27/07/2024
New Post: Nailing the big problem with too many by-laws https://buff.ly/46lbXan Over 25 years ago our regular guest columnist Francesco Andreone enthusiastically promoted by-laws as the best way to customise strata building operations.
However, he now thinks the proliferation of strata by-laws and rules since then has gone a bit too far; leading to many unnecessary, inappropriate and invalid by-laws and rules with most strata stakeholders placing undue reliance on them to fix all strata problems.
Here are some of Francesco’s examples of bad by-laws and rules, from his own website GoStrata, and his thoughts about how to tame the strata by-law beast.
INTRODUCTION
You’ve probably heard of … the ‘law of the instrument’ or the ‘Birmingham screwdriver’. It goes something like: ‘If all you have is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.’
It refers to the practice of using one tool (usually your favourite) for all purposes.
Well, I’m worried that too many strata mechanics think their by-law or rule hammer can fix everything that happens in strata buildings and are using it everywhere.
I’ve had to review a few by-laws and rules and found some serious flaws in a surprising number of them. Plus, many of them are poorly written (verbose, overly formal and unstructured) and others are just impractical or impossible to apply or enforce.
What gives, and why?
SOME BAD BY-LAW & RULE EXAMPLES
Here are just three examples of the unnecessary, invalid or just bad use of strata by-laws and rules I’ve come across (plus the problems with each of them).
- A NSW by-law that restricts the number of people that can be in strata lots or use common property facilities that’s intended to stop overuse by non-residents
This kind of by-law restricts people numbers and is intended to prevent the overuse of common property facilities like a gym or pool, particularly by non-owners or non-residents as strata buildings somehow consider it unfair that they do so.
But, strata owners and strata tenants have unfettered property rights to have guests and visitors to their lots and to use the common property, so this kind of by-law is likely to infringe on their basic private property rights.
It’s also likely to be outside the very limited scope that the untested provisions in section 137 and regulation 36 of the NSW strata laws appear to give to by-laws limiting the number of adults who can reside in a strata lot.
So, there are serious doubts about the validity of that kind of by-law or rule. Plus, I don’t know how it would be policed or enforced. I guess those strata buildings will also try to limit fob or other security device access which opens another legal can of worms.
- A rule that requires polite communication between strata owners and others and excuses committees, managers, etc from responding to rude contacts
This kind of rule or by-law prescribes behaviour in communications and sometimes authorises strata committees, managers and others from having to respond to rude communications.
I suspect a rude strata owner would not know (or care) about a politeness by-law. Or, even if the strata committee could respond by sending the strata owner a copy of the politeness by-law that’s unlikely to work.
It’s very likely that trying to prescribe communication protocols isn’t within the functions of strata corporations.
Plus, to the extent that the strata laws require strata corporations to respond to or deal with strata owner requests, a rule or by-law saying they don’t need to will be invalid.
And, exactly how do you define appropriate and inappropriate communications?
Perhaps there are better ways to improve intra-strata building communications.
- A strata by-law or rule restricting the installation of and prescribing controls over apartment blinds and curtains.
These kinds of strata by-laws or rules are often found in newer and more upmarket strata buildings and are intended to provide a more uniform appearance to the strata building when viewed from the outside.
However, there are already standard appearance by-laws or rules in most Australian states that deal with appearance issues in less prescriptive way and Cooper’s Case in NSW suggests that blanket bans in by-laws will be invalid.
Plus, in New South Wales, the strata law provisions about cosmetic and minor alterations allow blind and curtain alterations without approval so this kind of by-law or rule would be ineffective to the extent it is inconsistent with those strata law permissions.
There are many many more examples of bad by-laws or rules like those banning pets, Air BNB, and imposing money penalties and fines.
Frankly, invalid and poorly written by-laws and rules are a waste of strata stakeholder time as they’re never going to fix any problems and will hurt the strata building and the wider strata sector in obvious and less obvious ways.
But, even valid …