, but we’re just unsure of the best wording to approach the owner.
Hi Sally
I suggest dealing with the satellite on the roof and the one on the side of the building as two individual items.
Check your by-laws to see what rules you have. In most cases the tenant may not install a satellite dish on the side of the building without written permission of the committee explicitly approving where the satellite can be installed.
If you agree there is a breach get the committee to vote on issuing a Continuing Contravention Notice to the owner/tenant. The committee must resolve to issue the Notice first. A Vote Outside Committee is sufficient.
The Continuing Contravention Notice is a form that sets out what information you must give the owner. Allow a specific time frame within which the dish is to be removed and wall repaired or proof that written approval of the committee be provided. If the tenant has permission to install, and it wasn’t provided current committee, they should be able to produce when requested.
This is the start of the dispute resolution process. From there Adjudication may be sought if action is not taken. To be able to continue with the process you must get the Notice correct.
If written approval of the committee was provided things could get a bit messy. I’m not sure how retroactive these things are. Largely I think it will depend on by-laws and the permission granted. Cross that bridge if the tenant manages to produce written approval.
Hi Lisa,
Thank you for providing such an awesome resource for everyone, you’re awesome!
I have a question about attempted thefts from common property which is exclusive use such as a dedicated car park space .
If there has been multiple attempted thefts of a secured bicycle and the owner/tenant wishes to install a small bicycle storage shed, does Body corporate have grounds to block the installation or force the owner/tenant to go through an application process for approval and purchase of a specific brand/type of shed?
Kind regards,
Jasper
Hi Jasper
One of the key strengths of a body corporate is its appearance. They should present in a uniform and attractive way. To facilitate that the by-laws of the scheme give control of the exterior appearance to the committee who’re then charged with maintaining said appearance. Most by-laws specifically forbid any changes to the exterior or the interior that might be seen from the exterior. So you can’t hang washing on the balcony, or have bright green curtains.
Its the same in the car park, which, although each space is allocated as exclusive use to lots, is still common property. The allocation is made subject to certain conditions and one of them will be that items may not be put in the car space. That means to install a shed you will need to go through an application process. This is necessary as if the approval is granted it is granted with conditions. If not specified otherwise the conditions will be binding on any subsequent owners/residents, hence any deviation from the normal by-laws needs to be recorded.
The two issues combine, appearance and approvals, in restrictions on the brand / type of shed. Its to promote uniformity and keep things legal. The approval should be specific. You’re allowed to install this type of shed, in this colour and size, and if only for you, until you move out.
Thank you so much Lisa, I truly appreciate the clarification!
Hi Lisa
I have recently purchased a unit in a subdivision of 5. We each have seperate Lots and our own land and the only shared property is a driveway between two of the units and the letter box out front. We are however paying hefty body corporate fees to a manager every three months. Can we organise our own body corporate to cover insurance of our driveway including public liability? I am paying almost $1000 a year to the current bc manager for what feels like nothing much in return.
Thanks
Rebecca
Hi Rebecca
Your scheme can absolutely self-manage. Usually if you self-manage someone, or rather the committee, needs to take point. What I mean is that someone must be responsible for issuing levies, preparing agendas, minuting meetings and so on. It sounds hard, and it can be demanding, but its not rocket science and many owners happily manage their own affairs and save a bomb along the way.
Check when your current agreement expires as a first step. Then you’ll need to agree as owners to self-manage. You don’t need to appoint yourselves, effectively by joining the committee you’re appointing yourselves, but its best if all owners agree or it can get messy.
In common area, who can open or close the window in stair well.
Hi Lyn
The window is common property therefore the committee presumably have control. If opening the window is in dispute that doesn’t necessarily mean that the committee is being reasonable.
In the common area who has rights to the stairwell window on their floor?
Hi Lyn
The stairwell window is part of common property therefore body corporate responsibility.
Hi Lisa, we have an apartment on 4th floor which is the top floor. The owner below ours had moisture and water leak coming into her apartment. She took us to vcat for damages claim but VCAT did that it was inconclusive that it was from our balcony. She had to get an independent assessment and report. The day the company came to test the balcony, they ran water for an hour and nothing leak through but when spray on side of balcony outside glass balustrade, there is a crack through the render. Is this consider common area and Strata insurance body corporate has to pay for damages? Thanks
Hi Linh
I’m not sure of the legislation in Victoria. Ask your question on the Lookupstrata.com.au website or Flat Chat Forum.
Here in Queensland if the balcony is leaking to the one below then it is likely to be due to waterproof membrane issues which is body corporate responsibility to repair. The same with the balustrade and its fixings and the render on the outside of the building.
Hi Lisa, thanks for your reply. I will look it up.
Hi Lisa, in apartment blocks if an owner has a garden on their TITLE and without access to other owners does the body Corp need to pay for maintaining the garden? Apartment block is in NSW?. Thanks.
Hi John
Here in QLD the garden would be either part of a lot or allocated as exclusive use. In both cases the lot owner is responsible for maintenance of the garden. Basically, if its yours you need to maintain it, and to the same standard as the rest of the scheme.
Rules may be different in NSW. Check out the Flat-Chat Forum or LookupStrata to see if they have any information targeted to your specific legislation.
Hello, is a neighbour allowed to walk right up to my townhouse unit garage door, and then take systematic photos of my car parked there, taking detailed photos of my car’s exterior and interior? Is this classed as trespassing? His actions intimidated and harassed me . I told him several times to get away from my vehicle and he persisted. He was angry that my car was parked there, after he and his flatmates have repeatedly parked cars outside their unit day and night for months. What right did he have to circle my car and menace me like that?
Hi Susan
I would say that the behaviour was intended to intimidate and harass you. It seems to have worked quite well.
This is not a body corporate issue. Behaviour of people is regulated by the Police.
Good Morning,
The Block of units I live in has developed a severe water hammering issue. Body Corp is failing to deal with the issue. How should I proceed?
