Body Corporate Committee Member Spying on Bathroom

Hi all.
This is my first post and my desperation is what drove me to ask for advice.
I'm an owner in a block of 11 units in Brisbane. I'm not a body corporate committee member and I live on the ground floor.
A month ago I received an email complaint from the Body Corporate stating my pipes are noisy and I must hire a plumber to fix them.
I asked which unit submitted the complaint but they would not reply. Instead they continued to push me to hire a plumber. I denied the noise was from my unit and asked for proof.
I then received an email saying that the noise is definitely from my unit because the noise only occurs when my hot water is in use and my bathroom lights are on.Attached to the email was a photo of my hot water meter.
I immediately wrote back demanding an apology for spying on my bathroom and that this was an indecent behaviour.
To this day I have not received an apology or a response. I am now paranoid that someone is watching my wife and I when we use the bathroom as our bathroom is on the ground floor of the complex.

Any advice would be appreciated. Please don't ask us to move as we can't afford to…

Comments

  • +1 vote

    If someone is actually putting hidden cameras in your bathroom, that's a police issue, BUT BEFORE WE GET TO THAT:

    Attached to the email was a photo of my hot water meter.

    Is that accessible or visible from the outside by any chance?

  • +1 vote

    What outcome are you seeking exactly?

  • +14 votes

    Member Since
    40 min ago

  • +2 votes

    Whow!

    Attached to the email was a photo of my hot water meter.

    Pic please

  • +8 votes

    Ask BC to hire a plumber to investigate source of noise. Tell them that you'll pay for the investigation if it is in fact your pipes. If, as you believe, you are not the source of the noise then they'll both pay for the investigation and the rectification work. If you are responsible, then you will have to pay for the rectification work as well as the investigation (which you'd have to do anyway).

    (Had the exact same situation as you and was advised by the strata manager to proceed as above, which I did)

    That way it's not a he said/she said argument about the source of the noise - instead, it's an objective third party

    • +5 votes

      This is wrong way about it.
      These strata committees usually have a list of "mates" who will side with them on matters like this. It's better to choose a third-party/independent plumber for their professional evaluation. I mean, where an unbiased assessor might notice some "pipe-noise" coming from OP's house he could conclude that they are not substantial enough to warrant a fixture. And an unbiased assessor might even go forwards by checking multiple pipes in multiple houses to actually find the source of the problem.

      Whereas a biased assessor might only just test the OP's house. Might hear a small sound from OP's pipes. Might side with Strata (since they're the boss) and conclude that OP needs to pay the bill and have the pipe's fixed.

      •  

        That makes sense, but how do you find a plumber that is deemed to be independent?

  • +1 vote

    Are you sure it's the pipes? What are you and the wife doing in there?

  • +13 votes

    Expectation: someone was spying on you in your bathroom
    Reality: someone put 2 and 2 together that the sound was happening when your bathroom light is on

  • +3 votes

    "Noisy pipes" are generally caused by water hammer — suddenly shutting the flow of water in a pipe. This causes the pipe to expand slightly and they shudder. If the building wasn't constructed properly and pipe saddles installed tightly, this has the effect of banging on the wall studs and the noise travels through walls and the pipe. This usually occurs with fast valves, like washing machines etc that shut the water off instantly. It usually doesn't happen with "screw" type taps where the water is shut off more slowly. It can happen with them if you shut them off quickly and you have good water pressure, but it's not common. Flickmixer type taps, common in the kitchen but less likely in the bathroom, can turn off the water very quickly too. When you shut off the water, do you hear a loud thud or weird groaning or rattling sounds come through the walls? It isn't likely that your pipes will be noisy while you are using it/having a shower etc. What sounds can you hear when you are in the bathroom?

    I imagine you are responsible for your own hot water and it comes from your own property water meter. The knocking won't travel through pipes to the rest of the property but might through the walls to neighboring properties. The owners corporation has no right to tell you to hire a plumber — you might do the work yourself or choose never to use hot water again etc. It's not up to them how you maintain your own property. If they have a problem, they need to outline the extent of the problem (which includes what noise it is generating outside your property, where it is heard and how loud etc. Only then you can make an informed decision as to the severity and if it need any attention at all, or if it is normal and the complainer is being unreasonable. What do they expect you to do, ring a plumber and say, "I've got a noise in my pipes that I can't hear but somewhere in the other 10 properties they can hear it, I don't know how loud it is, how bad it is or where it is. I don't know if it is just one neighbour or many of them." I wouldn't be spending a cent or lose a moment's sleep over it until someone is prepared to give you some details so you can act on it. How are you supposed to investigate something like that? What do they think, just calling a plumber will make them pull out their magic wand and magically cure the problem?

    • +1 vote

      owners corporation has no right to tell you to hire a plumber

      Wrong, but OP will be DisabledUser832473476234 withing 24 hours so whatever…

      • +1 vote

        They can't tell you how to fix the problem, nor can they make you spend money on a tradesman just because they say so. They may be able to compel you to fix the problem, once they have established that it is a matter that you are responsible for (they haven't yet). My comment is about demanding you have to do a certain thing a certain way, not that they have no right getting the problem addressed. It's the same when you have a car accident; the other party cannot demand details of your car insurance, or that you take it to their preferred mechanic etc. It is totally up to you whether you claim on insurance, or where you take it for repairs.

        •  

          It's the same when you have a car accident

          It's not even close the being the same.

          OP lives in a building subject to a body corporate. They are a member. They agreed to this by purchasing the property.

          • +2 votes

            @zeggie: Are you a professional troll? You seem to be very argumentative in every post in every thread I have seen you post on OzBargain. You fail to understand or comprehend anyone else's point of view or opinion, and come back with an irrelevant comment.

            Put simply, I am talking about someone telling you what to do and how to do it just because they perceive you have done something wrong. You reply with "but they are a body corporate member". WTF has that got to do with my comment? Sure there are obligations to being a body corporate member, I've never denied that, but I'm talking about something completely different. The first thing in a body corporate dispute is to determine if it is a legitimate complaint and it has merit. What part of the body corporate rules does it infringe? Who is responsible? Just because some office holder makes a demand, it doesn't mean it is an obligation that needs to be followed blindly. Often these office holders don't have the first clue about natural justice, or correct procedures to pursue actions. If someone makes an accusation against you for a wrongdoing, you are entitled to know the specifics of the complaint. That apparently hasn't been provided. I've sought additional information to help determine if the complaint has merit or if their property requires attention. Having emails with little information and demands accompanied with "personal" photos would make most people uneasy, along with feelings of being stalked. WTF use is a photo of a water meter with regards to a noise complaint anyway?

            • -1 vote

              @endotherm: Argumentative? I'm correcting your incorrect information. I note you have provided absolutely no evidence for anything you've stated despite you believing it is correct.

              A Body Corporate is nothing like a "car accident" as a Body Corporate has By-Laws and legislation it can rely on to force a lot owner to do something. OP must act on this request and complaint.

              The Body Corporate can demand a lot owner stop interfering or impacting another lot owner's right to peaceful occupation of their lot.

              The Body Corporate can demand the lot owner act on that complaint from another lot owner and remedy the Breach.

              The Body Corporate can enter OP's lot, conduct inspections and/or repairs, and bill OP for it if he doesn't do anything about it.

              The Body Corporate representative has simply given the information they have on hand so OP can take the first step to remedy it. It's all informal now. If OP doesn't sort it out, they will. It'll get formal real quick and someone, likely OP, will pay for it.

              I've linked the law. Now tell me where I'm wrong. Go ahead.

              • -1 vote

                @zeggie: Way to miss the point entirely, once again. All the references to Bodies Corporate that you have listed is once again irrelevant to the discussion. GO BACK and tell me where I have disagreed with that, and see where I have agreed and stated THERE ARE OBLIGATIONS TO BEING A BODY CORPORATE MEMBER. Feel free to point out something specific that I have said that is INCORRECT INFORMATION. And I'm still waiting for the OP to actually state that they can hear a noise in their property when they turn a tap on — it seems to me that an officious neighbour is abusing their position on the committee to get his own way on something. There is no evidence presented so far that something is wrong or abnormal to warrant an investigation, let alone remedial action. Exactly what evidence do you want ME to provide?

                Seriously, are you so fixated on thinking I'm saying you don't have strata obligations (I'M NOT!) that you can't see the point I'm trying to make with the car analogy? If I crash my car into yours, and it is my fault, but I tell you not to take it to your insurer because it will cost me too much, but you should take it to my mate who will do a cheap shonky job for me because it is a lot cheaper for me and he owes me a favour. Now do YOU allow him to walk all over you and dictate to you what to do? Of course not. You decide how you are going to get your car fixed, and you are well within your rights. See the connection yet? It is the same in this situation, someone is trying to take advantage of you and manipulate you to get their way. You are screaming "a Body Corporate is nothing like a "car accident" while holding up a photo of a car in one hand and a body corporate in the other and showing it to a 3 year-old and asking for their opinion if it is the same. That's not the comparison I'm making. In your example saying "a Body Corporate has By-Laws and legislation it can rely on to force a lot owner to do something, so it isn't the same as a car accident" doesn't derail my argument either — have you looked lately of the laws and regulations that compel you to take certain actions if you are involved in a collision? IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME. But the actual point I'm making is to not let people railroad you and walk all over you if they are abusing their power, and only comply when you have established that there is a case to be addressed, and it is legally required.

                I'm saying there is no information to date of any noise being generated or heard (aside from an anonymous complaint that can't be verified or questioned), yet you want to throw the OP under the bus before there is a proven case to answer. I've met lots of nutcase residents that have a perceived problem and they obsess about it. It might just be the normal REASONABLE sound of a mechanical water meter ticking over, but somehow, it is the crime of the century, and they are abusing their position to force UNREASONABLE actions over a minuscule non-issue. Let's say that is the cause of the problem — why does the OP have to spend a cent to address a noisy meter, when it is the water authority's property and responsibility? And meters are notoriously noisy for what they are, can we be sure the complainer hasn't some mental disorder and is triggered by ticking, when the sound is completely reasonable but they obsess over it anyway? I'm sure most people would be happy to address the situation if they knew there was a problem and its extent. What do they have to do, get a plumber in so they can no longer hear any peep inside their property from their pipes, if any exists at all? Then have to get another one in to repeat the same work because it then becomes apparent it can be heard from the neighbour? Then repeat yet again because it can still be heard in the furthest residence? Then have to do more work because that wasn't the issue they were complaining about anyway. It is utterly reasonable not to do anything until you know the extent of the problem, and I find it strange that the committee don't want to provide that information, but are happy to issue demands.

                • -1 vote

                  @endotherm:

                  All the references to Bodies Corporate that you have listed is once again irrelevant to the discussion.

                  Really? OP is part of a Body Corporate. There are laws regarding this. Sounds relevant.

                  GO BACK and tell me where I have disagreed with that

                  "The owners corporation has no right to tell you to hire a plumber"

                  "nor can they make you spend money on a tradesman just because they say so"

                  Feel free to point out something specific that I have said that is INCORRECT INFORMATION.

                  See above.

                  have you looked lately of the laws and regulations that compel you to take certain actions if you are involved in a collision? IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME.

                  I didn't realise Body Corporation laws had shifted into automobile laws. Feel free to link us the legislation proving that.

                  I'm saying there is no information to date of any noise being generated or heard

                  Doesn't matter. A body corporate member has made a complaint. It must be dropped, investigated and/or resolved.

                  it is the crime of the century

                  Oscar moment for you?

                  but are happy to issue demands.

                  Because that's their role.

                  Comment again when you're feeling better.

                  • -1 vote

                    @zeggie: It is irrelevant to the discussion. I am not talking about Bodies Corporate, I am talking about others telling you what to do and how to do it. YOU are the one with a bug up your ass discussing laws around living in a stata situation. I'm not arguing that at all, nor am I disagreeing with them. You are the one not getting the subject of the discussion, as such your comments and examples are IRRELEVANT. You have a problem with reading comprehension. That takes care of 90% of the argument. I could say the OP is an Australian Taxpayer and as such, there are laws regarding this, then spout off a bunch of BS tax laws. Irrelevant to the discussion.

                    The O/C cannot tell you "you must hire a plumber". They similarly may have substituted "you must demolish your house", "you must replace it with a swimming pool", "you must hire a civil engineer…" etc. They can ASK you to investigate and take remedial action, but how the OWNER decides to address the problem is totally up to them. They cannot decide for you, and force you to follow their nominated method. What happens if there is a fault discovered and it is in an area that is the body corporate's responsibility, or the water supplier's responsibility? They have then just made an unreasonable demand on the owner to do something and spend money on something that they aren't responsible for. The OP is NOT OBLIGED to comply with such an "order". Please tell me what you consider is INCORRECT INFORMATION in that hypothetical scenario. "See above" is a weak argument.

                    You are seriously (mod: edited) or trolling if you think I have EVER made a reference to automotive law being applicable in this case. I have made a reference in both cases to unreasonable demands being made in an attempt to compel you to do something that you are not required to do. A CASE THAT THE PIPES ARE MAKING NOISE has yet to be substantiated, and the committee seem to be deliberately withholding vital relevant information from the OP for them to make an informed decision.

                    An unreasonable anonymous complaint without substance has been made. The OP requires further particulars which are being denied. Let me quote from the legislation you have quoted, without you reading or comprehending it:

                    SCHEDULE 4
                    1 Noise
                    The occupier of a lot must not create noise likely to interfere with the peaceful enjoyment of a person lawfully on another lot or the common property.

                    What is the occupier DOING to CREATE the noise? The pipes are making the noise, the owner is not deliberately CREATING a disturbance. Where is the noise coming from? Where is it being heard and what level is it, so that it is interfering with another's peaceful enjoyment? Is the activity unreasonable, or a normal exercise of their own right to peaceful enjoyment of their own property? A case has not yet been established answering these fundamental questions. Natural justice affords you the right to face your accuser and question the veracity of the allegation. You are jumping straight to the execution phase without all that pesky trial stuff in the middle. If ultimately it is established that there is a case to answer and the owner does not rectify it, the O/C would have to take the matter to a Magistrates Court to have an ORDER issued. Only then will they be compelled and obliged to follow the order. Owners Corporations cannot issue ORDERS.

                    The committee seems to have breached pretty much all of Schedule 2 (regarding Codes of Conduct), specifically:

                    8 Unconscionable conduct

                    A body corporate manager or caretaking service contractor must not engage in unconscionable conduct in performing the person’s functions under the person’s engagement.

                    Examples of unconscionable conduct—

                    1 taking unfair advantage of the person’s superior knowledge relative to the body corporate

                    2 requiring the body corporate to comply with conditions that are unlawful or not reasonably necessary

                    3 exerting undue influence on, or using unfair tactics against, the body corporate or the owner of a lot in the scheme

                    We have yet to establish what is reasonable (the extent of the noise, where it is heard etc.)

                    Section 182 can "demand" the owner take remedial action, but it is full of other requirements that must first be met by the committee. THEY HAVEN'T COMPLIED!

                    Parahrasing:
                    If they believe the owner is contravening contravening a provision of the by-laws and it's likely to continue:

                    • they may give the owner a notice requiring them to remedy the contravention. NOTE, NO MENTION OF HOW TO DO THAT, THEY DON'T GET TO SPECIFY "A PLUMBER MUST BE HIRED".
                    • The notice must state the B/C believes there is a breach of by-laws
                    • state the by-law being broken
                    • details sufficient to identify the contravention and
                    • the REASONABLE timeframe to remedy the situation
                    • a warning that if it isn't remedied, the B/C may apply to a Magistrate for a resolution

                    However, the owner does not commit an offence if, when the notice is served, they are not breaching the by-law in the way alleged i.e. they are not taking a shower. They'll have a hard time serving that notice!

                    Pretty sure that means S.182 doesn't mean what you think it means.

                    As to a B/C entering an owners lot, you are quoting something out of context, that doesn't apply in this scenario.
                    i.e. they MAY enter a lot while it is reasonably necessary to inspect the lot and find out whether work the body corporate is authorised or required to do is necessary or required to be carried out. Meaning, stuff the B/C is liable for themselves, NOT THE OWNER IN THIS SITUATION, and only if the owner is not contactable or refuses to admit them or it is an emergency. IT IS NOT A CARTE BLANCHE POWER OF ENTRY.

                    On the face of it, a committee member has made an unreasonable demand without providing supporting evidence, or details that the Act requires to be given. Unreasonable demands and unlawful commands and actions can be challenged and ignored. If a policeman approaches you in the street and tells you to strip naked and stand on your head, you are totally allowed to challenge and disobey the command as it is unlawful and unreasonable. Same principle applies here. A committee of management or Owners Corporation should know better and it leaves them liable for recourse against themselves. It is not their function to "issue demands", as you state. It is their function to comply with the legislation that governs them and act accordingly, being fair and reasonable in the provision of the request. They can follow up to see if the situation is resolved. If it is a reasonable request with merit and evidence, THEN they may proceed to seek an order to enforce certain action.

                    Stop being (mod: edited)

                    •  

                      @endotherm:

                      I am not talking about Bodies Corporate

                      Cool. The entire thread is regarding a Body Corporate issue.

                      I was debating whether to respond to you - despite the fact you've raised points that I've actually already raised, and raised points I've already explained, I'd just like to point out as someone with a family member with that particular disability, which I'm sure there's plenty of others on OzBargain as well, it's pretty shameful

                      1. You resort to personal attacks in a civilised discussion; and
                      2. You use that particular term for a particular disability as a personal attack.

                      Very shameful.

                      •  

                        @zeggie: Actually the thread is about being spied upon. You made it all about the body corporate issue. I made a comment about being pressured and intimidated into doing something you wouldn't do. You replied to me. Your replies were all about the issue you were creating, which I have never disputed. The irrelevant replies were nothing to do with the comment I made. If you can't fathom that train of thought from all I've written then sorry, I can't help you.

                        The term I used, which has since been censored, refers to being less advanced in mental, physical, or social development than is usual for one's age. It was an acceptable medical term to use to describe that condition during my lifetime, but it has been maligned by the politically correct brigade to be offensive, despite its usual meaning being medically accurate and appropriate. Funnily enough, yet another example of someone trying to tell you what to think and do, imposing their will on you without just cause or authority. I'm not using the word in a derogatory manner, just as a verb. You are the one that has a problem with it and are all too ready to take offence when it wasn't directed as a personal attack, it was an observation. It was a comment about your insistence to being obtuse and argumentative or failing to comprehend. I am loathe to demonise a perfectly good word because it is considered politically incorrect. I do not readily conform to being told what words to use by someone who has no authority to do so — the crux of my initial statement actually. If it is now accepted in common usage that an alternative should be used to appease the overly sensitive, that has more to say about the gullibility of a [younger] generation to swallow the rhetoric than it does about generations that have used it in a benign way.

    • +5 votes

      hot water meter is in the common area

      BORING.

      So they've taken a photo completely legally.

      I was hoping for something more illegal and SPICY.

    • +2 votes

      the hot water meter is in the common area of our building

      Then I don't understand what "spying" you're talking about. They can see by the hot water meter when you're using water, they can see by the bathroom light when you're in there at night. Neither is spying since both are easily visible from outside.

  • +1 vote

    a photo of my hot water meter.

    The image is of an item.

  • +4 votes

    A month ago I received an email complaint from the Body Corporate stating my pipes are noisy and I must hire a plumber to fix them.

    Are your pipes noisy or not?

    I asked which unit submitted the complaint but they would not reply.

    Why would you expect them to tell you this? Can you imagine the sort of issues this would create? What if you are the sort of person who would key their car? Of course they won't tell you who is complaining, the point is that a complaint was made.

    Instead they continued to push me to hire a plumber.

    Which is exactly what I would expect them to be doing if there is a complaint.

    I denied the noise was from my unit and asked for proof.

    You asked for proof and they gave you proof, so what are you complaining about?

    I then received an email saying that the noise is definitely from my unit because the noise only occurs when my hot water is in use and my bathroom lights are on.Attached to the email was a photo of my hot water meter.

    Your hot water meter is in a common area of the building and is accessible to everyone. Anyone can see whether your water is running. If the noise only occurs when your water is running, then you need to hire a plumber.

    I immediately wrote back demanding an apology for spying on my bathroom and that this was an indecent behaviour.

    How is viewing your hot water meter "indecent behaviour" or "spying on your bathroom"? How about you fix your pipes and stop annoying other people.

    To this day I have not received an apology or a response. I am now paranoid that someone is watching my wife and I when we use the bathroom as our bathroom is on the ground floor of the complex.

    I don't understand. You were the one who asked for evidence in the first place. What sort of evidence did you want them to give? Your water running = noise, your water not running = no noise, is about as concrete and exact evidence as they could probably put together. Best way forward is to tell body corporate to hire a plumber to investigate the issue. If it turns out to be yours, you will reimburse and pay to fix the issue.

  • +2 votes

    OP, my understanding of how strata law works is that everything inside the walls is the body corporate responsibility, at least in NSW. So if any noise is coming from inside the pipes, its not your responsibility. You should only have to replace taps or valves outside the walls. But first things first: someone thinking that the noise comes from your unit, doesn’t actually prove that as a fact. Body corporate can investigate at their expense and if they find your unit is the source, they need to give you something in writing signed by an authorised and licensed plumber. You did well by raising concerns about your privacy. That crap with the lights in your toilet that they have tried to pass to you for evidence isn’t worth 2c. In your case call you strata manager, ask for the bylaws that govern your complex, read up and fight back hard. On the other hand, if you realise you have a faulty valve somewhere, get a plumber to fix it for you, it shouldn’t cost more than $100. Source: I’m one of them dinosaurs on the strata committee:)

    •  

      OP, my understanding of how strata law works is that everything inside the walls is the body corporate responsibility, at least in NSW.

      By default yes, but in a lot of cases the by-laws commonly transfer the obligations regarding pipes that only serve one unit, and that are wholly within the walls of that unit (so not in common walls) to the owner of that unit. Makes it easier for the strata owners (one less thing to fix) and also the owner (don't need to go through strata for minor fixes).

  •  

    Inside your pipes is a Strata responsibility!!!

  •  

    "I am now paranoid that someone is watching my wife and I when we use the bathroom"

    Trust me, unless you're both supermodels nobody is or wants to.

  •  

    Body Corporate Committee Member Spying on Bathroom

    And you won't believe what happened next!

    #endclickbait

  •  

    Share the photo please OP

  •  

    Are the pipes in a boundary wall or an internal wall?

    Boundary wall should be the BCs problem. Internal wall is yours.

    Nobody is peering in your bathroom so stop being a whiner and so offended. Why not concentrate on getting the matter fixed at minimal cost to you rather than pursuing an apology?

    Rather than email, why not ring the strata manager and talk like civilised people do? Work it out. The more self righteous emails you send, the more the matter will fall into confusion.

  • +2 votes

    " I am now paranoid that someone is watching my wife and I when we use the bathroom"
    This is the part you have got wrong. If the light in your bathroom comes on anyone can see it from several blocks away. That is NOT spying!
    Just tell the BC that you do not believe the noise is coming from your unit. Ask them in writing if they will allow you to contact an independant plumber, not one associated with the BC, to check for noise and if they will refund you the cost of the inspection if it is found to be not at fault.

    • +2 votes

      Or better yet, spend 10 mins as someone else suggested turning taps on and off and determine if they are making a noise. You don't want to look like a jackass by insisting it's not your problem only to be proven wrong. It's weird that in all of OPs post they never commented on whether they had actually checked if the complaint has merit.

      PS I live in Brisbane. Tell me ur address and when ur wife is having a shower, I'll let you know if I can see her. /jk

  • +2 votes

    Stop being a whinging sook

  • +2 votes

    Firstly, you should know that it would be a very rare thing for someone to complain about such noise without it actually being a problem, so take the complaint seriously. I would get proper advice relating to who actually owns the problem - as others have alluded, it may be a common property issue.

    You have every right to ask in which unit/s the noise is audible as you will need access to it/them to observe the noise in order to identify the problem. Depending on the layout of the pipe runs you (or your plumber) may even need to access the pipes from there. The noise transfer (to other apartments) may be caused by pipes touching the surrounding structures when it shouldn't. It's common for builders to cut corners by doing things like using non-isolating braces or no brace at all, or rigidly fixing things that were not meant to be fixed, or not installing lagging (properly or at all).

    There are minimum standards for sound insulation of pipework so I would ask to see the certification of the pipes in accordance with Section F5 of the BCA/NCC. Unfortunately, there's no test or line in the sand to establish if the received noise is reasonable or not. Compliance with the BCA is inferred by design and you'll need to confirm the construction meets the design. Any remedy will also require an understanding of the construction.

  •  

    @Whow2019, are you interested or concerned about the noise, even just a bit?
    IMHO you shouldnt concern about who submitted the complaint (could be ALL the 10 owners?) or whether they apologise for "spying". The issue here is the noisy pipe, so just deal with it.
    Others have provided many solutions on how to deal with these pipes. Once it's sorted, you and your wife can have a quiet shower…… Blissful!

  •  

    I actually spoke to 6 of the 11 tenants. None of the 6 tenants (non owners),including the neighbouring unit reported water noise from my unit. They actually reported noise from 2 other units which happen to belong to the committee members.

    In short, I'm not a noisy neighbour

  •  

    @brad and everyone else wondering about the location of the pipes - all pipes are in boundary walls

  •  

    @endotherm and other helpful posters
    Thanks for all your feedback. I'll stop replying to this thread for now and try and use some ideas in here, e.g. write up a response to the body corporate.

    Good to see lots of positive / helpful / understanding comments

  •  

    Why don't you wait to your wife has a shower and go and listen to see if your pipes make a noise….

  • Top