Strata Non-Smoking Bylaw - How Strongly Is It Enforced?

sagrules on 31/10/2019 - 10:13
Last edited 31/10/2019 - 10:46 by 1 other user

Hi All,

I have been reading some of the other neighbour complaint stories and have one of my own. For the past few years we have been living in a strata complex with two different neighbours below us who regularly smoke. Both of these are tenanted apartment lots. It used to be so bad that it would come in from our balcony door, main bedroom windows and now even can smell it in our kitchen with the windows closed. It is happening at least twice a day at the same time, but I cannot seem to "catch" them in the act even though it happens so regularly. They are also on ground floor and may be smoking within their apartment building which still somehow manages to enter via our balcony and kitchen windows. I do not want to be restricted and unable to open and close as I freely choose.

Originally there was no bylaw in place to stop this but after 1-2 years of going back and forth with the strata and getting approved at the last AGM we finally have a no smoking bylaw which states that residents or their visitors cannot smoke in common areas which includes smoking outside and entering into other lot owners apartment blocks.

After the bylaw got approved my partner was verbally harassed by that neighbour after returning home from work on common property, we notified strata. Nothing was done about it. One of the neighbours has moved as a result of no longer being able to smoke, but the second one continues to do it at least 2 times a day. It also results in common property stairway smelling very often as well.

Again I tried contacting strata manager about this and now they want me to take photographs and sign an affidavit confirming it is them and recording all the times this happens in order for Strata's lawyer to issue them an NCAT order. Now, I don't necessarily want to be going down NCAT route as it can drag out and might not result in any real change. Is this really my only option? Has anyone else had any success stories or provide any real concrete advice.

Home & Garden

Comments

                                    • [Deactivated] on 02/11/2019 - 16:03

                                      @Vote for Pedro:

                                      But it happening twice a day is, in the scheme of our health, not worth the outrage.

                                      That is OP's decisions to make and you haven't sufficiently explained why your reasons behind this statement is valid.

                                      banning shouldn’t be too onerous on society.

                                      Banning what? Smoking? Yes. Ban it completely please.

                                      • Vote for Pedro on 02/11/2019 - 16:09

                                        @[Deactivated]: Absolutely agree that’s the ops decision to make. But I disagree with it. And that’s my decision to make. I understand you and op are looking at the health issues in isolation while I’m considering other factors and the level of outrage I feel is right given all the factors I considered.

                                  • Vote for Pedro on 02/11/2019 - 16:04

                                    @[Deactivated]: And on the issue of fossil fuel burning for vehicles and energy, it is proven that there are significant health risks, but we have a government that doesn’t believe that any action is needed to protect citizens from those health hazards. And a transition is possible using the right policy levers. I’d like Sydney much more if it had less fossil fuel pollution. It’d be a healthier place.

                                    • [Deactivated] on 02/11/2019 - 16:16

                                      @Vote for Pedro: I see that you're looking for a platform to promote your views. Nothing wrong with that, and I agree with your views. Had hoped you were clear on this before you decided to derail the discussion on smoking.

                                      I’m considering other factors and the level of outrage I feel is right given all the factors I considered.

                                      Feel free to apply the appropriate level of outrage as you see fit in a more relevant discussion.

                                      And on the issue of fossil fuel burning for vehicles and energy

                                      As two separate things unconditional on the banning of each other (smoking), I agree to a certain extent. My stance on each differs between the time frame for either. We can ban smoking within a much shorter period of time than banning the use of fossil fuel.

                                      Just be aware that renewable energy isn't perfect either. There is still an environmental tolls to pay (just that the developed countries are most likely able to outsource this burden on to developing countries)
                                      http://theconversation.com/does-green-energy-have-hidden-hea…

                                      We are in overarching agreement. I also acknowledge your desire to ban/reduce fossil fuel usage completely despite the complete lack of relevance to OP's situation here.

                                      Have a good weekend.