Hi Mick
The issue may relate to body corporate or it may be a lot owner who is responsible. Find out where the noise is coming from to determine who is responsible.
Start by submitting a complaint to committee. If you have, and they’ve done nothing, submit another. If no action is received look into making a Conciliation application via Office Commissioner Body Corporate. You must have attempted to self-resolve first, which is why the complaints. If you cannot negotiate a solution with committee then you can escalate to seeking an order the body corporate take action.
But first you must determine that its a body corporate issue to deal with.
Hi Lisa
I am in the NT. There are 6 units in our complex with a penthouse on top. A pole on the balcony of the penthouse, used to secure a shade for solely their use, has caused a crack in the concrete and water has damaged the ceiling in the unit below. The unit block is all concrete. The floor area of the penthouse is therefore the roof for units below. A contractor has said he can inject a substance into the crack in the ceiling of the effected unit repair the gyprock ceiling and repaint. Who is responsible for repairs? Thank you and what fabulous service you provide.
Hi Jo
This is a difficult question. Structures on the roof of buildings that benefit one lot create issues around who is responsible.
In the first instance, in QLD at least, the body corporate is responsible for maintaining the waterproof membranes between floors. However, because the shade sail has been installed for use of one lot, causing damage to roofing system then you can certainly argue the repair would not need to be done without the actions of the penthouse owner, therefore they should be responsible.
That said, there are a lot of things not referenced here: who actually put the shade sail up? Did the body corporate approve? Was it done on construction? How long has the shade sail been up and was it definitively responsible for the issue?
If you were in QLD I would refer you to conciliation or Adjudication. This is a complex issue to solve. The body corporate should seek advice from a strata lawyer.
Hi Lisa,
We bought our unit a year ago and put interior blinds on top window above our bed as it gets very hot, the building is charcoal and white our blinds are blockout white the same as exterior walls. The chairperson now after a year has told us they have to be taken down and charcoal ones put up. We are 1 of 2 units whose bedroom window faces the street on the 4th floor. Our neighbour decided on charcoal but had hers installed a few months after ours. Can you tell me where we stand please.
Regards Rosanne
Hi Rosanne
Did you seek permission to change your blinds? If you didn’t, then its likely the second person who applied for blinds has managed to “set the standard”.
You’ll now need to do what you can to sort this out. I’d start by applying for permission for your current blinds. If they say no, then talk to the Office Commissioner Body Corporate about chances of succeeding in a bid that this is unreasonable. If they say maybe, you can fight the action. Weight up how costly all would be rather than simply changing to charcoal.
If you did get permission, this is all moot. You’re good as you are.
Hi Lisa,
I am in Victoria. There are 7 units in our complex. At the front of the property, there is a building that houses 4 units. In the rear, there are 3 stand alone townhouses that have no connecting walls to the front building. There has been talk about removing a few trees on the property which are causing some issues with the structure of the front building which has caused cracks and the roof needs repairing. In regards to the removal of the trees, are they considered as common property when the trees are located in a fenced off area around the front building and not in the “common space?” In regards to covering the cost of the repairs and removal of trees to the front building, do all 7 units have to contribute to the cost or will the cost fall upon only the 4 units of the front building? What leg do the 3 townhouses have to stand on in regards to refusing to contribute to the cost of repairs?
Thank you
Hi Lida
I am based in QLD ad cannot tell you much about Victorian legislation. Here in QLD the common property for both buildings is joint common property and all the owners are responsible for joint issues.
There may be different rules in Victoria. Try posing your question on the Flat Chat Forum. Someone there may be able to help with local information.
Hi Lisa
We are in a stand alone unit in a block of 5 units (NSW). Our unit faces the main road and we have a double garage attached to unit facing road with concreted double driveway leading up to garage doors. Is that considered common ground? We also have a small unfenced front yard, is that classified common ground? Regards
Hi Kim
To find the boundaries of the common property and your lot you need to refer to the SP for your Owners Corporation. There are differences in NSW to QLD legislation as well.
I suggest you discuss with your Strata Manager. In the first instance ask about the garage and driveway. Possibly one is common property (driveway) and the other part of the lot, but again, I’m just guessing without seeing the plan.
To get specific NSW advice check out the Flat Chat Forum.
Hi! We are selling our townhouse (one of two) on the property. We are now being told most of OUR land is common property. we have maintained, fenced and got quotes on a garage/shed and a pool on this land ALL council approved but now selling to move on to be told we don’t own it! it is under body corp. just the two of us! so no help. We have owned this property for 15yrs. and when brought assumed that it was ours!
How do we find out before we sell and does it make a difference???
Thanks in advance Karen
Hi Karen
To find out if an area is common property or part of the lot refer to the survey plan for the lots. What you’re talking about suggests that the area is common property, likely allocated to the lot as exclusive use. Have a read of this article for more detail.
You might also need a copy of the by-laws for the scheme, which should be contained in the scheme’s Community Management Statement.
If the area is common property then to make all the changes above board you can seek permission from the other owner. Something in writing, an email is fine, to say they agree with you doing whatever is sufficient as approval for you and any future owners.
Hi Lisa
I am an owner of one half of a duplex under a Two Lot Scheme in Qld. The next door neighbour has advised that there was a water leak detected underneath the driveway on their side which the plumber fixed, but they are wanting to know if costs that involve the common driveway are shared between the two units. Would it be right in thinking that the water pipe would need to be shared by both of the units for it the cost of repairs to be shared?
Hi Kristene
That’s correct. If the pipe only services that one lot then it is that lot owner’s responsibility, despite the leak actually being on common property.
Hi Lisa,
I’m a homeowner in a block of 9 units in QLD.
