Strata, common property and a false ceiling

[RazzaDazzla]

Renovating an apartment.

Strata are slack and a pain in the backside and there's the usual 'nosey' residents on the Executive who think it is their business to know everyone's business.

Anyway; our next renovation project is installing a false ceiling. This will involve drilling into the existing ceiling (concrete slab) to attach furring channel which the gyprock ceiling will attach to.

It is my understanding that this concrete slab (our ceiling, unit aboves floor) is common property and that our 'ownership' stops with the wall/floor/ceiling coverings such as paint, carpet etc.

In previous 'casual' discussions with strata (regarding removing a non structural wall) strata tried to say that any works that involved common property would require a special general meeting to be called (at a cost of ~$800) and that something like a 3/5 majortiy would be required to approve the work.

In regard to the wall, we simply sent the executive and strata a letter and report from a structural engineer stating that the wall was; non structural, not common property (as it wasn't shown on strata plans) and therefore would not have any effect to other residents. Strata & the executive said/did nothing and we removed the wall as we stated we would.

So, the options.
a)Write to strata/executive and ask permission to attach false ceiling to common property.
Time consuming, costly, may get knocked back by not getting 3/5 majority.

b)Just go ahead with the work, perhaps discretely let the residents above know about the noise out of courtesy.
If strata/executive gets a whiff of us touching common property, what rights do they have to access our property to inspect? I'm assuming they can then demand we remove the unauthorised renovations and possibly have us pay for repairs/inspections of common property.

So, any words of wisdom? after all, we just want to stick a few bolts into the slab to hold our false ceiling, we're not drilling in peep holes!

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

I'm no lawyer, but it sounds like you are on a loser.

If you think the Strata committee are agin you, then that is going to be an expensive way to get knocked back.

Your work will be too noisy to prevent some snitch getting wind of it and dobbing you in to the strata manager.

I'd move if I were you.

gg

 

[gooner]

Get the workmen to do the work when everyone is sleeping, then they won't be aware of it

 

[RazzaDazzla]

Strata/Executive isn't 'against' us; just the usual slackness of the Strata Managers and the noseyness of the Executive who think they are the boss of everyone.

What rights do Executive/strata have to come into a property and inspect?

Are my assumptions correct that the slab between us and the apartment above is classed as common property? and therefore needs approval to drill into?

Does drilling into common property require permission?

Damn I wish this was a house

 

[breakevencrazy]

It's always better to beg forgiveness than to ask permission.

 

[Onceblue]

Why not get a report from your structural engineer to say that attaching the false ceiling in your apartment will not affect the integrity of the building?
The strata manager will not care what you do inside your apartment so long as its safe.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

It's always better to beg forgiveness than to ask permission.

agree, but the ole Razza would be making so much noise he wouldn't get to the sinning stage.

Razza your home is yer Castle. Watch the movie, read Trading Post and stand your ground. It may go to the High Court. A much cheaper option than $800.

gg

 

[RazzaDazzla]

Why not get a report from your structural engineer to say that attaching the false ceiling in your apartment will not affect the integrity of the building?
The strata manager will not care what you do inside your apartment so long as its safe.

I like this. As per the wall removal, a letter from us (the owners) to the Strata Managers and the Executive stating that we will be installing a false ceiling on a given date. Attached will be a letter from Engineer that states that installing false ceiling will have no structural or other negative effect to lot owners.

Then the ownness will be on the Strata/Executive to say no.

 

[pixel]

What State do you live in?
I'm not aware of any Strata Law that requires a 3/5th majority vote to receive permission to screw into "common property". Especially if it's on the inside of your shell.
But then, I'm only Chair of our Strata Company of units in WA. Owners and tenants here are trying to stay on good terms with the "Executive", knowing full well if they create too much hassle they'll have to fill some vacant positions. (Alternative: appoint a contractor to manage the affairs - at three-to-five times the Strata fees and ten times the red tape ) So, we get along well and don't interfere unduly with renovations.

Read the by-laws. What do they say about renovations and fixtures inside your "external skin"? Again, I can only tell you the general tenor of our by-laws. For example, we have handed free rein over the entire backyards to owners. That includes patios, subject only to council regulations; dividing fences between units, subject to amiable negotiations between the two affected parties; only what's visible from the outside has to adhere to common design and colour schemes. Alterations visible from the outside, including air conditioners and roof extensions like solar tanks or panels, need approval. I can't remember any such application being rejected; nor can I recall anything obstructive or unreasonable being applied for.