                                      • Vote for Pedro on 02/11/2019 - 16:19
                                        +1

                                        @[Deactivated]: It’s relevant in the scheme of level of outrage. That’s where the other topic arose. We need to get over ourselves a bit.

                                        I can hear Karen demanding to see the manager.

                                        • [Deactivated] on 02/11/2019 - 16:26

                                          @Vote for Pedro:

                                          It’s relevant

                                          Whataboutism.

                                          level of outrage.

                                          I'll humour. Could you please define and quantify and contrast the level of outrage OP, I and others are applying in this situation vs the level of outrage you think we are applying to your "other factors"?

                                          I can hear Karen demanding to see the manager.

                                          So Karen should never see the manager if she has bigger problems going on in her life?

                                          • Vote for Pedro on 02/11/2019 - 16:28

                                            @[Deactivated]: I agree it is whataboutism. Don’t panic. I just don’t think it’s such a big deal :-)

                              • bringbring on 03/11/2019 - 04:33

                                @[Deactivated]: What about the killing of Osama Bin Laden which prevented polio from being wiped out (through tracking of DNA via the vaccine programme and resulting distrust)?

              • trapper on 01/11/2019 - 13:23
                +1

                @[Deactivated]:

                so the level of dilution is important.

                Source?

                Common sense. Would you rather be inside a phone booth with a smoker, or 500m away outdoors?
                What difference if the dilution isn't important.

                • [Deactivated] on 02/11/2019 - 13:35

                  @trapper: I'd rather be far enough not to smell it at the very least.

                  You did not address his further point and the accompanying citations.

                  This is the Cancer Council's stance on the issue :

                  There is no safe level of exposure to second-hand smoke. Second-hand smoke has been shown to be harmful even at low levels, including in outdoor areas.

        • snook on 01/11/2019 - 20:58
          +1

          All of you people on the side of the smokers are WRONG.

          I have emphysema and out in the street I try to avoid the smokers because breathing any of it in means that i can't breath properly. I will cross the street to avoid them and if one walks past, i'll hold my breath for as long as possible. The ppm are irrelevant here. Any lingering smell, even on someone in the bloody elevator, makes it hard for me to breath.

          So yeah nah, sagrules is well within his rights to say it causes harm, because it actually does.

          There was a time you used to be able to go as fast as you wanted on the road in a car and you only had to prove that you were doing it safely for it not to be speeding. I was alive then, why can't that rule apply to me today? Oh, that's right, rules change and whether we like it or not, we have to comply.

          • HighAndDry on 02/11/2019 - 16:50
            +2

            @snook: That's like a kid with a peanut allergy demanding that their entire school ban peanuts.

            • snook on 02/11/2019 - 17:46

              @HighAndDry: It's not an allergy when it's going to make you die faster. And that's what it does. Every bit of shit i breath in shortens the period i live. Do i care? No. But some people would, especially those with children.

      • This Guy on 31/10/2019 - 19:39
        +4

        It is a petty matter as you chose to live where you live.

        You are over 18, right?

        Like others have said, if you have a problem, you move. You don't mess with another's established home.

        Yes, second hand smoke on average shortens life spans. What about vehicle emissions? Heat? Noise? Did you pick a home away from traffic? Did you get one with air conditioning? Is your apartment in the country, miles from any source of disturbing noise?

        What's next for you? Petition the state to ban all forms of non silent transport? Close all power plants? Block out the sun?

        You selected your apartment. If you stuffed up, find a new one that better suits your taste.

        • RecklessMonkeys on 01/11/2019 - 10:33
          +10

          It's not the OP's responsibility to stop smoke entering his premises. It's the smoker's responsibility not to allow his smoke into common areas.

          Let the smoker move.

          • This Guy on 01/11/2019 - 10:42
            +1

            @RecklessMonkeys: No. OP choose to living in a smoking allowed unit block. OP can choose to move if it is a problem.

            That's like moving next to a pub then complaining about the noise after 8pm.

            Yes, smoke sucks, but some people like it. And they were there first.