There has been some work done on our rooftop/penthouse which is owned by unit 7 (which is the ceiling of unit 7, 8 & 9 units) as there has been some leaks from when the water feature that was erected on the rooftop/ penthouse by the previous owner of unit 7 has caused the ceiling of one of the units to collapse. I was able to obtain a copy of the latest by law and there was no mention of the water feature nor of the pergola and gym that now exists on the rooftop/penthouse
The waterproofing has now been done and all homeowners had to pay an extra levy for the works (including replacement of rooftop/ penthouse tiles) as it was an urgent matter but now a few of the homeowners are questioning whether it was the rooftop’s owner’s (unit 7) responsibility to fix the waterproofing as they have taken over property and they have also signed the building inspection check which makes them responsible for anything that shows after the sale has been done.
Are we correct to assume that the job should have been the owner of Unit 7’s responsibility?
Hi May
This is a complex situation and you need to obtain legal advice from an experienced strata lawyer. Refer to lookupstrata.com.au and the smartstrata.com.au websites for directories.
It is possible the leak was caused by something the lot owner did, eg the fountain, making the rectification of the issues their responsibility. But there are a lot of possible options here. And a lot of possible causes. Plus there’s the issue of what do you do now that the body corporate has undertaken the works at owner’s expense. Is it possible/worth seeking recompense from the lot owner? Lots of questions and maybe’s.
This is not a common situation so the answers are going to require some research and legal advice.
Hi,
I have 5 Alexandra Palms overhanging my balcony which is the entrance to my apartment. They are becoming very tall and the fallout, not only to my balcony but surrounds is getting rediculous. I have asked the Body Corporate to have the fronds and we’d pods removed before they fall, as I had one nearly hit me on my balcony, however, the Chairman has said that that would be using funds for a singular unit owner, and that I would have to pay the gardener to remove them, and even then he would hav to come onto my balcony and would not be covered by insurance. Surely trees that are on common property should be the responsibility of the strata not mine personally, otherwise what am I paying strata fees for?
Hi Michelle
You’re quite right, the trees on common property are body corporate responsibility, not yours personally. I’m not comfortable with the Chairpersons response either. There are specialist places that trim trees, it doesn’t need to be completed by the gardener.
Perhaps you could get a quote from an arborist or like to have the trees cleaned up. They might also be able to advise whether the safety issue is important. Once you have a quote submit, in writing a request to the committee to have the body corporate attend to the trees.
If the committee votes NO then you can seek Adjudication, if you believe, and the advice is, that the current situation is unsafe.
Hi,
I working out the capital gains tax on my double storey in Sydney which is now convered to downstairs living my ourselves; and the top has been converted into 2 single bedroom units. Is the original cost of acquisition/purchase INCLUDING THE LAND allocatable to the units above on area occupied basis OR can the original purchase including land be allocated entire to the home downstairs?
Leo
Hi Leo
You need to contact an Accountant with this question. Its not my area of expertise.
Hello Lisa
We own a unit in a block of six on the Gold Coast. All the owners have agreed to have balconies built across the front of our building.
Due to the shape of the building, the balconies on the Northern side will be 14 square metres bigger than the balconies on the Southern side. The additional 14sq metres encroaches on common land. The question we have is should the owners of the Southern balconies be compensated for the loss of the 14 square metres of common land?
I look forward to your reply.
Many thanks
Cyndie & Ross
Hi Cyndie
You need to speak to a Strata Solicitor about this. There are several ways you can do this. You can excise and sell the common property to the lot owners. Essentially they buy the land. The money would go into the body corporate funds. Its not owned by the other owners, its common property and owned by all owners equally. Doing it this way is going to have some serious costs associated as there’d be title changes, new plans etc.
Equally you could grant an improvement on common property for which those owners are liable. This is likely the cheapest option, but no compensation. You could create an exclusive use area in consideration of funds. Again a more costly process because of the need for plans.
So upshot, yes the body corporate can be recompensed, but not the other owners.
We are five townhouses in Queensland , we are standard module and building format plan. We have a problem on our common property all our exterior wall cladding is damaged in parts. We will all have to pay towards this from our own money as we have not enough in Sinking Fund. Three of us can pay from our own money – two others need to borrow. The Management can get us a loan through a Broker on ten year loan at 8.65% but we cannot pay this off before 10years. We three are told we cannot pay our own money to pay for our equal share in the cost. As we three do not want to borrow the money. It seems we have no choice but to borrow from what our Management Company say. I feel and the other lady as we are elderly – there must be another way around this. We want to pay our share but not by a loan . We would be grateful Lisa for your comments. With Thanks for your advice Doris Bramwell
Hi Doris
To enter into a strata loan the body corporate will need to pass a resolution at general meeting. If the majority pass the resolution then unfortunately you will not have a choice. I’m sorry but that’s how bodies corporate work: majority rules.
Do vote NO at the general meeting. Maybe the NO’s will carry the day.
If that happens I would take the money you earmarked for the special levy and quarantine it. Use it to pay your scaled up contributions.
Hi Lisa , There are just 5 townhouses and three of us so far want to pay for our part. The other two members we don’t have feed back from them, they won’t comment on this. We just understood that we all had to be in agreement or go with this loan. However, we don’t know how the others or other person will pay etc. I guess they can get the brokers loan through our management, for themselves. With thanks Doris.
I purchased a property in NSW in 2015. There is 2 units on the land and the common area was the driveway. Both property had either street or Lane Way access. I obtained DA and put in parking on the rear property (Lane Way) and then I made changes to the BYLAWS giving front property exclusive rights to the common area. What I want to do is now transfer the common area (which I now have built a pool) to actual unit entitlement for the front property and get rid of common area name tag. I am finding it very difficult to get any answers from departments……just get passed on and on and on with no outcome.
Hi Vickie
It sounds like you need to speak with a Surveyor or Solicitor. What you’re attempting to do is complex and you need some professional advice.
This is a two lot scheme in NSW I have a neighbour who is forcing us to pay half the cost for installing a storm water pipe from her lot underneath the common driveway and to the street. Because the neighbour has a retention pit where the storm water flows and dissipates to the garden bed. The strata manager is forcing us to pay saying the storm water pipes to be installed is common property and therefore pay the cost including costs installing a pipe from her property. In addition forcing us (neighbour and strata manager) to replace the entire driveway rather than repairing it.