 

[adobee]

legally you do need strata approval to put in a false ceiling.. once in you will take full responsibility for it also so if there is a leak from upstairs etc it will be up to you to fix your own gyprock etc. There is a building code standard which dictates the minimum ceiling height as such if your ceiling is lower than this then on a building inspection or council inspection it could be classed as a defect and you have to rectify (very unlikely to ever happen). What is the existing ceiling ugly ass vermiculite ? In my experience its much easier to just do it than muck around with approval just tell the tradespeople to keep the door shut whilst there doing the work.. make sure the lighting is reinstalled by a licenced electrician though. If you have fire services in the ceiling ie if its a newer block (i doubt it is or you would be changing ceiling) you will need to ensure that these are not covered or impeded upon (ie sprinklers) as if something does go wrong and you have blocked them you could get in a bit of hot water.. if its an old vermiculite one just throw the gyprock up quick smart.. whats the quote you have for this ? are you putting in down lights or leds or track lighting ?

 

[RazzaDazzla]

Thank for the reply adobee.

fully understand re. taking responsibility for ceiling such as paying for reapirs if there's a leak from upstairs etc. This is obviously something Insurance should/would cover. I just wouldn't want insurance to say "well, you didn't have strata approval to install this, therefore we're not paying for the damage".

Apartment is circa 1970 and has high ceilings of ~2.5m. Ceiling is just simple smooth rendered concrete slab; so isn't that ugly.

Reason for ceiling: Appearance and cable management. Free to air and fox outlets are on another wall and we need to do something with cables. I'm a bit of a nerd, so want to cable the entire unit.

Options were to either install bulkheads (effectively large box shaped cornices) and have all the required cables in there and perhap install low voltage downlights for mood lighting.

GF really wants false ceiling so she can have her precious down lights throughout. She is disgusted by the idea of bulkheads and also track lighting. I am more for bulkheads (price reasons). I also like the idea of our lofty ceilings as it gives the feeling of space.

We are looking to drop the ceiling 80mm (need to confirm this will be enough clearance for downlights) so we shouldn't have an issue with minimum ceiling height.

Costs - For false ceiling in a 2 bedroom apartment. Every room except WC, bathroom, laundry and ensuite. Total area = ~100m^2 (less the rooms mentioned)

Materials quoted from CSR for furring channels, gyprock, clips, glue, screws, plaster, delivery etc. was $2,000.00

Got a builder who works for $30/hr who estimates his work to be ~$2,000.

He then estimates (I think it's an over estimate) that the gyprock setters (I assume this is the guys who put the plaster on and make the joins look all pretty) will be ~$4,000. I think this could be done for cheaper.

I am then thinking of leaving a gap between the false ceiling and the walls of say 100mm. This gap will be covered with a modern looking mess. Then I will have access in the future for adding cables if required. Some mood lighting (not sure on type) can then be added to provide soft lighting around the edges of the rooms.

Still need to research downlights (as we want dimmables) and perhaps cable management.

At this point sent an email to a structural engineering mate and asked him his thoughts about supplying us with a letter that says "...attaching false ceiling to existing ceiling will cause no negative structural issues nor negatively impact on other lot owners...". Then we will send a letter to strata/executive saying we are installing a false ceiling, and BTW here's a copy of an engineers report saying it will cause no problems.

OR do we just go ahead, do it, keep the door closed, cover the windows and not let anyone in unless it's the sheriff? As stated before, in the event of flood, fire etc. it would be bad news for insurance company to renege stating that the ceiling wasn't approved by strata.

 

[Bill M]

I am unit owner in block of apartments in Sydney. We have to apply for any installations that we may want. For example air conditioners and storage units in an under cover car parking area.

When the person upstairs applied for an AC unit to be installed on the balcony my first question was noise filtrating downstairs to me or any potential leaks into my unit. The whole point of The Body Corporate is to protect each of the owners from building failures and to maintain the block. We pay for it in our levys as I am sure you well know.