            • RecklessMonkeys on 01/11/2019 - 12:31
              +3

              @This Guy: They didn't move next to a pub. They moved next to a neighbour, who is breaching strata by-law.
              If they were noisy neighbours they'd be told to knock it off as well.
              It doesn't matter if they were getting away with it before.
              All the apartments are bound by the same by-laws, new or old.

              • This Guy on 01/11/2019 - 14:11
                +1

                @RecklessMonkeys: OP said the the smoking ban is new, brought on by OP. It is exactly the same.

                OP should have spent the time to find a non smoking block if that is important to them.

                • RecklessMonkeys on 01/11/2019 - 14:50
                  +4

                  @This Guy: If you are saying that it's ok for a smoker to risk somebody else's health on the basis that “they were there first”, then I understand and disagree. And so does the law.
                  It causes lung cancer. That's why it's banned from pubs.
                  They have no moral or legal right to smoke if that smoke enters another apartment.

                  Who initiated what, and who was where when is totally irrelevant.

        • ely on 01/11/2019 - 22:06
          +2

          You don't mess with another's established home.

          The smoker is messing with OP's home, so by your reasoning it seems obvious that you'd expect the smoker to stop… and yet you don't. Inconsistent much?

          • This Guy on 02/11/2019 - 02:24

            @ely: @ely

            No.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propositional_calculus

            If you are still confused why you are wrong after reading the link, reply and I will waste 30 minutes explaining propositional logic in basic English.

            • ely on 02/11/2019 - 14:17

              @This Guy: One of us is confused. It's not me ;)

              • This Guy on 02/11/2019 - 22:23
                +2

                @ely: @ely:@ely

                The word you missed is in the quote you quoted:

                You don't mess with another's established home.

                I like trolls. You make the internet more interesting. But I offered you 30 minutes so…

                The smoker is messing with OP's home, so by your reasoning it seems obvious that you'd expect the smoker to stop… and yet you don't. Inconsistent much?

                Let's break that down!!!

                The smoker is messing with OP's home

                Nope. The smoker is enjoying their home, under the strata guidelines, that was put in place to stop OP complaining and making strata's life hell. OP's rules created a burden to the smoker, but the smoker complied. OP didn't realise the rule changes would also create a burden for themselves, so OP wants to create further burden's for the smoker!

                dun dun dun!!!!!

                so by your reasoning it seems obvious that you'd expect the smoker to stop

                Smoker is following the rules. And was there first. OP already scared away another smoker, who too was there first. OP is acting like a bully to the smokers. I don't support bullying as a way to correct unhealthy behavours such as smoking.

                and yet you don't.

                Yes, because two people can read the same story and imagine two different pictures. I see how much it sucks for OP, but OP didn't do their due diligence before picking their apartment and I am quite against living in a nanny state. OP is an adult. OP is responsible for their bad decissions, not a stranger who is burdened by OP's self righteousness.

                Inconsistent much?

                Half an hour is up. I hope I helped you improve your literacy! Today we talked about reading every word in a sentence, different perspectives to the same story and misunderstanding what reasoning means when used in a debate.

                • ely on 03/11/2019 - 09:54
                  +1

                  @This Guy: To paraphrase someone else's fine line -

                  This Guy, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this forum is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

                  OP is fine with the smoker smoking in their apartment (not interfering with their established property at all). OP is not fine with the smoker's smoke being in OP's apartment (it is the smoker that is interfering with OP's property).

                  • This Guy on 05/11/2019 - 18:59

                    @ely: OP lives above the smoker. Smoke seeps though the walls. Most people who have lived in an apartment understand this and the realities of apartment life. It is nice to know you have always been able to afford a house. It sounds like OP is new to apartment life and is pooping where they eat.

                    Yeah, that quote is called an off topic personal attack. They are generally made when the author can't make a rational reply but is upset so they must write something.

                    Off topic personal attacks are usually made when the attacker is wrong, but they are personally opposed to a related concept in the comment (smoking is bad in this case).