I have 50% control and the neighbour has 50%.
Strata manager said it is a structural defect which should of been done before but that time the building laws were lax in the 1980s.
My question is if that storm water pipe were to be installed underneath the common driveway just for her sole and exclusive use and it is NOT shared at all, am I responsible for the cost? I thought that if the pipes relating to one owner for their exclusive use and is underneath the common property it is the responsibility of that owner not the strata. The same for storm water pipes is this true?
I kept the meeting professional but my strata manager tells me i wasted her time and told next door neighbour to consider getting compulsory strata to relinquish power from us so she can control whatever decisions she will like. In addition report me to the strata insurance and jack the premiums up because of my decision to say no.
This is oppressive conduct I am nearly broke and extremely worried living off of the streets of managers actions.
Hi Juzton
This sounds like a challenging situation. In Queensland, yes, pipes that service only one lot are that particular lot owner’s responsibility. I’m not sure what the answer is in NSW.
You could try posting your question on the Flat-Chat Forum. They are based in NSW and will be able to confirm the situation for you.
Hi Lisa,
We’ve been living in a complex for over a year now and today a middle-aged gentleman came to the door and introduced himself as the new caretaker of the complex, complete with a new sheet of rules. However, he offered no identification other than his first name and there is no contact number on the rule sheet.
One of the rules is ‘there is to be no illegal parking’, so my question is, is parking outside our shed illegal? We use the shed to hang washing and store belongings that do not fit inside the house. When we first arrived here there were parking lines in place, but they have since worn away.
Hi Zobia
Parking in a strata scheme should be designated by the plan and scheme by-laws. It could well be where you are parking is not a compliant area. You’d need to discuss more fully with the “caretaker” and hopefully get to see a plan and by-laws.
As an owner I have a manhole out the front of my residence to access the crawl space roof. Do I have to ask the body corporate to access it for providers to hook up nbn?
Hi David
It will depend whether the area is common property or part of your lot, servicing only your lot. Its best to discuss with the strata manager or Caretaker. Often bodies corporate have complex arrangements with wiring and access and its easy for contractors to screw things up without meaning to. A simple discussion before hand can avoid a lot of issues.
I live in a detached unit which is part of 24 similar units comprising our Body Corporate (in Victoria). Each unit has a front lawn bordering the driveway and each unit also has its own free-standing letterbox on a stand set in the lawn by the driveway. Two of these letterboxes have recently been hit and damaged by unknown vehicles. Who pays to fix them? The unit owner whose letterbox it is, or the Body Corporate?
Hi Peter
In QLD, where I am, the matter would be lot owner responsibility. I’m not sure in Victoria.
Hi Lisa,
We own a unit in a complex of four in QLD. Apparently the sensor light in the front carports which service all is connected to unit fours power. The booster to the TV aerial is located in unit three and services three of the four units. The owner of unit three and four ( he owns both ) is now asking how he gets reimbursed by the body corporate for the power that is being used with this infrastructure?
I’m not even sure how this would be calculated.
Hi Amanda
I’ve no idea how that would be calculated either. I would think that common sense should prevail and a small amount per annum be offered. Calculated over how many years? This is not a common occurrence by far and appears a bit of a hornets nest. Negotiation is going to be required. Perhaps ask the owner what they want, bearing in mind that all parties are required to be “reasonable” however you choose to define that.
Maybe it would be more beneficial to have an electrician connect the common property items to common property electricity.
Hi Lisa
I live in a townhouse complex of 7 with common property driveway into the garages. Recently, 3 units have taken to using the shared driveway as their children’s play area most weekday evenings and all day weekends. The adults have camp chairs and have even taken to cycling in the driveway. Car drivers into the complex have to take extra caution not to hit the kids. The obstructions caused by the kids, adults, chairs and toys in the driveway makes it difficult to drive into our garages. One of the parents even threatened my son physically when he asked them to mind their kids’ safety on the driveway. What are the by laws regarding the common driveway. There is a park just 5 mins up the road. We live in QLD.
Hi Jenifer
That sounds like a difficult situation.
By-laws differ across every body corporate. You’ll need to find the specific by-laws that apply to your scheme. Most likely they will have a by-law regarding shared roadways. The committee is responsible for policing by-laws. Make a formal complaint on the matter to committee.
Hi Lisa,
I am renting a villa here in NSW. Each villa all have garages and a car space in front of the garage. However, the car space is very short and it cannot accomodate even a hatchback car causing the car to park sticking out into the driveway (which is common property). Most of the neighbours here park their car sticking out but never block the driveway. I also park like that, where all part of my rear bumper’s car is sticked out into the driveway. The neighbour next door of my unit is unhappy, he told me to park my car in the garage and reported me fas I kept parking like that (he actually parks his car sticking out into common property as well).
I reported him back for parking like me but the strata manager said “he is part of the owner committee, we cannot send him letter or fine him” instead the manager told me to park my car inside the garage because I am causing issue for parking like that. Could you please comment on this?
Hi Riz
By-laws apply to everyone in the scheme equally, regardless of whether they’re on the committee or not. Further, strata schemes are not allowed to be discriminatory, meaning the rules that apply to owners also apply to residents. I suggest lodging a dispute resolution seeking an order that by-laws be applied equally although I am in QLD and comment on Queensland legislation. You’ll need to double check everything as it relates to NSW. Try Flat Chat Forum to post the same question.
Hi Lisa,
I live in a Body Corporate in Hervey Bay QLD. In this estate there are 7 houses, each on approx 2000m with each lot accessible via an access road on common property. At the time of creation the local council placed a condition on the development application stating that the developer ‘provide an 8m wide area on the south side of the development for access and services’. This was done, however this area is the total of the common area. At a later time some of the residents elected to grow a hedge against the south side boundary fence. This hedge has now grown to a width of over 1m which seriously reduces the area and makes it virtually impossible for me to ingress and egress from my lot and has caused damage to our caravan. My question is: does the DA condition apply and therefore the full 8 metres width have to be provided. I have asked and asked for the hedge to be reduced but to no avail.
