Hard Rubbish Fine from Body Corp - Pay or Ask to Reduce Fine?

A bit of context I got a dented Marvel Mop bucket and decided to throw it away. Instead of putting in a big rubbish bin in waste room, I decided maybe someone can use this for other things and left it in a waste room floor.

Got caught on CCTV and slapped with $1k fine.

  1. Obtaining CCTV footage - $350.00.
  2. Attending to breach - $242.00.
  3. Removal of hard waste - $100.00.
  4. Penalty for failure to comply with rules - $350.00.

Now I know it's my fault and angry at myself that I should have just dump the bucket in the bin anyway.
Is it worth calling and ask to reduce the fine?

Poll Options

  • 461
  • 32


      • +2

        Meant to +

        • All good. If you care, you can click on "votes" underneath the post and then click the "-" on your vote to revoke your vote. You won't be able to + the vote, but it removes the - (or vice versa if you are removing a + : you can remove the +, but can't add a - )

          • @Chandler: I swear I’ve lost the ability to do this in my iOS Safari

            • +2

              @spillmill: All good - was mostly letting you know for any future misclicks/taps. I'm not too bothered about fake internet points :)

  • +5

    Ring VCAT and ask them what can be done about the fine is legal and how you would go about disputing the amount as the amount is way to much.

  • +3

    Do not pay. Tell them to kiss their ***. Bloody rippers.

  • +24

    Wow, I would hate to see what you are paying the OC on normal rates if that is their charges. I'd be tempted to be just as petty and send them a fine in response

    • Checking of mailbox -$242
    • Opening of letter and reading of frivolous attempt to extract money- $350
    • Time spend drafting letter in response - $700
    • Spending letter expenses - $200

    Mention you will be happy to waive the excess expenses if they decide to withdraw the fine. Or that you are happy to add any lawyer costs to the above should they wish to take it further.

  • +2

    I'd direct that letter to my complaints department (the bin) and get on with my life :)

    • +2

      Judging by their bullshit fees, theres probably 100% compounding interest calculated per hour

      • Yup, 10%

        Interest will accrue daily on overdue fees and charges by 10% per annum until paid
        The amount of interest has been calculated in accordance with the current rate under the Penalty Interest Rates Act 1983 (VIC).
        This rate is subject to change.

        • +3

          I'd be moving out…

  • +2

    Extreme why was money wasted to even investigate, I Thought someone put a bed , set of drawers and a fridge in the common area for that sort of fine.

  • +1

    Were you ever given a copy of the by-laws when signing your lease? If not, I would be getting a copy, reading it and going from there.
    Surely a warning would suffice, and why are there charges for accessing their own CCTV?

    • Surely a warning would suffice

      This… specially if your only new in the joint. Good neigbours are very valuable, this just causes hate instantly.

  • Sell the unit/apartment before due date of fine and purchase a house

    • I'm a tenant.

      • +4

        I'd never pay it and ignore all communications from them in that case.

        • +1

          Strata would issue a fine/charge to the lot owner who is ultimately held responsible. The owner would normally pass it onto the tenant or take it out of their bond if they refuse to pay. Abiding by strata bylaws is usually a clause in tenancy agreements.

          I guess my point is, don't bury your head in the sand and hope it goes away by ignoring. :)

          • +3

            @eggplant: The lot owner won't have to pay it as they didn't do anything. It's unreasonable to make a lot owner pay for their tenants strata violations. Neither will the lot owner pass the charge to the tenant as the tenant is their golden goose, paying for their mortgage/lifestyle and they don't want to loose that or have to deal with finding a new tenant if they have to break the lease to evict tenant.

            Strata could take OP to court, but then strata would have to justify the insane fine and also have to pay their own cost/time - which isn't worth it.

            The fine is completely unreasonable and magistrates are not going to accept such an unreasonable fine to putting a plastic bucket in a waste room.

            Head in sand is a perfectly reasonable way to deal with this if I was OP. Wait till strata takes you to court (which they won't as they will have to pay all the application fees and they surely know know their fine amount is unreasonable) then call their bluff in trying to convince a magistrate that $1k is reasonable to putting a plastic bucket in the waste room.

            Anything more than $100 for someone to bend over to pick up the bucket and and put it in the correct bin will be laughed at by a magistrate.

            • @studentl0an: is the owner aware? if it was me i would break lease say covid 19 make some exuse dont inform owner of fine

              Run and dodge make sure u get the bond back first too

            • @studentl0an:

              The lot owner won't have to pay it as they didn't do anything.

              In NSW when a lot owner purchases an apartment, the sales contract will stipulate that it's a strata title and subject to clause 23. Essentially by agreeing to buy the property, the owner or their tenant agree to these rules (strata schemes act 2015). Here is a snippet of the act your reference:

              135 Requirement to comply with by-laws
              (1) The by-laws for a strata scheme bind the owners corporation and the owners of lots in the strata scheme and any mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession, or tenant or occupier, of a lot to the same extent as if the by-laws—
              (a) had been signed and sealed by the owners corporation and each owner and each such mortgagee, covenant chargee, tenant and occupier, and
              (b) contained mutual covenants to observe and perform all the provisions of the by-laws.
              (2) There is an implied covenant by the tenant of a lot or common property to comply with the by-laws for the strata scheme.


              Otherwise we'd have tenants or owners in strata properties not subject to any rules? That'd be a horrendous situation.

