Main Menu
Login
STO Forums
Type your search criteria above and click Search to search the forums.
To see if someone has already answered a query similar to yours, click the Search button above and search for terms related to your question.
Trustees
Good afternoon,
I own a unit in a complex and it is doubtful whether the trustees had ever heard of the Act prior to June 2011 when a new owner bought into the complex and informed the trustees that the complex must be managed in accordance with the Act. At first the trustees informed her that they “did not care about the Act” but at a later stage the trustees decided to join Professor Paddock’s Club, and when ANY problem arises, the trustees write to the Professor to ask his advice. I have no doubt that the professor gives the trustees sound advice, but he is offering advice on only one side of the story.
Over the years, many owners have done additions/extensions to their units, which, due to mismanagement, have not been registered, yet the trustees have altered the PQs. The new owner, who informed the trustees that they must obey the Act, has had plans drawn up indicating the additions to her unit, which had been erected by the previous owner, at least 10 years ago. The chairman now refuses to sign the plans in order for them to be submitted to the municipality for approval. He stated that the Professor advised the trustees that an engineer’s certificate must be obtained before the chairman signs the plans. As this could be a costly exercise, why has the Professor taken this stand when the municipality may refuse to grant approval of the plans for many reasons, e.g. the FAR has been exceeded? The Body Corporate has previously approved the additions/extensions to all units, on the understanding that they will submit plans and register the alterations. Surely it would be more sensible to wait for the municipality to inspect the plans as they will call for the engineer’s approval, if required, before they issue an occupation certificate. I believe that this particular owner is being victimized by the trustees, and are using the Professor to wield a big stick.
Replies
You must login to post a reply.
RE: Trustees
Tokie. The certificates must have been issued on completion of the building process. Your submission will be “as built”. The chairman would be correct in demanding the certificates as there could be more than one. You will most probably get relaxation from the municipality if you have exceeded FSR or Coverage. The following certificates could be required, attached to the plans when you do the submission: Certificate of Compliance – Electrical, Compliance – Plumber. Appointment certificate, Foundation certificate, Compliance & Occupancy Certificate, all from the engineer. Roof Loading Certificate – I.T.C. Only on submission of these, all or some, will you get the Certificate of Occupancy from the local authority. If she does not have them, best would be to sign the file out from the local authority and get the contact detail of all the appointed contractors, then ask them for copies of the originals.
RE: Trustees
I'm not sure which post it was on Paddocks Club recently, but if it is the same one I am thinking of, if I remember correctly the Prof's reply was that each request has to be treated on its own merits and also if the trustees believe the structural integrity could be affected then a engineer's certificate should accompany the request.
You mention that only one side of the case is stated. It regularly happens on this site as well where a question is slanted to get a certain reply and once this reply is given then the worms come out of the woodwork with a string of new facts which negates the earlier replies. If this owner feels aggrieved about the treatment she is getting she could either ask the trustees to see the posting they put on the Club and the Prof's replies, as they are using this as the basis for their argument or she could do a one off query directly on the Club (under the Consultation heading). A fee would be payable but then she would have a solid base to argue from.
RE: Trustees
Thanks for your reply. This is exactly my point regarding the reply from the Professor, as without discussion between the parties, misunderstandings can occur. As no plans were submitted to the municipality for approval in the first place, it is therefore understandable that no certificates for any work were issued.
It is my opinion that the as-built plans must first be lodged with the municipality, and should they agree that the FAR has not been exceeded, or have any other objections pertaining to the additions, the municipality may then request an engineer’s report, or any other certs, before they issue the occupation cert. The municipality or the trustees can request any certs they consider necessary, but by obtaining an engineer’s cert before the municipality agree that the alterations can stay, is not advisable as this could lead to unnecessary expense, particularly if the municipality rejects the application and instructs that the alteration be demolished....Show More
RE: Trustees
Having worked in the building department of the old Stanger municipality for many years, I most certainly agree with Tokie. The first step in the formalizing, of the unauthorized alterations, would be to submit plans of the additions, drawn by a qualified person to the municipality for approval. Should they approve the plans the building inspector will request an engineer’s report together with an electrical certificate before he issues the occupancy certificate. To pay for an engineer’s report at this stage could be a complete waste of money. Perhaps the trustees have friends who issues engineer’s reports!!
RE: Trustees
As a retired professional engineer, who has been requested on numerous occasions to issue reports on alterations to buildings before the local municipality will issue the necessary occupancy certificate, it is my opinion that the owner must insist that the building department of the municipality approves the plans, before he/she commissions an engineer to check the structure. Owners cannot be expected to incur costs until they have been advised that the municipality has no objections.
It would appear that the trustees have not obtained the approval of the owners by a special resolution, and therefore have not lodged this requirement in the rules at the local Deeds Office.
Therefore the next lot of trustees may drop this requirement and leave it to the municipality to request the owner for the engineers report prior to the issuing the occupancy certificate. This option, in my opinion, is the way forward.
Advertisements
Website Statistics
- Forum Topics: 6190
- Users: 13951