Hi Ray
The DA condition does apply, however it does sound like its been complied with. The area is allocated is common property. That its fill with a hedge is an internal matter for the body corporate to deal with.
The body corporate is responsible for maintaining the hedge. I suggest you get a quote for cutting back the hedge and submit to the body corporate seeking a committee resolution to proceed along with outline of how the overgrown hedge is affecting your lot. If the committee do not agree to proceed you can seek conciliation via the Office Commissioner Bodies Corporate.
Hi Lisa,
My question is about factory units. I have a small factory that i work out of. There is some common
ground between me and the next factory. I have a roller door facing this common ground. One of the previous owners put up a fence to stop people wandering around in this area and for security. I now have a problem where a few factory owners are using this yard as a storage facility and say i can’t do anything about it was i don’t own it. I just want it clean and tidy. What can i do? I suppose the body corporate can ask them to remove their rubbish but then, as i have discovered, i get abused for not letting them use it.
Thanks John
Hi John
There will likely be a by-law for your scheme that says things cannot be stored or dumped on common property. If that is the case then yes, the body corporate must take steps to enforce the by-laws. I would send your committee a request asking them to clear out the area. Alternatively you can issue a Form 1 Notice of Continuing Contravention to the body corporate regarding the area asking they get it cleaned. This is the first step in the dispute resolution scenario and will allow you to move toward conciliation if no action is taken. I’d ask them first.
Its possible you will get abused for not letting people use the area. Unfortunately what you want is not in alignment with what they want so there’s no way for everyone to be happy.
Hi Lisa,
I live in a block of apartments on the first floor ( In Victoria). There is a large landing on the 1st floor shared by 4 units. We have an expensive bike so we have locked it against the stairwell railing and stored it in this area which is common property. The bike is stored in an unobtrusive manner I.e. not blocking access to the stairway or any unit. We have had issues with one of the owners not wanting a bike to be stored in this area. We have been contesting this as the bike is not being obtrusive in any way. Are there any Set rules that govern if things such as a bike can be stored in common areas or not? Can a single lot owner enforce that common property can’t be used in this instance?
Hi Preethi
Yes, there are rules about what can and can’t be stored on common property. Refer to your by-laws. The most common by-law, and certainly codified into legislation here in QLD, is that nothing may be stored on common property by a lot owner. The common property is common and owned by all owners jointly. Its not to be used by anyone as they feel like it.
In a apartment building there will be further workplace health & safety and fire safety provisions about storing items on common property. Quite simply common property has to be kept clear for safety and liability issues.
One owner complaining should be all that’s required for the committee to enforce their by-laws. Sorry Preethi, you’re in the wrong. Move your bike.
Hello. We recently purchased a townhouse in Qld there are six units. In front of our unit is a garden bed with trees and plants, three of the other units have garden beds in front of their units as well. These garden beds are on common area and not part of the units. The other owners have told me via the Body Corporate that we are responsible for watering the garden bed in front of our unit and if we don’t or if plants die we are responsible for replacing them. We however rent out the unit to short term tenants and as such are not there to water the bed. I thought common area garden beds should be maintained by body corporate including watering them? Can other owners vote and tell me I have to water the beds? Thank you
Hi Claire
If the area is common property then the body corporate is responsible for maintenance. If the area is exclusive use then you will be responsible.
No, the other owners cannot vote and make you responsible for common property. Legislation is clear its body corporate responsibility.
Thank you. I had a look at the Body Corporate rules and regs for the property and I didn’t realise this when I bought the property but each unit has been allocated an exclusive use section of the garden. So does this mean I’m responsible for watering and maintenance of our section? Is there any way of getting out of this garden being exclusive use to us, or reversing this decision, as we don’t want to be responsible for its maintenance? Many thanks
Hi Claire
Exclusive use can be reverted back to common property by resolution without dissent at general meeting. Until then, and have to say it doesn’t sound like your fellow owners will go for it, the area remains your responsibility and you will be in breach of by-laws if you don’t maintain.
I have 3 Units and the garage lighting have been hooked up to the BodyCorp SwitchBoard.. My current BodyCorp doesn’t want to pay for the repairs to these Lighting now broken on U2 and U3. They believe it’s my responsibility since these Units are on my boundary line.
Who should pay for these repairs? Body Corp or me?
Hi Michael
I’m not sure I follow the question here. If lighting is part of the lot it is lot owner responsibility. If it is on common property and services only the one lot, then it is lot owner responsibility.
If its common lighting on common property then it is body corporate responsibility.
Thanks Lisa, I’m still confused then.. Even though the BodyCorp pays for the electricity bill each quarter why should it be the lot owner’s responsibility to repair the lighting?
There is no separate light switch for each garage and at night the ALL 3 Garage lights turn on when the External BodyCorp Light turn on. It seems it was designed like this when built.
Hi Michael
I’m confused as well, and by the sounds of it so is your strata manager. The crux of this matter is whether the lights are common property or part of the lot.
I agree you have a good argument for saying the lights are common property therefore body corporate responsibility. The body corporate is paying the electricity, you didn’t install the lights and you don’t have any control over how they work. Try again with the strata manager.
Hi Lisa
We live in a block of 4 units in Queensland. We purchased 25 years ago. Another owner purchased 32 years ago. Each unit has an assigned free standing, lockable garage. We have both occupied the garages we bought all those years ago continually.
Now after all those years, the other owner has discovered that the title deed has the garages numbered differently to the ones we occupy. He wants us to swap garages. We do not wish to swap as we have made improvements and have taken great care of our garage. He bought first, took possession of his garage and determined the numbering of the garages.
Do we have to swap and does “adverse possession law” apply as we fulfill all criteria as stated in tis law.
Hi Anne
Your question is best posed to a lawyer: its not a legislation/management question so I’m afraid I have no idea. Try lookupstrata.com.au
Hi,
I own a house that was built on Body Corporate land two years ago. It’s in a rural area and my access is via a cement easement for the first forty metres and from there a dirt track for a few metres…plus the driveway constructed at my own expense. I’m quite happy with this arrangement and have had no issues with it.