I would strongly recommend doing it properly by making an application through the body corporate. As for the $800 fee that is required for a meeting that is not necessary. Wait for the next annual meeting and 2 Months prior to it send a signed letter to the Body Corporate Manager of your intentions. Clearly outline what you want to do and be ready for any question that may come your way during the meeting. Oh and be there too, applications tend to be turned down if the applicant doesn't turn up for the meetings because they are not there to answer the questions.

As far as insurance goes, if you haven't taken the correct steps then they can deny any claims so I would do it properly if I was you.

I know it's a load of BS but that's what unit owners have to go through, good luck.

 

[pixel]

fully understand re. taking responsibility for ceiling such as paying for reapirs if there's a leak from upstairs etc. This is obviously something Insurance should/would cover. I just wouldn't want insurance to say "well, you didn't have strata approval to install this, therefore we're not paying for the damage".

As stated before, in the event of flood, fire etc. it would be bad news for insurance company to renege stating that the ceiling wasn't approved by strata.

You better seek advice about that from your insurance company. As it's all happening on the inside of your "shell", you have to be quite clear that everything that happens to the interior, including the lowered ceiling, is YOUR responsibility. And if there is the slightest possibility that something bad could happen to the common property from that ceiling and the cables you're hiding in the space, be sure the Strata Company is aware of it. They may need to inform their building insurer (assuming that's the way it works at your place).

 

[RazzaDazzla]

Thanks for the replies.

Waiting for the next AGM isn't an option as it will be some ~ 8 months away. In hindsight, we should have been more organised and applied for ALL our renovations at the last AGM. This would have made good sense.

So I guess there's a valid point in Strata charging ~$800 to facilitate a special general meeting. Still, a bit hecsy if you ask me.

Hmmmm... Decisions decisions.

If we go ahead with the work, what's the worse that can happen?
Strata gets some sort of order/warrant to inspect our property?
They can then demand we pay for a independent engineer/building inspector to inspect the work.
They can then demand we remove the ceiling and pay for repairs to the slab where we attached the ceiling?

What are the chances of this happening VS the cost that this would cause?

Units!

 

[RazzaDazzla]

Just had a flick through the by-laws.

5. Damage to common property
(1) An owner or occupier of a lot must not mark, paint, drive nails or screws or the like into, or otherwise damage or deface, any structure that forms part of the common property without the approval in writing of the owners corporation.


I'm assuming the concrete slab under the coat of ceiling paint is considered common property?

So...
Go ahead do it anyway, how would they know what we're doing inside our own apartment?

OR

Go hat in hand, pay the fees to convene the Special GM and hope all goes well?

OR

Instead of screwing/bolting furring channels etc into common property, is there anyway to glue these things to the existing ceiling and still support the weight of the false ceiling?

 

[Smurf1976]

GF really wants false ceiling so she can have her precious down lights throughout. She is disgusted by the idea of bulkheads and also track lighting. I am more for bulkheads (price reasons). I also like the idea of our lofty ceilings as it gives the feeling of space.

Nothing personal , but halogen downlights are very much a "form over function" thing in my view. An incredibly maintenance and energy intensive means of providing fairly poor quality lighting.

But each to their own as I said and it doesn't really bother me. Just as long as people with houses full of downlights don't start complaining about coal, power stations, greenhouse gases etc - installing those lights is a conscious decision to increase your carbon footprint.

LED lighting is where it's all headed - anything else will almost certainly seem very dated within a few years given the pace of LED development. It's not quite there yet, but it's getting closer in terms of output and light quality.

As for the original question, my general principle with anything resembling a council, body corporate or similar is don't tell them any more than you need to but do tell them what you are required by actual laws (not the funny "laws" that many such people seem to invent) to tell them.

In this case, it would seem that you are required to inform them of what you propose. But as as with any bureaucrat, make the "easy" option the one in your favour - you'd be amazed how that can work (depends on the people concerned...).

 

[Happy]

....
So, any words of wisdom? after all, we just want to stick a few bolts into the slab to hold our false ceiling, we're not drilling in peep holes!

It sounds probably silly, but did you think to anchor false ceiling to the walls instead?

 

[RazzaDazzla]

It sounds probably silly, but did you think to anchor false ceiling to the walls instead?

Not silly at all. I spoke to the builder about this, and he was a bit amused at my out of the box thinking.

In the hallway etc. with narrow spans, this could be done. In living areas with 4-5m spans you would need some sort of support in the middle of the rooms. Apparently by the time you put gyprock, plaster, paint etc. the ceiling becomes quite heavy.

