Welcome to the blog of NSW strata investigative journalism
| From: | SP52948 owner |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Crosbie Waratah Strata Management |
| Subject: | FINAL REQUEST FOR OFFICIAL RESPONSE AND ACTION: SP52948 Replacement of obsolete smoke detectors in Lot 158 |
| Date: | 9/5/19, 8:08 pm |
For public records of SP52948. This is the final notice and personal reply by the Secretary of the Executive Committee is expected immediately.
No reply was received on the previous email below. Note in the alleged EC meeting held on 21 March 2019 (not compliant with SSMA 2015 because two EC members cannot be on the committee due to unpaid gas levies and because at least some owners, like Lot 158 again, did not receive agenda of the meeting 72 hours before the meeting) failed to inform owners about significant number of owners having privilege to replace smoke detectors at owners corporation expense.
The admission that no owner paid gas levies in FY 2018 makes it
now very clear that the quorum was not satisfied, in spite of clear
question by Lot 158 at AGM 2018 to name all owners who had rights
to vote at the meeting. That also makes all decisions at AGM 2018
in doubt (including contract renewals and By-Laws).
Lot 158 is trying to avoid costs to SP52948, but it seems their attempts to reason with the EC members and the strata managers are silently rejected.
In September 2017 in the case of McElwaine v The Owners – SP 75975 [2017] NSWCA 2 the NSW Supreme Court of Appeal decided that in addition to the rights of the Lot owner to obtain appropriate orders that the Owners Corporation maintain the common property in accordance with Section 62 of the SSMA 1996 [which is similar to Section 106 of the SSMA 2015] a Lot owner who suffers damages as a result the default by the Owners Corporation is entitled to common law damages.
In that case McElwaine was entitled to damages in nuisance. Similarly damages will be awarded against an Owners Corporation due to the negligence of the Owners Corporation in the appropriate case.
Regards,
On 19/3/19 12:06 pm, SP52948 owner wrote:
Hi,
It is noted that no response was received from Waratah Strata Management at any time, no action taken to replace the expired smoke detectors, and directly discriminating against Lot 158 and endangering their safety.
The attachment shows part of the collected evidence that other owners replaced their detectors from common funds.
It is also noted that Waratah Strata Management acts as strata manger, Secretary, Treasurer, and Chairperson for SP52948 because office bearers do not exist since AGM 2018 (which failed to satisfy quorum, like AGM 2016 and 2017).
Regards,
On 1/3/19 11:17 pm, SP52948 wrote:
Hi,
In accordance with SSMA 2015 Section 106 (Duty of owners corporation to maintain and repair property), obligations by Waratah Strata Management as listed in their contract with SP52948, obligations by maintenance staff as listed in their contract with SP52948, and Motion 19 at Annual General Meeting 2018 (strata affairs directly affecting Lot 158), it is requested that overdue replacement of very old smoke detector be completed as soon as possible.
a) The NSW Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 requires that "the owner of a building, to which an essential fire safety measure is applicable, is required to maintain each essential fire safety measure in the building". Failure to comply with this legislation can lead to significant fines and possibly serious legal ramifications for those responsible.
The bottom-line is: everyone MUST comply with the fire safety legislation – no excuses
In an effort to protect residents from this risk, the NSW Government introduced the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment (Smoke Alarms) Regulation 2006.
As of May 2016, a legislative change came into force requiring that all smoke detectors MUST be replaced when they are 10 years old.
The requirement to replace smoke alarms is defined by law and also shown at Fire and Rescue NSW:
https://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=9218
Photos taken from two smoke alarms in Lot 158 show that one of them should have been replaced in 2005 (now 14 years after the due date), and the other one expired last year. Please verify that information.
As number of other units had their smoke alarms replaced from common funds (Lot 158 has full documentary evidence of it, including the invoices for the work carried out), it is requested that the same service be provided to Lot 158.
The law is that repair and maintenance of
smoke alarms are an owner’s responsibility unless it was installed
at time of construction (which is the case in SP52948).
It is requested therefore, for the safety of occupants of Lot 158 and all owners, tenants and visitors in SP52948 that replacement smoke alarms be organised as a matter of urgency in Lot 158 and every other unit as deemed necessary.
b) Today, a notice was put in all elevators (they should be on notice boards but that is a separate issue) that a group of owners, who did not provide access for fire inspection must do so next week.
Is this service provided without extra charge by Eagle Fire or will there be an extra cost to Lot 158 and other owners from common funds. If latter, then the owners who forced additional inspection must be charged for such service. Lot 158 is not willing to spend their levies on these repetitive actions.
c) It is noted, as it affects Lot 158 (and other owners too), that compliance with fire safety standards is lacking in various areas (photo and video evidence has been collected). Examples:
It is kindly asked that owners corporation completes all fire
safety measures and rectification steps before requesting
compliance approval from the Ryde Council. Evidence exists that
Ryde Council was receiving false information about SP52948
compliance in the past.
Due to seriousness of fire safety issues, a response from Secretary of the Executive Committee of SP52948 is required and welcome.
Regards,
On 18/2/19 5:56 am, SP52948 wrote:
Hi,
Thank you for finally addressing the issue with missing compliance tag on the entry front door of Lot 158 which existed since 2016.
This was a known issue and documented in yearly fire inspections but not attended by owners corporation until last week.
The door tag is an integral component of a fire-resistant doorset identifying the door.
Regards,