However, 4 other lot owners are pushing to have the dirt track replaced with a sealed bitumen road. They fully expect the entire body corporate, consisting of 21 lots, to foot the bill for their improvements to this area of common ground. All other lot owners have access via a bitumen road. The four dissenting members claim they are being treated unfairly but the fact is, they too, could have built their homes at the front of their blocks, which would enable them to use the already established bitumen road. They chose to do otherwise in order to maximize the views at the top of the slope. I did this also but without any expectation that the body corporate would then build me a bitumen road. I believe my choices had consequences that are my responsibility.
Their claim is that the body corporate has a legal responsibility to provide a sealed access road on the ‘top’ side, the stretch that is currently a very serviceable dirt track. What’s your take on this? Much appreciated.
Hi Melinda
Much will depend on whether the area in question is part of the lot, allocated as exclusive use or common property. If the area is part of the lot or exclusive use then it is lot owner responsibility to install a driveway.
If the area is common property the owner could make an argument that the body corporate should pave to the lot, not the house, but the boundary of the lot.
From what you’ve said I think its lot owner responsibility. If other lots are built to the boundary which is on the road it appears common property was paved which is all that is required. You’d need to check that against plans however.
Hi Lisa,
We’ve bought a townhouse in QLD 4 years ago with private lift which we share with our neighbour . The lift has never worked properly from the very beginning, and has been serviced many times. We wanted to open a legal case with ACCC and OFT to get a whole unit replaced, but our neighbour was not interested back then. Now he decided to sell his unit, but there are 3 unpaid bills for the lift service which we are refusing to pay, because the lift company did not fix the problem but still issued us with bills ” for attendance”. They should’ve replace a lift part as well, however they wanted us to pay the previous bills, othervise they don’t want to start the repair process. Now our neighbour in a hurry and wants to fix lift ASAP because he has a buyer for his townhouse. We would like to negotiate the repair cost and refusing to pay for ” attended no service provided” visits . Our neighbour threatening us saying if we don’t want to pay our part ( 50%) for lift service, he will pay it himself and block our access to the lift. I believe it is unlawful, and no-one can deny our access to our private property ( lift), because it is a part of our townhouse, unless he has a court order. Am i correct? Would really appreciate your response please. Thank you
Hi Toni
No the other lot owner cannot legally block your access to the lift. That won’t necessarily stop them from doing it. Its a difficult situation here. Maybe you can negotiate some form of agreement with the outgoing neighbour on the matter.
Much of what you’re talking about is a contract dispute with your lift contractor. I suggest you see a lawyer.
We have a BC as well, we live in a complex of 6 townhouses, however we have to deal with our lift company ourself, because our lift is a private property. We also applied for insurance via BC couple of months ago, but still did not receive any answer re whether they will cover any cost of repair
Hello, a quick question if I may. You buy a unit in a complex, it has a garden area that is exclusive use of your unit, with only 1 gate for access off the side of your unit. There are trees in the garden area and the body corporate has engaged a company to remove them without your permission or giving you notice. Is this allowed? And who actually owns the trees?
Hi Naomi
The trees in the exclusive use area are your responsibility. Nor should the body corporate enter your exclusive use area without appropriate notice.
If they are removing the trees there is likely a problem, like trees impacting common property sewerage/water infrastructure. Before you complain bear in mind they can instruct you to remove the trees at your cost if removal is required due to common property issues.
Hi
The area in front of my townhouse (as I step out of the only access to front door) is common property and I have been given permission (not by resolution but noted in the minutes) approximately 15 years ago to park in that area. I would like to apply for exclusive use of that portion of common property so I can build a brick wall on the boundary of the property (which is approximately 6 metres from my front door) for privacy and security. The area is approximately 9mx6m. No other lot owners would have reason for access to this piece of common property as it only leads to my front door. Approval had been unofficially granted for exclusive use by majority 18 months ago and no AGM has since be held. How should I proceed with the application for exclusive use as we currently do not have a strata manager, reliable council of owners and several new owners. I live in W.A. Thanks
Hi Maria
I’m in QLD so take with a grain of salt. Here, to grant exclusive use, a motion by resolution without dissent needs to be passed at general meeting. Once passed the by-laws of the body corporate need to be updated and registered. There is a three-month window when this needs to be done or else the motion needs to be passed again.
WA is likely to have different rules, however the essence is usually the same. A by-law would need to be made.
The lack of strata manager / committee is a problem. Generally speaking all you would need to do is submit a motion by resolution without dissent to the next general meeting. Once owners have voted you can proceed with lodging the updated by-laws. You’re going to have to discuss with your fellow owners to try and get something happening.
Alternatively you can proceed as if the grant was made. Maybe seek approval for building of the wall? Beware here though, this is not a registered change and could have impacts in the future as owners change again or you sell.
Hi Lisa,
We own an apartment in a complex with over 60 units. It is in a rental pool with holiday letting as the main income source.
The owners are looking to do a major renovation to the entry and part of the grounds. This will take 4 months and will involve relocating concrete stairs that allow access for the block that our unit is on the top floor. From the time the stairs are demolished and until the new stairs are complete and safe, there will be no access to our apartment (and another top floor apartment). All apartments in the block below (ground and first floor) will maintain access. The schedule of works is not confirmed but it could be 2-3 months.
The executive committee have not made any allowances for providing access during this time, and have not considered compensation to the affected parties.
Where do we stand as owners? The decision will be made by special resolution (?75% votes infavour as far as I understand)? Are we entitled to compensation if the owners corporation cannot provide access to our apartment via the stairs which I assume is common property?
Hi Matt
Well that’s a hell of thing. Its also complex. I’m not aware of any rules about compensating owners for lack of access, though usually when these things come up its lack of access to a basement car park, not the lot itself!
