Hynes Legal (Page 2)

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

Bush lawyers abound out there in strataland. Someone heard from someone else that someone did something or got something and then that becomes the rumour that bounces around endlessly becoming the little spot fire that we then need to put out individually with clients when they ring to ask us: ‘I got told THIS — can we do that too?’ Valuers have it worse though. ‘So and so down the road got 5.6 times for their business so that means mine is worth 5.8 times.’ Leaving aside it was never contracted at 5.6 times in the first place, usually what has happened is the accountantRead More →

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

The Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCM Act) sets out a number of spending limits. Some of these intersect with others. Some need to go to general meeting and some depend on the number of lots in the scheme. The rules relating to them are scattered across the relevant Regulation Modules. This article sets them out in one place. The major categories of spending include the: committee spending limit (is a committee or general meeting required?) major spending limit (are two quotes needed?) common property improvement limit (what type of resolution is required depending on who is making the improvement?) The committee spending limit The default position for committeeRead More →

If you are in the accommodation industry and have not heard of Airbnb you must have been living under a rock. The San Francisco-based home sharing juggernaut just keeps growing. It is affecting accommodation supply worldwide, but also in our little part of the planet. An indication of how quickly Airbnb has arrived is reflected in the most recent BCCM review recommendations. We received the recommendations last month to an issues paper released in December 2014. The topic of short term letting restrictions would have been a perfect addition to that options paper, but Airbnb was simply not on the radar when it was published.Read More →

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

Hot on the heels of the lot entitlement review recommendations, we now have the recommendations paper in response to another of the BCCMA option papers. What is in this recommendations paper is not law, although it is what the QUT professors are suggesting should become law.  Responses to the paper can be lodged as detailed here and close on 5 May 2017. The recommendations paper (amongst other things) relates to: Towing of cars; Pets; Smoking; Overcrowding; Fining occupiers for breaching by-laws; Debt recovery costs; Australian addresses for service; and Scheme termination. Can anyone else smell an election coming on? There are 84 pages of recommendationsRead More →

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

There are new requirements for smoke alarms in all dwellings (being houses or units) from 1 January this year. The rules are not retrospective but they will apply when a dwelling is relet (whether to a new or existing tenant). You can click here for the QFES summary and here for a more detailed explanation. The OFT also has a section on it. All property managers should make sure their clients are aware of the requirements to comply with the new rules. There is little doubt where liability would sit if there was a fire and the smoke alarms were not compliant.Read More →

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

It’s over. The longest running (and most expensive) dispute over a deck in Australia has been decided by the High Court.  There are no appeals from there so we now have the definitive statement on what a body corporate’s decision making obligations are based on. Round one went to the deck owner (Commissioner’s Office) Round two went to the complaining owners (QCAT) Round three went to the deck owner (Qld Supreme Court) We wrote an article after the Supreme Court decision here. The opponents to the deck won. The smartest group of lawyers in the country (being the High Court) has decided that the oppositionRead More →

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

Acquiescence.  Such a beautiful word.  But not when it comes to by-law enforcement. Enforcing by-laws is not an optional activity. By-laws must be enforced, and the responsibility for their enforcement lies with the committee. There are a few golden rules that all committees must follow when it comes to by-law enforcement. The by-law enforcement process in the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (BCCM Act) must be followed. The BCCM Act sets out a specific procedure for enforcing by-laws.  Regardless of your personal view on the effectiveness (or otherwise) of these procedures, the committee must follow them.  Deviate from the procedural requirements at yourRead More →

Smoking in Strata

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

We have no idea how we haven’t written about this issue before but in terms of frequently asked questions in strata this is one of the biggies. If you were a smoker you couldn’t help but feel a little threatened (and perhaps rather heavily taxed) given the range of legislated rules around smoking.  Smoking has now been banned in aged care facilities and one of the recent state government discussion papers on strata title laws specifically asked for comment about smoking in strata title schemes. And before anyone asks, no, we haven’t seen draft legislation or feedback from the government in relation to any ofRead More →

We are definitely seeing more and more management rights businesses being created without the need to own a piece of real estate with them. This is particularly the case in new off the plan developments. Some of these are large enough to be purely standalone businesses, but most of them in smaller schemes seem to be designed to be able to operate on a standalone basis, but also as a ‘bolt on’ to an existing management rights business. We have written previously about things you need to consider when thinking about separating your management lot from your management rights business here. The key theme thereRead More →

Contributed By: Hynes Legal on

Yes, we took that from the Godfather, but why not? It is one of the greatest lines ever delivered in a movie (and credit where it is due to Mario Puzo for writing it in the first place). Anyway, enough pop culture. We don’t need any distractions this early in the new year! We have written about bodies corporate and their obligations to act reasonably over the years and this newsletter is another example of the same principle. It started with 14 owners saying ‘no’ to an application made by our client for the grant of an exclusive use space (which required a resolution withoutRead More →

ADVERTISMENT: