Historic Repairs to Bathroom

  1. Forums
  2. Repairs and maintenance
  3. Historic Repairs to Bathroom

Forums Repairs and maintenance Historic Repairs to Bathroom

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #395717
    Leo 0708
    Member

    Hi Amanda

    This issue predates my time in the building. There was a signaifcant leak form Unit 3 into Unit 1. After much legal to do the OC paid for the complete renovation of Unit 3 bathroom. There is nothing on records of the understanding between the OC and the Owner of Unit 3 who still resides in the building.

    When ever there is an issue in her bathroom she asks The OC to pay for it and informs us that is the responsibility of the OC as they have renovated her unit. Is she correct with this?

    Does the OC now pay for any repairs in her bathroom no matter what?She has seepage from the pipe leading to the toilet bowl and again has asked the OC to cover the cost.

    Keen to understand what the OC responsibilities are in this case.

    Cheers

     

     

    #395877
    Amanda Farmer
    Expert

    Hi Leo,

    Do you know exactly what the OC did in the bathroom? Are we talking a re-tiling project, or new fixtures and fittings also? Eg – did the OC install the toilet that is now leaking?

    It’s beyond debate that the OC remains responsible for the common property – just as it does with any original bathroom.

    Things get a little trickier if the OC did replace fixtures like vanity, toilet, etc and there is a problem with that particular item.

    I’d  try arguing that:

    (a) the item is lot property – sure it was replaced by the Owners Corporation, at its cost, but that doesn’t mean the ownership of the item suddenly transfer to the Owners Corporation. That’s like saying an owner’s wardrobe doors, damaged by a leak from above, now belong to the OC because the OC paid to replace them. Not the case.

    (b) the work that was done way back then is (I assume) out of warranty: the OC has no recourse against the contractor who did the work – nor would the owner, even if they had engaged them directly. So the OC is in no better position to rectify the issue than the owner.

    This would be different if there was a failure in the waterproofing – for example. Where you’re waterproofing boundary walls and floors, that waterproofing is common property and though the OC has in the past replaced that item, it has not shifted responsibility to the lot owner (the lot owner would have needed to consent to that).  The OC remains responsible for any problems with that waterproofing.

    Amanda.

    #395988
    Leo 0708
    Member

    Hi Amanda

    The entire bathroom, waterproofing , shower, bath, fixtures & fittings were all done I am told at the cost of the OC.

    This issue is not related to waterproofing or the tiles it is a pipe that is from the wall to the toilet basin and is basically wear and tear.

    Now this is a small item and cost to the OC. However I believe we need to make clear what is and is not a cost to the OC. We need to have clarity for both parties. Just because the OC paid for the entire bathroom to be replaced it does not mean they now own it and are responsible for all works at any stage?

     

    #396123
    Amanda Farmer
    Expert

    Indeed. I agree with your last line.

    Amanda.

Viewing 4 posts - 1 through 4 (of 4 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Menu