Hi All, I am a Commercial Manager helping a friend with a problem with her unit which is part of a body corporate, and I just want to check that my thoughts are consistent with other managers/lawyers before I approach her BC Manager. I do deal with BC's though work however the person managing this unit has a very different way of dealing with the situation, though I am pretty sure based on where their business is based and where the unit is that they have not inspected/visited the property in some time.
Essentially, there has been moisture damage (mould to ceiling, walls and carpet etc) in her unit, from what I can see by the photos she has provided me with there is water coming from a partially collapsed retained bank at the back of the property which forms part of the common property, the water is running down the side of the building (concrete block walls). If the photo provided by the BC manager is correct then there is also an area of external wall which is unpainted/sealed, and the pic shows a bunch of rubbish piled up down the side of the unit, however I am unable to marry that picture up with the photos provided by my friend, which I find a bit suspicious. I am going for a road trip next weekend to view the property myself.
The advice provided by the BC manager is that my friend is responsible for clearing away any rubbish and/or soil from a slip and ensuring that the paint on the outside of the unit is maintained, as the area forms part of a private courtyard and that they would be happy to undertake the repairs and recover the costs from her under section 126 of the UTA 2010. The unit title plan clearly shows the courtyard to be on the other side of the house, and the boundary of private property to be the wall of the unit.
So, my thoughts are that regardless of the cause of the damage; be it from rubbish piled outside of the building or a slip/water coming from the rear of the section, it would have been the responsibility of the BC to maintain/repair those areas in order to avoid damage occurring to any of the units. My thoughts are that the damage was consequential from a lack of maintenance and that the BC should be responsible for putting it right. (Looking at the photos it appears that there is very little maintenance completed on the rear of the site, the photos show a number of areas where the bank has given way and the soil is just lying on the ground at the back of the car park).
Anyway, I would be interested to know if anyone has had any experience with a similar situation or a better legal understanding than the BC manager, would really appreciate any of your thoughts.
Thanks in advance,
Giddy
Essentially, there has been moisture damage (mould to ceiling, walls and carpet etc) in her unit, from what I can see by the photos she has provided me with there is water coming from a partially collapsed retained bank at the back of the property which forms part of the common property, the water is running down the side of the building (concrete block walls). If the photo provided by the BC manager is correct then there is also an area of external wall which is unpainted/sealed, and the pic shows a bunch of rubbish piled up down the side of the unit, however I am unable to marry that picture up with the photos provided by my friend, which I find a bit suspicious. I am going for a road trip next weekend to view the property myself.
The advice provided by the BC manager is that my friend is responsible for clearing away any rubbish and/or soil from a slip and ensuring that the paint on the outside of the unit is maintained, as the area forms part of a private courtyard and that they would be happy to undertake the repairs and recover the costs from her under section 126 of the UTA 2010. The unit title plan clearly shows the courtyard to be on the other side of the house, and the boundary of private property to be the wall of the unit.
So, my thoughts are that regardless of the cause of the damage; be it from rubbish piled outside of the building or a slip/water coming from the rear of the section, it would have been the responsibility of the BC to maintain/repair those areas in order to avoid damage occurring to any of the units. My thoughts are that the damage was consequential from a lack of maintenance and that the BC should be responsible for putting it right. (Looking at the photos it appears that there is very little maintenance completed on the rear of the site, the photos show a number of areas where the bank has given way and the soil is just lying on the ground at the back of the car park).
Anyway, I would be interested to know if anyone has had any experience with a similar situation or a better legal understanding than the BC manager, would really appreciate any of your thoughts.
Thanks in advance,
Giddy
Comment