By The Paddocks Club Team
Below are examples of two questions on the Discussion Forum on Paddocks Club. We want to show what is available to our Community Members!
Insuring Exclusive Use Area structures
Member’s Question:
An owner has the right to increase the insurance on his section if he feels that it is warranted.
Would this also apply to exclusive use area’s in the Conduct Rules, may an owner of the rights to an exclusive use area add to his contribution to the schemes insurance policy in the event that he feels that structures on a garden exclusive use area warrant it?
What happens if the body corporate workmen damage an exclusive use area garden structure?
Can an owner insure privately?
Anton’s Answer:
Owners must pay an additional contribution to cover body corporate costs in respect of their exclusive use area’s. Insurance is one of the costs specified in section 37(1)(b).
The trustees must see to it that the buildings and improvements to the common property are insured to full replacement value, so the trustees must increase the insurance to cover structures added to exclusive use area’s and then recover the cost of the extra premium from the owners concerned. If they have not, the owner could always suggest to them that they do.
Member’s Response:
In the event that the body corporate appointed the workmen that damaged the exclusive use area and the body corporate insurance policy covering the structure doesn’t pay out in full, must the owner of the exclusive use area rights pick up the excess?
The full replacement value should have been in the policy but so often it isn’t.
Anton’s Answer:
If the contractor did the damage he is therefore responsible for any costs of repairs. The body corporate should get the money from the contractor.
Non-Resident Owner’s Right of Access
Member’s Question:
An owner has no right of access to a flat that he has rented to a tenant except with due notice etc.
Has such an owner also given up his right to access the common property?
For example:
Does a non-resident owner have the right to an access tag where such tags are generally only issued to residents?
Does the non-resident owner have a right to use the pool, which is common property?
Is the non-resident owner permitted to park on common property perhaps in a visitor’s bay?
Carryn’s Answer:
A non-resident owner (or his other duly appointed agent) is entitled to an access tag. You cannot deny an owner access to his or her property.
The owner is legally entitled to make use of the common property pool, but practically if every owner and tenant were entitled to use the pool in the scheme there could be an excessive burden on these facilities/amenities.
The visitor’s parking bays must be used for visitors to the scheme. If the owner is attending to a matter with his or her tenant regarding the unit then the owner can park on the visitor’s bay for a short period of time.
Member’s Response:
In terms of the Rental Housing Act:
The landlord gives the tenant the “right of occupancy” of “the dwelling” (presumably the unit i.e. the section and a share of the common property).
“A tenant has the right, during the lease period to privacy and the landlord may only exercise his or her right of inspection in a reasonable manner after reasonable notice to the tenant.”
I interpret this to mean that (unless the tenant is in breach) the landlord has given up his “right of occupancy” (which includes an access tag and the use of the pool) in favour of the tenant and is only permitted on the property as a “visitor” to the tenant.
Carryn’s Answer:
Sectional title ownership is a distinct type of ownership. A person who purchases a unit in a sectional title scheme has ownership of his or her section; an undivided share in the common property and becomes a member of the body corporate. When an owner lets out his or her unit the owner is still a member of the body corporate; pays the levies; attends the AGM; and can exercise his or her vote for motions at the AGM.
The Rental Housing Act deals with landlords and tenants. It does not only deal with letting of units in sectional title schemes, but also to freehold property etc.
I do not think that the Rental Housing Act provisions relating to “giving up occupancy” and “only inspecting in a reasonable manner” means that you can jump to the interpretation that an owner gives up all access to their property and common property when the unit is let out.
Article reference: Paddocks Press: Volume 9, Issue 10, Page 6.
Professor Graham Paddock, Anton Kelly and Carryn Durham are available to answer questions on the discussion forum for Community Members of Paddocks Club. Get all your questions answered by joining Paddocks Club.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Recent Posts
Archives
- November 2024
- October 2024
- 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