LawAnswers.com.au - Australia's #1 Legal Community

LawAnswers.com.au is a community of 10,000+ Australians, just like you, helping each other.
Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
Join us, it only takes a minute:

WA Is Body Corporate Responsible for Repair Costs?

Discussion in 'Property Law Forum' started by Wayne Russell, 10 June 2016.

  1. Wayne Russell

    Wayne Russell Member

    Joined:
    10 June 2016
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    We are part of 10 units (single tier) which were formed in 1980, WA. There are no exclusive use stipulations or bylaws affecting the internal space of the units, so standard Strata Title regulation. One of the units has just had an assessment done to see where water damage is originating from & it has been determined that the Tile grout & membrane in the shower area is the issue.

    Is the Body Corporate / Strata Company responsible for the repair costs of this situation (Insurance Policy does not cover this) or is it the responsibility of the owner? In other words are the Tiles & Membrane of the shower area considered common property responsibility & therefore Strata Company responsibility?
     
  2. Tim W

    Tim W Lawyer

    Joined:
    28 April 2014
    Messages:
    1,713
    Likes Received:
    402
    I think you'll find that the the membrane and the tiles are attached to the common property wall.

    It is therefore more likely that the lot holder will be responsible for the M&R of the tiles and membrane,
    and for any damage caused to the common property (or the property of other other lot holder)
    by either act (damage) or omission (failure to maintain).

    To put it another way - the owners corporation/ body corporate (by whatever name in WA)
    is typically not responsible for damage done by an individual lot holder.
     
    Wayne Russell likes this.
  3. Wayne Russell

    Wayne Russell Member

    Joined:
    10 June 2016
    Messages:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you Tim W for your input here, much appreciated, it certainly makes a lot of sense & appears logical.

    Interpretation of the common property & it's defined boundaries is something of a grey area here regarding this situation (& strata plan) in WA, as was indicated by a Landgate person I spoke to earlier today. Thus my inquiry on this forum

    I welcome any other input from people may have.
     

Share This Page

Loading...