Sectional title legislation contains a couple of head-scratchers and the subject matter of this article is a prime example of one. Let’s look into this question in a bit more detail:
We know that, as the owner of a section in a sectional title scheme, you are responsible for the repair and maintenance of your section. Amongst other things, this includes any pipes situated within your section that only serve that section (not the common property or any other section). So when such a pipe bursts (as they often do), the body corporate is not wrong when they communicate to you that you are responsible to fix the pipe and pay for the associated works… but is that the end of the story?
When diving deeper into sectional title legislation we find that the body corporate has a responsibility to insure “the building” and specifically to insure it against “water escape, including bursting or overflowing of water tanks, apparatus or pipes”. Therefore, while you must repair the pipe, you are able to claim the cost of doing so from the body corporate’s insurance.
When first hearing this, the knee-jerk reaction of many a trustee has been to question it, feeling that it would be odd to allow an owner to claim the costs from the body corporate’s insurance when it is not the body corporate’s responsibility to repair or maintain that portion of the property. Could that have been the legislature’s intention?
It must have been indeed as we find further support for this position in the Prescribed Management Rules, which stipulate that a member is responsible for any excess amount relating to damage to any part of the building which that member is responsible to repair and maintain. This rule therefore provides absolute clarity:
- A member can institute a claim against the body corporate’s insurance for a part of the property which the member is responsible to maintain and repair (for example, a pipe situated within their section and serving only their section); and
- Should the insurer approve the claim, the excess payable needs to be paid by the member responsible to maintain and repair the area (in other words, the owner of that section).
If the insurer does not approve the claim, the owner of the section will be responsible for the full cost of the repair and/or replacement.
If you find that you get stuck on head-scratchers like this one often, why not consider upskilling by doing a Paddocks UCT online short course aimed at empowering community scheme roleplayers with the knowledge to answer difficult questions?
Contact us at courses@theadvisory.co.za to find out more.
Article reference: Paddocks Press: Volume 16, Issue 8.
Specialist Community Scheme Attorney (BA (Law) LLB), Ané de Klerk, is a Director at The Advisory, a boutique law firm specialising exclusively in community scheme law. Get in touch with her at www.theadvisory.co.za.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Recent Posts
Archives
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- February 2008
- February 2007
Recent Comments