The issue of improvements to the common areas in a scheme is almost always contentious. Those members who cannot afford the additional expense or do not expect that they will derive any benefit from the improvements will oppose them, while others will support them.
In terms of section 39 (6) (d) of the CSOS Act, an application may be for:
“an order declaring that the association’s decision to reject a proposal to make improvements on or alterations to common areas is unreasonable, and requiring the association-
(i) to agree to the proposal; or
(ii) to ratify the proposal on specified terms;
Examples of issues
A member may feel that the association has unreasonably rejected an improvement proposal, such as a wheelchair access ramp required so that he or she can get to the common area pool.
An owner who has suffered loss due to a burglary in the scheme, or the theft of their car from a common area, may find that their proposal for common area security improvements is not supported by other owners.
The executive committee may support a common area improvement, but find that they are not able to get the required level of owner agreement to authorise the expenditure.
In these and other cases an application can be made to the CSOS for an adjudicator’s order that effectively reverses the decision to reject the improvement proposal.
Example of order
An example of the type of order the CSOS could give is:
That the directors of the Green Valley Home Owners Association must, within a period of 3 months, install a wheelchair access ramp linking the clubhouse building to the parking lot adjacent to it. This order takes effect immediately.
Is this not the right order – is either the type or category is wrong for your matter?
Use the buttons below to navigate back and explore other options.