  • chumlee on 31/10/2019 - 11:47
    +11

    Why don't you just pee off your balcony to square things up?

    • DemocracyManifest on 31/10/2019 - 22:00
      +1

      That's quite fun

    • ely on 01/11/2019 - 22:04

      I have been tempted numerous times. Deterred mainly because it would fall on all of the floors past the smokers as well, doesn't really seem fair.

  • HardlyCharly on 31/10/2019 - 12:48
    +5

    Just do it, do everything you can to get this filthy animal to stop.

  • abb on 31/10/2019 - 13:52
    +1

    You might consider an air purifier?

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/tag/air-purifier

    • sagrules on 31/10/2019 - 14:38

      Thanks for the link. Anyone you recommend?

      • abb on 31/10/2019 - 15:45

        I haven't used any myself but anything Xiaomi is always popular on OzB

        • bobbified on 31/10/2019 - 16:16
          -2

          OP can't even be bothered closing the window. You think he'll want to spend money on an air filter? And if he does, can he be bothered turning it on?

      • kranix on 31/10/2019 - 22:15

        If there's space to install it in your flat, a whole-house Sanctuary Air unit beats anything else out there.

      • TerryJustTerry on 01/11/2019 - 09:00
        +1

        I can recommend the Xiaomi Mi Smart Air Purifier 2S have had it for a while now and its going pretty well ( need to replace filter every 3- 6 months though)

      • Cartman2530 on 01/11/2019 - 19:31

        My mother-in-law is a heavy smoker and she got an ozone generator/air purifier a few years ago and it has made a dramatic difference to their home as she smokes inside.
        I hate the smell of smoke too and while the purifier won't completely eliminate the smell, it'll reduce it dramatically. Its definitely worth a shot!

  • Tee Rex Arms on 31/10/2019 - 14:58
    +5

    This thread made me use up my 5 negs for the day already

    • sagrules on 31/10/2019 - 15:16

      Thanks for the support :-)

      • Tee Rex Arms on 31/10/2019 - 18:58
        +13

        It wasn’t in support of your view lol

        • bobbified on 31/10/2019 - 20:42
          +4

          LOL! ^_^

    • Whisper Quiet on 01/11/2019 - 15:49
      -2

      Me too! Can't stand these people with their views about banning everything they don't like. People can do whatever they want in their own home. OP sounds like the busybody from hell from their history too.

  • jimbobaus on 31/10/2019 - 15:22
    +3

    I assume they are smoking on their balcony / verandah which would not be a common property. No Strata ByLaw would prevent a tenant/home owner from smoking in their own home / backyard

    If they have a yarded area that is fenced off, this would also not be common propety and as such they have not breached the bylaw you mentioned.

    If they are smoking on paved areas around the complex, in car parks etc then thats different but as long as they are within the boundaries of their own property no rule has been breached.

    • sagrules on 31/10/2019 - 15:44
      +2

      Where they stand is not relevant if the vapours are entering into another lot owners property. That is what the bylaw covers.

      • jimbobaus on 31/10/2019 - 15:56
        +3

        Actually Nope… the vapours are completely irrelevant if they are on their own property.
        You can not pass a bylaw that prevents people from being able to smoke on their land/property.
        The OP stated the law relates to "common areas" your own verandah/balcony is not a common area and as such would not apply.

        • orangetrain on 31/10/2019 - 17:59
          +1

          Bylaw looks relevant if the smoke output of their unit is entering other units.

          Otherwise everyone would pee/vomit on their balconies that goes below.

          Not sure what OP can do if there's no visible evidence.

        • lysp on 15/11/2019 - 14:52

          You cannot prevent them smoking in their own house. But if they choose to do so, they must not let the smoke become a nuisance.

          Even without a bylaw the OP still is within their rights to stop smoke entering their property.

