MUD Act Section 10 query

BreezyByTheSea

I live in a MUD that is about 16 years old. I am also on the board of the Omc. It is a small development of about five blocks consisting of a duplexes below with apartments on top.

Outside the duplexs are a small bit of grass areas that the duplex owners have been planting in and treating as personal gardens. Some have put small fences around them.

It has been pointed out that these small patches are part of the common areas and owned by the OMC and the question is now do we force owners to remove the plantings and return the areas back to the original or find a solution that allows us to let the members continue. The majority of the board believes it improves the development over the past 16 years.

My question is would the MUD act Section 10 allow us to transfer responsibility of the maintenance of these areas to the individual unit owners if it was passed by members at an AGM?

Lantus

You will need to take expert legal advice on this matter. To my understanding the buildings and land are irrevocably bound to the company. If it was as easy as a quorum voting at an AGM (which can be as little as three people) you'd of had every greedy despot taking ownership of land and property. The lease will prevent this from happening.

BreezyByTheSea

Lantus wrote: »

You will need to take expert legal advice on this matter. To my understanding the buildings and land are irrevocably bound to the company. If it was as easy as a quorum voting at an AGM (which can be as little as three people) you'd of had every greedy despot taking ownership of land and property. The lease will prevent this from happening.

We are seeking legal advice, it's just Section 10 seems to imply you can so I was hoping someone would understand Section 10

antoinolachtnai

There are a lot of Bad Things in what you have described. You really need to see a solicitor, and time may be of the essence.

Lantus

BreezyByTheSea wrote:

We are seeking legal advice, it's just Section 10 seems to imply you can so I was hoping someone would understand Section 10

So that's not an easy section to easily grasp, very legal. Digging up common grounds even adjacent to your unit doesn't infer a right to own such areas. You can be sure that if a few people are going to become land owners everyone will want a piece.......

Lantus

antoinolachtnai wrote:

There are a lot of Bad Things in what you have described. You really need to see a solicitor, and time may be of the essence.

If someone was injured on these fences or lands the company could be held liable and the directors found to be negligent (which is highly undesirable).

This is because it's doubtful it's been built to standards acceptable for public spaces and it contravenes the lease and could invalidate your pl insurance.

BreezyByTheSea

Lantus wrote: »

So that's not an easy section to easily grasp, very legal. Digging up common grounds even adjacent to your unit doesn't infer a right to own such areas. You can be sure that if a few people are going to become land owners everyone will want a piece.......

Yeah we aren't looking to transfer ownership of the areas but just the responsibility of maintenance

As per :
(b) the owners’ management company concerned may by agreement transfer and the unit owner concerned may by agreement accept,

the transfer of the ownership of the interest in, or the transfer of responsibility for the maintenance and management of, the part concerned.

athtrasna

Technically anyone erecting a fence is vandalising common property. Owners skills be given time to return common areas to their original state or pay the cost of the management company doing so.

Allowing this semi takeover was extremely unwise, directors are charged with protecting the interests of the management company, they need to act to reclaim this land, however small it might seem

Lantus

What about the next unit owner that buys a unit? They will need to maintain this area? What if they don't and it looks a mess?

It seems a little like a balcony scenario. The omc own it but the owner looks after it to an extent?

Peregrinus

athtrasna wrote: »

Technically anyone erecting a fence is vandalising common property. Owners skills be given time to return common areas to their original state or pay the cost of the management company doing so.

They're not vandalising the common property. The general view seems to be that the amenity value of the common property is enhanced by what they're doing so, if anything, they're improving it.

But I agree with other comments. As long as there's confusion or uncertainly or misconceptions, there could be tears before bedtime. Duplex owners may think that they own "their" garden areas, or that they are acquiring ownership, or that they are at least acquiring some exclusive right or licence. It would be as well to standardise the arrangement and document it in an agreement between the management company and each of the duplex owners concerned. The agreement needs to be within the powers of the management company and, just as importantly, it must not diminish the rights of the remaining occupants of the development or reduce the value of their units.

Solicitor time, I think.

athtrasna

Peregrinus wrote: »

They're not vandalising the common property. The general view seems to be that the amenity value of the common property is enhanced by what they're doing so, if anything, they're improving it.

They're putting holes in the ground to erect fences and to plant plants. Technically they are not entitled to do this. They are also changing the external appearance of the development which should be a no no and is in most leases (usually to stop people doing things like painting their door bright yellow etc).

Also the management company is responsible for the maintenance of common areas (not like balconies). OP has this happened in your development?

Peregrinus

athtrasna wrote: »

They're putting holes in the ground to erect fences and to plant plants. Technically they are not entitled to do this.

But that doesn't make it vandalism. The work you do on someone else's land may degrade it, or it may enhance it. Only the former would normally be considered vandalism.

BreezyByTheSea

athtrasna wrote: »

They're putting holes in the ground to erect fences and to plant plants. Technically they are not entitled to do this. They are also changing the external appearance of the development which should be a no no and is in most leases (usually to stop people doing things like painting their door bright yellow etc).

Also the management company is responsible for the maintenance of common areas (not like balconies). OP has this happened in your development?

I've only been in the development 2 years but the development is over 16 years old and there has never been a consistent look in the development.

I believe there was a deal done with the developer that they would finish off planting some of the common areas way back then. This ended up where some of these garden patches had different trees/plants etc placed and some had none at all. Over the years over half the duplex owners have been adding to these patches to improve the look.

The OMC do still maintain the common areas and planting of the large communal green areas in the development. For these grass patches/gardens we do cut the grass where there is grass. Some units have had this area landscaped and replaced with stones etc.

I think for years there was no real wish for anybody to drive the omc and the ones willing were lacking in the knowledge this issue could create.

Currently there are no guidelines on door colours etc, probably as it wasn't a consideration at the time when the development was built. There is a provision that the unit owners have to keep there doors in good condition

athtrasna

BreezyByTheSea wrote: »

Some units have had this area landscaped and replaced with stones etc.

To be honest I'm horrified at this. The directors need to get together and realise what has happened and get good legal advice. They have seriously fallen down on their duties in allowing individual members to colonise common property in this way.

Lantus

Ultimately you need to manage your development with respect to your unique circumstances. A smaller more community driven group could make this work. It would be a shame to curtail this work if it's of good quality and brings people together.

The_Conductor

What happens to the unit owners who don't have a personal garden?
The apartment owners- other than the duplex owners for example- who have the self-same property rights and ownership rights- and are members identical to the duplex owners in the OMC. The OMC exists for a reason- it is a holding body for all communal property- and organises maintenance of same. There is absolutely nothing to stop the apartment owners coming together- and demanding a self same 'personal garden' to the duplex owners- and legally- as they have the exact same ownership right to the 'personal gardens' as do the duplex owners- you could end up having to convert your car park into allotments- if you continue to go down the road you're going.

You need to stomp this out- to the fullest extent possible- immediately.
Fencing off the individual gardens is the last straw- are these people trying to claim squatters rights or something?

You need to knock this on the head for once and for all- its bonkers that the OMC has allowed this to develop- and if its challenged the directors could all find themselves in serious hot water- and the OMC with quite staggering legal bills.