I even ran the idea of gluing the battens to the existing ceiling, s then we're not drilling into common property. He doesn't know of a glue that would hold all that weight.

The GF did find this;
STRATA SCHEMES MANAGEMENT ACT 1996 - SECT 116 Owners, occupiers and other persons not to interfere with structure of lot or services to lot
116 Owners, occupiers and other persons not to interfere with structure of lot or services to lot
(1) An owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession (whether in person or not), lessee or occupier of a lot must not do anything or permit anything to be done on or in relation to that lot so that:
(a) any support or shelter provided by that lot for another lot or common property is interfered with, or
(b) the passage or provision of water, sewage, drainage, gas, electricity, garbage, artificially heated or cooled air, heating oil and other services (including telephone, radio and television services) through or by means of any pipes, wires, cables or ducts for the time being in the lot is interfered with.
(2) The owner of a lot must not alter the structure of the lot without giving to the owners corporation, not later than 14 days before commencement of the alteration, a written notice describing the proposed alteration.
(3) In this section, "lessee" of a lot in a strata leasehold scheme means a sublessee of the lot.

So from the sounds of it; despite our by-laws; I think we will send a letter to the Executive, CC the strata manager and inform them off what we are doing, supported with an Engineers letter saying that work will not damage common property, supporting structures, or services to other lots. Then we are not ASKING their permission but rather telling them what we will be doing. Then it is up to them to get off their lazy backside and go to the effort to say "no".

I think this is the better option rather than ASKING them for permission.

If we tell them what we're doing and support our claims of no damage etc. with an engineers letter; I think we'll be in business. Will keep you all posted.

 

[satanoperca]

Hi,

Have plenty of experience with BC, been the chairperson of BC for two years on a 110 unit development in Melbourne.

All that the BC is trying to do is mitigate any liability from themselves if something goes wrong.

You also have to accept by nature and structure body corporates take forever to come to any discussion even the simplest of request.

The question is who is responsible if anything goes wrong? You, BC, builder or Engineer.

Eg you drill holes into the concrete, unknown to you there is a small hair line fracture which you drill into. Over time, this small hole weakens the slab and eventually leads to a section of the ceiling falling.

The BC insurance company will come after you first if you do not have the written consent of the BC. You in-turn will have to chase the Engineer and Builder unless the builder provides the Engineers certificate, in which case you only have to pursue to Builder for damages.

It this technicality that may bite you further down the track.

Also, is the Engineer registered, always check and have adequate insurance.
Is the Engineer willing to accept responsibility if something fails?
Has the Engineer supplied drawings that specify how the work is to be completed?

Now assuming that the batterning is to be attached with concrete nails, the penetration will be relatively small, which is good and should not take to much time, less than a day of noise then you may not have a problem.

As you have asked the BC for permission, telling them that you are going to do it means nothing as you have already announced that you know you need permission.

The interesting bit is with this issue, if you go ahead with the works can they stop you. No. Can they make you remove, pulldown the works once completed. Yes, but it is costly for them to proceed with such action., but if they do and it is deemed you were in the wrong, you will have to pay all court costs.

You may think to yourself, f---k em, I will not pay. They will place a cavet over you property preventing you completing a sale in the future without paying of any debt to the BC.

I sold my apartment last year due to a reason stemming from the BC. They wish to take on a publicly list developer for defects over 7 years ago. Legal action, not at court yet is already at $250K and will mount to easily over $1M before and if there is a settlement. The rectification works cost $250K. I have the developer willing to pay half the costs, but due to BC structures all it took was a few committee members to get a bee in their bonets and the deal was taken off the table.

This is the problem with BC. You could also look at getting elected onto the BC.

Cheers

 

[Happy]

…
In the hallway etc. with narrow spans, this could be done. In living areas with 4-5m spans you would need some sort of support in the middle of the rooms. Apparently by the time you put gyprock, plaster, paint etc. the ceiling becomes quite heavy.
…

This might put too much pressure on the walls, but arched support before is straightened and bend the other way will take quite a load.
Idea can be run past engineer to calculate what sort of beam across the room has to be put to hold that weight.
Also instead of gyprock, styrofoam might be installed with similar to gyprock face that can be painted, but halogen spotlights would be out as no way it could be ventilated to remove heat out.