  • unelectric on 31/10/2019 - 15:55
    +3

    For what it's worth strata has sent round letters to everyone in my building saying that if smoke penetrates another lot then offender will be fined $5000 (from memory)

    • jimbobaus on 31/10/2019 - 15:58
      +7

      LOL good luck to them enforcing that bylaw.

      This is the very reason i wont buy property with a Strata system
      They are literally just cash cows for the company running them, they have zero influence and enforcement powers.

      I remember one of my tenants (back when i had a place in a strata) got a fine for putting washing on the street facing balcony as it was "against the bylaws"
      tenant went to VCAT and the Strata company was laughed out of court. Non enforceable, most ByLaws are sadly.

      • diazepam on 02/11/2019 - 18:36
        +1

        Would you be able to provide more information (either via message or here) because my Owner's Corp being sticky with me regarding the balcony issue and it was my understanding that owners essentially have 100% use of common property unless it directly and unreasonably impacts on others.

        Not really impressed with this BS 4th level of government with baby boomers that have nothing else better to care about.

        (I'm an owner) but all the other owners think that the balcony / washing is going to affect their property value. Even had someone on the committee one say to me "It's starting to look like an Asian slum" with obvious poking at my nationality. Not impressed.

    • sagrules on 31/10/2019 - 16:00

      While I agree to some extent with the comment below. Was that fine written into your bylaws?

    • DemocracyManifest on 31/10/2019 - 21:59
      +1

      lmao $5000 good luck with that

  • Vote for Pedro on 31/10/2019 - 17:19
    +6

    So what you’re saying is you want someone to do something about a problem you have but you aren’t willing to assist in presenting evidence that supports your complaint nor are you willing to stand by your complaint by putting your name to it?

    • Vote for Pedro on 31/10/2019 - 17:54
      +3

      To the neg: You can’t expect someone to stick their neck out on your behalf. I’ve made that mistake in my younger years. When it starts getting serious, all of a sudden you’re on your own and the original complainant is nowhere to be seen.

    • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 10:30

      Have you read my comment above? I said I am more than willing to sign the affidavit, I just dont have any photographic evidence of it happening. This has been an ongoing problem for quite a while.

      • Vote for Pedro on 01/11/2019 - 13:09

        And it sounds like the strata manager isn’t prepared to get in the middle of a “he said, she said” kind of dispute and would like some more evidence.

        • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 15:21

          This is only because there used to be two different occupants smoking one of which has moved out.

          • Vote for Pedro on 02/11/2019 - 14:51

            @sagrules: Sounds fair. Looks like they want to be sure before leaping into action.

        • Baysew on 01/11/2019 - 15:31

          would like some more evidence

          The smoking gun?

  • UserNameAlreadyTaken on 31/10/2019 - 18:30
    +1

    Our next door neighbour chain smokes, I can smell it often as our houses are a couple of metres apart. I feel for OP but what can one do as I don't want a hostile neighbour and he really isn't friendly and keeps to himself pretty much. Unfortunately no strata rules applicable.

    • HighAndDry on 31/10/2019 - 19:17
      +3

      Unfortunately this is part of living in a society. Lots of things are bad for us, but unless OP is a saint, others are doubtless having to put up with their flaws too.

      • UserNameAlreadyTaken on 31/10/2019 - 19:36
        +1

        As I said… I just feel for the OP being a none smoker where there are specific strata rules being breached for smoking.

        • Vote for Pedro on 02/11/2019 - 14:56
          +2

          I honestly think smoking should be banned. We’re fluffing around the edges to resolve this problem but all it’s doing is causing these neighbourhood issues. Meanwhile Government happy to take taxes.

          Was it Singapore that basically said, if you’re born after 2001, you can’t buy cigarettes? Gradual phase out.

          Edit: looks like the Singapore phase out was just a proposal.

  • nakahanap on 31/10/2019 - 19:03

    I feel for OP. At my previous residence, I was unable to place washing in my small outdoor area because my next door neighbour smoked. Ironically the terms of his lease stated he wasn’t allowed to smoke inside, so what he was doing was fine in terms of his lease agreement but certainly impacted my enjoyment of my place. I couldn’t open the windows on one side of my place or put washing inside.

