By The Paddocks Club Team
Below are examples of two questions on the Paddocks Club discussion forum. We want to show you what is available to our Community members!
Tuck Shop
Member’s question:
Hi All,
We have been asked by a couple of body corporates recently if the trustees can operate a tuck shop in order to raise funds to augment the income of the complex. The shop would be on common property, and would sell items only to the residents.
We are of the view that firstly the complex is zoned residential and therefore no commercial enterprise can take place. Secondly we believe that the mandate of the trustees is to recover expenses from the owners, and not to run a commercial enterprise. Thirdly we believe that the Scheme is residential, and it would be against the Act in terms of change of usage.
There are other significant factors to consider also. Such as stock losses, possible additional wages of cleaners etc, separate bank accounts and the like.
I would appreciate other views on the matter.
Member reply:
Hi all,
We have a similar question about a coin-operated laundry.
I know that the body corporate can provide “amenities and services” for the residents, for example it is common for schemes for older people to provide meals.
If the service is owned by the body corporate and only serves the residents is it “commercial” in terms of city zoning?
Does it make a difference if it is intended to make a profit or break even?
Thanks and regards,
Carryn’s answer:
Opening a tuck shop in a scheme is not prohibited. It would have to make sense for that scheme though, for example where it is an old age home or there are no corner shops near to the scheme.
Section 38(i) the body corporate may enter into an agreement with any owner or occupier of a section for the provision of amenities or services by the body corporate. Furthermore the trustees can employ a shopkeeper in terms of section 38(i) and PMR 26(1)(a).
The trustees would have to weigh up the risks and rewards in opening up such a tuck shop.
Garage a used as living area
Member’s question:
Good afternoon
Some advice please on how to address the following;
I received a report that the garage (part of the section) adjacent to mine has a lounge suit arranged therein and a gentleman has been seen lounging thereon on occasion. I do not live in the complex but have now on two occasions this week end (in the evening) when driving past the complex observed a person seated therein.
The garages are situated on the ground floor in front of the building directly off the street. The doors are ’tilt’ doors and when open, public has full view of the interior of the garage.
We are aware of the fact that a garage (shown as such on the plan) is not permitted to be used for any other purpose. I am not at all brave enough to approach this garage. Only one Trustee resides in the building and she is also not prepared to approach. I intend addressing this matter with the absent owner but would like some advice on how to approach the matter as I cannot state for sure whether there is someone residing in the garage.
Do I just request owner to personally view and investigate with a report back date? He lives quite nearby. I am not sure whether or not to advise of the law etc at this stage due to the uncertainty of actual proof.
The tenant has been a problem (exceptionally noisy) for some years now and there have been numerous communications in this regard with the owner. However
we are of the opinion that owner is somehow afraid of the tenant as he has mentioned that her boyfriend is a magistrate and all previous complaints have been
brushed aside as racist.
Look forward to some advice.
Anton’s answer:
Section 44(1)(e) deals with nuisance and section 44(1)(g) and PMR 68(1)(v) deal with use restrictions. Additionally, the part of a section designed and built as a garage is not a habitable space in terms of the town planning regulations. There are ventilation, damp proofing and fire protection issues. Section 37(1)(n) requires the body corporate to ensure compliance with any law relating to the common property and improvements to the land.
I agree the correct route to follow in this instance is to write to the owner concerned, alerting him to the use and local authority contraventions and requiring him to put a stop to it.
Article reference: Paddocks Press: Volume 10, Issue 3, Page 6.
Professor Graham Paddock, Anton Kelly, Carryn Durham and Zerlinda van der Merwe are available to answer questions on the Paddocks Club discussion forum for Community members. Get all your questions answered by joining Paddocks Club.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Back to Paddocks Press – July 2015 Edition.
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Graham Paddock on Body Corporate Functions: Insurance
- Graham Paddock on Spending body corporate funds
- Graham Paddock on The Levy Clearance Certificate: The Body Corporate’s Cheap & Effective Weapon
- Graham Paddock on The benefits of online sectional title meetings
- Heinz Wiesner on The benefits of online sectional title meetings
Archives
- 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
1 Comment.
A homeowner insisted on building a tuckshop on common property.. How do.we stop this from happening or taking down the structure. He is using bullying tactics please advise