I suggest you seek some legal advice. I would think at least you’d be eligible for Loss of Rent / Temporary Accommodation claim if the unit is really to be inaccessible for 2 -3 months. Get clear on what’s happening first by discussing the matter with your strata manager and possibly the other owner affected. Then see a lawyer about your legal position.
Potentially you can seek Adjudication that the body corporate not proceed until your access arrangements are addressed.
I own a townhouse in Brisbane which has an exclusive use swimming pool and pergola which only I have access to. I maintain the pool and the surrounds.
Who is responsible for insuring the pool?
Robert
Hi Robert
It will depend on whether you insure your lot or the body corporate does. If you cover your own insurance then you will be responsible for the cost. If the body corporate insures the building the swimming pool should be included with the bod corporate insurance though you will be responsible for any additional cost in insurance premium.
My children and my ex-husband lives in a 5 and 4 units level building with a basement/ground carpark. Who is responsible in maintaining the lights in the parking area, seeing that it is a common property? The Strata Manager says that it is not his responsibility. If not his, who looks after changing the light bulbs in the garage then?
Hi Moana
It is the responsibility of the committee to maintain common property. Well, actually the body corporate, but committee are the action arm of the body corporate.
Can you change a piece of common property into exclusive use by one lot owner?
Hi Irene
To allocate exclusive use you need a resolution without dissent passed at general meeting.
That means the motion would need to pass without other owners voting NO. So if the motion was proposed and nobody voted NO, and the owner proposing voted YES, then that vote could pass the motion.
If there’s been no resolution without dissent at general meeting then the allocation is not valid.
Hi,
I have a couple of questions in regards to common areas.
1.My apartment has a staircase that I’m being told is common area even though I’m the only one that can access the stairs and I seem to be paying for the power in this particular area and no maintenance is being done on it because I have the key, is this common area or not?
2. Is strata responsible for broken windows and fly screens on apartments of it is on the outside ?
3. Do strata management need to provide a maintenance schedule?
4. Can strata management earn a commission from the building insurance?
Hi Kurt
The stair question is difficult to answer. Stairs like this can be registered as either common property or part of the lot. You’d need to refer to the plan for the scheme. If the stairs are for your lot only, then expect to end up paying for any maintenance works yourself. If a cost can be isolated to one lot then that lot owner is responsible for the cost.
Whether the windows are body corporate responsibility will depend on whether or not its common property. Again, it may or may not be. Much depends on type of building – BFP or SFP. Screens will depend on whether they were installed to all lots or if its installed after by a lot owner. In most cases I’d expect screens to be an add on.
No the strata manager is not required to provide a maintenance schedule. That task would fall to committee but there is no requirement for them to do one either.
Yes the strata manager may received a commission for building insurance. It will likely be disclosed in the strata management agreement.
Hi, I own a unit in Qld and on the building plan an area of 6 x 2 mtrs shows as a “Void” It was a large skylight over the reception area. 15 years ago the body corp decided to roof the area to protect the units below as the slab leaked badly. This void is now inside our lounge room and we have covered it to use as a raised area with seating. My question is who now owns the void?
2nd question if the bylaws don’t prohibit storing goods in a large empty space that is common property, can owners utilise the space for storage?
HI Mike
Your question regarding the roof void is best addressed to a Solicitor. Its an interesting question I’ve never seen before. I suggest it would take some investigation to be able to answer fully.
Re storing items in the storage space, there are a couple of things that will make a difference here, assuming the by-laws are silent about prohibiting storage of goods. The first is the conditions of the exclusive use grant. If it says for parking vehicles then its for parking vehicles. There might also be requirements regarding other matters in the by-laws. For instance, having items in car spaces may impact on the working of the fire safety installations. Fire safety legislation would take precedence here over whatever by-laws the body corporate does or doesn’t have.
There may be other reasons as well, such as risk of vermin or access for other car spaces. If the by-laws are silent on the matter then there may be house rules that discuss the use. House rules are not as binding as by-laws but they do still need to be observed.
If you’ve sought to store stuff in your car space and have been asked to move it there should have been a reason given for that request. That reason is required to be “reasonable”.
Hi Lisa,
We live in a 43 unit residential apartment complex on the Gold Coast. The complex has only one common area rooftop garden area (around 350m2) which could easily be enjoyed to up to 100 persons.
The committee are relentless in trying to have a bylaw passed that requires owners and occupiers to book the area for functions and/or gatherings. The committee has also installed infra-red CCTV cameras on the roof to identify anyone using the space. This bylaw motion has been defeated previously as the Strata Manager declared the motion be ruled out of order in accordance with section 104 of the BCCM Reg 2008 (accom’ module) for the reason that the motion is unenforceable as the common property is in use for all occupants.
The booking system rules state that if roof top common area has a booking lodged with the committee that no other occupants are allowed to used the common area for periods of up to 4hrs or maybe not at all if there are successive ‘booking’ – this sadly includes weekends and prominent public holidays.
The committees’ explanatory notes are as follows;
The committee notes that lot owners have requested for more clarity in relation to By-Law 18.1(j) which relates to the “booking system”. The committee is of the firm view that this new by-law is necessary because:
i. owners will be able to safely arrange an event for a particular date and time in advance; and
ii. the committee will be able to determine the people responsible in situations (including but not limited to) where additional cleaning is required or where damage or excess noise has been created.
Myself and other levy paying owners do not feel that our rooftop common area is a ‘venue’ for the committee to regulate who uses it, as our rights of use and enjoyment if not ‘booked’ have been retracted
Can you please clarify if the committee can control who can utilise our roof top as this is causing much friction amongst the residents of the scheme
Many thanks
Paul
Hi Paul
Unfortunately this is a question for a lawyer. It would take some research to clarify. Do you know if your body corporate has sought legal advice on the matter?
Whilst the committee’s reasoning makes sense, I agree with you. Common property is not a venue, its common property. However, there are numerous similar areas that require bookings in bodies corporate all over Queensland however (the most common being BBQ’s) which tends to indicate that some sort of system is allowable. How that relates to your specific circumstances would need to be explored.