    I wish you luck in enforcing the bylaw. Not wishing to be negative but I have not had, nor heard of, great experiences in terms of strata.

  • [Deactivated] on 31/10/2019 - 21:55
    +1

    I always think if someone is allowed to smoke at a place where others would have to inhale its smoke…

    Then anyone should feel free to fart after eating 10 eggs nearby these smokers too.

    • kolorijo on 01/11/2019 - 09:01
      +1

      They do that to non smokers too, it was all done in silence generally XD

      Silent But Deadly

  • DemocracyManifest on 31/10/2019 - 22:02
    +1

    This is impossible to enforce, these people are paying a lot of money to live there and the overreach is excessive. This is OzBargain, you should be hanging out in the bushes inhaling their fumes as you will be making money saving on $45 packets of Winnie Blue 25's

  • Blitz001 on 01/11/2019 - 00:20
    +4

    Don’t worry op at 2 cigarettes a day they’ll be dead by 140.

    Also can we get a bylaw for screaming children outside, this prevents me from opening my doors and windows freely due to noise.

  • Speckled Jim on 01/11/2019 - 09:10
    +1

    (something-something) vaping: the answer to everything.

  • ChickenTalon on 01/11/2019 - 09:47
    +2

    I've been in a similar situation and had success.

    We owned an apartment above chain smokers who were, fortunately, renting. Anytime they were home smoke would be coming up into any open windows.

    Initially, we tried talking to them about it, we asked them to smoke inside with some initial success. But it didn't last long before they commenced smoking outside again.

    So we and the other owners passed bylaws which banned smoking in common areas and banned "smoke drift". Essentially, if you wanted to smoke you needed to make sure the smoke stayed within your own apartment. They ignored it and a few owners complained. After a few warnings from strata their landlord terminated their lease.

    • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 09:58

      Glad to hear you were successful. I will take another look at the bylaw to check if says anything about smoke drift. I have requested a bylaw breach be sent directly to the owner but this has to be passed by the committee first.

  • biozet on 01/11/2019 - 09:53

    maybe take up smoking

  • PDeez on 01/11/2019 - 11:19
    +3

    We have the same problem, new tenants below us smoke on their balcony constantly and it drifts straight into our windows. Got a 2 week old baby who's crib is next to the window so needless to say we're unhappy with the situation. Already have the by-laws around smoke drift in place and they've received warnings but don't seem to care. Going to bypass strata and go straight to their landlord to complain. Good luck OP.

    • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 15:24
      +1

      Sorry to hear that. This was happening to us as well. Like I said its been about 2 or more years going on. How will you be able to do that without strata? I mean do you have the owners contact details?

      • PDeez on 01/11/2019 - 16:48

        My wife is pretty handy with the Google-fu and found out a bit about the apartment including who the leasing agent is, I'd love not to have to go down that path but the strata manager seems unable to get them to comply so hoping this has an effect.

        Have no problems with people smoking in their own homes, nor do I wish to impose on them. I think everyone should be free to choose what they consume, but the smoke literally drifts straight into the windows and we can't take the risk to the babies health. Not to mention we've an asthmatic 5 year old too. If only they'd smoke in their own place I'd have no issues.

        • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 18:15

          Ah ok, my strata manager said they would pass on my concerns via email to them, so I will try that and see if it results in any change.
          They are currently being pursued for another unrelated matter and nothing to do with us by the strata committee and aren't very compliant.

  • samthebear on 01/11/2019 - 12:51
    +1

    Our building has banned smoking anywhere in the apartment complex including on your balconies or in common areas from the moment the building was ready for people to move in. There is a $5000 fine and Strata has been made aware of some people ignoring the ban. Strata has since posted very strongly worded warnings at all lifts including photographic evidence of cigarette butts that have been thrown into other people's balconies and requested any resident with photographic evidence to submit them to building management. The evidence can come from any resident (did not have to be from the people directly complaining).
    We are tenants only but our tenant agreement requires us to abide by all strata by-laws and our tenancy can be terminated if we do not abide by the by-laws.

    You could try notifying the owners (if they are tenants?) and they might be able to terminate the lease.

    I'm just posting this to let you know that Strata absolutely has the right to enforce no smoking anywhere on the premises and don't believe other people for a second when they tell you that you have no recourse with building management when second-hand smoke is entering your apartment.

    • Vote for Pedro on 01/11/2019 - 13:14
      +1

      Bet you a tenner the owner won’t care about the smoking UNLESS it will impact their bottom line.

      • samthebear on 01/11/2019 - 16:05
        +1

        the owner is liable for any fines management puts on the apartment so yes, I presume the owners will care.

        • Vote for Pedro on 01/11/2019 - 19:16

          And until that onerous process is completed, the owner won’t care.

    • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 15:38

      Thanks for this info. We do not have a building management but I take your point about getting other neighbours on board to make further complaints.
      Which state are you in? Because for NSW Strata the fine is only $1100 and costs up to $3-5k for the strata to pursue the matter legally.

      • samthebear on 01/11/2019 - 16:04

        I'm in NSW, I presume the fine is to cover the cost of pursing the matter legally - my building does not take bylaws lightly. If your building has two or more buildings facing each other you might be able to get your neighbours across from you to help out since they would have a better view of the offending balcony/apartment.

        • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 18:10

          They do face each other however, the tenant is residing in part of the back block so nothing facing them. There is a foot path to walk past there though.
          The strata manager mentioned to me this is the NSW strata law the $1100 fine.

  • T1OOO on 01/11/2019 - 16:03

    Depends on the complex.

    I live in a nice one in cbd. No smoking. Put ima complaint to agent it never happened again.

  • prinsenhof on 01/11/2019 - 16:39
    +2

    Your best bet would be to flood their mailbox with pamphlets for e-cigarettes. After about 4 weeks if they still haven't started using one then "accidently" deliver a new one to their mailbox with your address on it.

    After a few days, if they are outside then talk loudly about how you claimed insurance on the package and are getting another one for free. Should reduce their guilt when using it.

    If they happen to actually return it to you, then act like its Christmas and talk it up.

    • sagrules on 01/11/2019 - 18:12

      Haha where would I even get the pamphlets for those?

      • orangetrain on 02/11/2019 - 13:01
        +2

        Start smoking and hope prinsenhof lives next door.

  • superValue on 01/11/2019 - 23:26
    +1

    I'm not sure what the current law is for smoke drift in NSW? Seems better than VIC.

    Contact your council and the police. The council will try to hand ball it when they do CC the councilor for your area getting them involved. A person from the health department should investigate.

    Good luck and keep us updated.

    For VIC Fact Sheet says council must investigate

    https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https:/…

  • sjbartley on 02/11/2019 - 09:41

    Sorry to hear about your situation. We ended up selling our apartment. The lady next door was nice, but such a person is generally a drug addict (nicotine). Our neighbour wouldn't do anything for us - wanted to live her life 'unrestricted' - even as she poured smoke into our boys' bedroom. We all do it, but a smoker like her will justify everything they do (to themselves); there's a fascinating Penguin book from the 1960s (I think) book called 'The addict in the street' containing the monologues of heroin addicts over many years, I recommend it: follow the path of a person going from "I'd never do that", to "Well, at least I don't…', etc…

    The first thing you may need to focus on is unconditional forgiveness (not conditional on your neighbours' changing or apologising); the smoke will hurt you more if you are stressed about it. Getting to know them will help a bit too (you may be surprised how if you like the person the smoke doesn't churn you up inside so much). If you end up moving, I hope you find this was all an impetus to a surprisingly better situation.

    BTW: My worldview is Theistic so I think another problem people have is to think evil is rational; education is not going to solve the world's problems.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join