Hi
Im considering buying a house on 1 acre in a gated estate in QLD. In the bylaws changed in 2021 it states that no ball games can be played on common property, that no bikes, scooters, or skateboards can be used. Common property includes a park area of about 1 acre and a tennis court. Is this even reasonable, can it be contested without changes in the bylaws?
Hi Jane
I’d say you have a case for saying it is unreasonable to not use an acre of common property for playing. What is it there for if not for recreation?
The downside of that is that the by-laws are in place and committee have no option but to enforce said by-laws. To challenge the matter would require conciliation or adjudication via Office Commissioner Body Corporate, or legal action. Just because the by-law exists doesn’t mean its unenforceable.
You could also try and have the by-law overturned by vote at general meeting. That is a more inclusive way of proceeding as it would involve finding out from other owners why that by-law was passed and whether they agree or not. If enough of you don’t agree there is a possibility of having it overturned by special resolution at general meeting.
An owner has not paid BC fees for 2 years and seems to have disappeared. Can the letting income be directed towards those fees?
Hi Janice
That’s a legal question to direct to a Solicitor. Since the lot is over two years overdue the body corporate must commence legal action against the owner with overdue fees, if it hasn’t already.
Hi I have purchased a commercial property that from the front is in a block of 4 commercial properties. However my block is a stand alone on seperate title to the other 3.
I have a back/side door that exits to the common area carpark of the other 3 commercial properties, one of the business owners says I cannot use that door to enter or exit unless emergency. I just want to know of that’s correct or can I use it as the grounds there is common property carspace . Either to park a car or to just walk in and out from. I am in Qld
Hi
In our apartment building, the plans showing common property use and allocation were never updated since the building was designed. On these plans,there are a number of errors including an area allocated to apartment X for storage whereas in reality the developers used this area for the purposes of housing utility infrastructure for the building.
The ownership of apartment X has changed a number of times, without issue, and now the current owners have identified that their storage, shown on the plans, does not exist and have requested the Body Corporate to relocate the utility infrastructure and provide the original storage area as per the plans. Owner X purchased in 2018. They raised this issue with the BCC in 07/2021.
The Body Corp note that in the standard REIQ purchase contract the onus is on the purchaser to validate / verify the property being purchased and raise any issues with the Real Estate Agent.
The financial impact on the Body Corp to relocate the infrastructure is an expensive exercise which the Owners do not wish to agree to. To have the plans updated to reflect the current layout will require a motion without dissent. (Fairly confident that Owner X will vote against this occurring).
So where does this leave the Body Corp? Is the onus on the Purchaser to identify the error and raise this with the Real Estate Agent and the Body Corporate has no involvement ? Does the plans, registered with the CMS, over rule the above (even though they are incorrect) and the Body Corp has to relocate the infrastructure and provide Owner X with their original storage area ?
Is the BCC obligated to provide a storage area, on common property, elsewhere at the BCC cost even though the “Buyer Beware” stance applies ?
Thanks
Ive got a question. I have a 2 storey townhouse. I have a covered area outside my front door which is part of the upstairs building. Is this classed as common ground or common property ?
Hi Jason
Um … maybe? Is the covered area part of the actual building? If yes, then probably. You’d need to get a copy of the building plan to find out.
Is it an awning or something added? If yes, then possibly its been added for the use of the lot owner.
There are a lot of variables here. If there’s a problem with it I would ask your body corporate to fix it and see what they say.
Hi,
Our body corporate area is a vehicle access way for owners to access their garages and there is also a visitors car park.
One of the lot owners has placed a freestanding basketball hoop for his 3 boys without permission from Body Corporate. The basketball generates a lot of noise and at times the boys can be out there playing for 3 hours+ at any given time. I work from home and find the noise extremely distracting. I have tried to talk to the owner in an attempt to reach some sort of compromise but had no luck.
Are there any body corporate regulations I could potentially use to have the basketball hoop removed from the common area?
Hi Benita
Refer to your body corporate by-laws. Most likely there is one about nuisance which would cover this situation. Complain to your strata manager / committee in writing.
Hi,
My Canberra complex wants me to remove a shoe box from outside the entrance way/alcove to my apartment (pics available) …. Rule113: For safety and to maintain the appearance of the complex, owners/occupiers must not store items in Common Property ….
Discussions with the Committee have finally accepted that the Shoe Chest … does not compromise the safety and appearance of the complex…. but they still want me remove shoe chest on the basis that the alcove/door entrance is common property, not my property. I do understand why the rule exists – particularly for floors with long corridors and multiple entrance ways to apartments … and I do understand the Committee’s preference to have one rule for all occupants (much easier to administer) … than exemptions requiring additional management/explanation.
I am seeking an exemption though on the basis that … this alcove/door entrance is for my exclusive use. Other lot owners do not use my entrance way. There is only on other owner on my floor and the 40 sq metre common area access to his door is not impeded/impacted.
Grateful any thoughts/comments.
Hi Brendan
I find it hilarious you say “I understand there shouldn’t be any execeptions … except for me!”
My thoughts are the area is common property and the shoe chest should be removed.
Hi I have a 2 two storey townhouse under a strata scheme in NSW. I am seeking to enclose part of my courtyard on the ground floor to expand my loungeroom. I am also seeking on that same ground floor to add a new storey above it that connects to existing 2nd floor (the new addition will have bedroom and bathroom). It means I have additional 25 square metres of space on this second level.
As I am building on my existing title and not into the existing roof space do I need to have valuation done, pay levy to strata and obtain exclusive use of the new floor as ‘common air space’ under a by-law or because it is all on my title does that not apply? I am guessing I may be liable as I am creating additional floor space?
Hi LM
I’m not sure. This is not a common request so I’m thinking your owners corporation would need to seek legal advice about what to do. You will definitely need a by-law allowing the works approved but how that impacts the entitlements I don’t know.
I would speak with the strata committee / strata manager and see what they have to say.