              • @eggplant: See now that wording states exactly what I said. That the "covenant chargee in possession, or tenant" will have agreed to the strata laws by signing the lease.

                There is no wording there which states that the owner is responsible for the tenants actions, which should be obvious for many reasons. For instance, if a tenant vandalises common property - the lot owner can not be expected to pay for the tenants destruction. Strata can only take action against the person who actually destroyed the common property.

                Another example is when tenants use properties for illegal activities such as illegal drug production. Police don't arrest and fine the owner - they go after the person who actually did the crime. It would be completely unreasonable to issue fines to the owner if they had nothing to do with the infraction.

                Tenants have to abide by strata rules. So do strata when it comes to issuing fines in that they have to be reasonable or risk being laughed out of court when it comes time to get a magistrate to enforce their fine on the tenant.

                • @studentl0an:

                  I'd never pay it and ignore all communications from them in that case.

                  Tenants have to abide by strata rules. So do strata when it comes to issuing fines.

                  So which one is it? If the fine was properly issued (rules clearly disclosed to tenant, reasonable enforcement costs etc etc), ignoring doesn't seem like a good idea.

                  Yes I agree the owner in this case is not directly responsible and should have originally said the fine is issued via the owner. In practice strata managers and comittees have no direct knowledge or relationship with tenants (something between lot owners and their tenant usually via a managing agent, think admin/enforcement costs paid by someone or everyone). Bonds exist for the very purpose of tenants not meeting their tenancy agreement obligations, not complying with by-laws is one of them and the owner shouldn't be out of pocket here.

                  Do the crime, pay the fine.

                  • +1

                    @eggplant: I don't know how I can make myself any clearer.

                    The tenant can be fined for strata infractions. I never said otherwise (unlike you when it comes to owners being responsible for their tenants). The fine however needs to be reasonable. If the fine is not reasonable and strata takes the tenant to court to enforce the fine - they will risk the magistrate reducing the fine to an amount less than their costs incurred for strata bringing it to the court in the first place.

                    Anything more than $100 for requiring maintenance/cleaning/manager staff to pick up a plastic bucket and put it in a bin will not be seen as reasonable. The CCTV/investigation/further infringement costs are not reasonable to even occur, and the amount they are charging for that further compounds how unreasonable strata are about this.

                    I think strata knows all of this yet thought they could swindle OP. That is why I suggested to not respond to their letters and to wait until action is taken. I think strata views OP as a cash cow who doesn't know their rights.

                    Surely you can't think that putting a plastic bucket on the floor in a waste room should cost $1k? If you do think $1k is reasonable when it comes to "do the crime, do the time" for placing a plastic bucket in a waste room then I think you're acting in bad faith.

                    Bonds exist for damages to the lot, not common property. Strata doesn't hold any bond from any owners/tenants anyway and bonds have no bearing to the discussion at hand.

                    • @studentl0an: Suggest OP to ignore all communications, but agree that tenants need to abide by strata rules. So no, I don't consider that clear.

                      At no stage have I suggested $1k is reasonable. Don't agree with the amount of the fine, but agree with there being a fine. What I can tell you though is $100 is unrealistic. The typical sequence of events and entities involved:

                      • Building manager identifies rubbish and culprit.
                      • Strata manager is engaged to provide resident written notice to comply with by-law.
                      • Cleaner is engaged to dispose of waste.

                      If you think these three entities are all going to do it for a combined grand total of $100, then your sorely mistaken or have found a new business opportunity. Yes it's just a bucket this time, but what about a mattress? or a fridge? {insert charitable piece of furniture of your choice}.

                      If the OP has an issue with the fine, they should take it up with NCAT or relevant body. Not bury their head in the sand and hope it goes away. Either the OP offender pays (again I only agree with there being a fine, not the amount) or making everyone pay. I would consider that acting in bad faith.

  • Surely they will understand this is community spirit. If it was left for more than a week I would maybe send the fine perhaps. Or if it was a couch or something. But an old bucket you hope someone will use..
    ??? A bit petty.

  • +1

    This is f***ing harsh, but need to read details of by-laws. Is it outsourced manager? If so might be harder to get reduction or less of reduction.

    Good luck.

  • Are they owned by the Pica group?

  • You must be joking… write to them explaining your actions "of good will"… if they perceive that as being anything otherwise, the onus is now upon them to prove otherwise.

    I would not be paying these shit prices simply in order to discard a mop.

    You drag it on and on and on… and then threaten to have the matter resolved via tribunal.

  • +6

    Even if you are technically at fault here I would be amazed if they can charge you for costs relating to their 'investigation'.

    At most it should be be $350 for breaking the rule and possibly $100 for removing the bucket. I don't know how you could justify $100 to move a bucket though… would love to see the invoice for that. lol

    edit: Not saying I agree with $350 either, the whole thing is bullshit imho

  • +4

    How generous of you to leave your damaged trash for someone else to use? It really shits me off when people leave all their junk in the waste room as if it were a dump and magical fairies will take away their rubbish. That said, ridiculous fine.

    • +3

      Yes, now that I think about it that's fair.

    • I think there is a big difference between "damaged trash" and useable, also dumping… OP wasn't putting a mattress or whole bedroom suite in there that clearly wouldn't fit in the bins, to avoid having to dispose of something. The bucket would have easily fit in a standard bin, they chose to leave it therefor the chance that someone might take it and use it out of good faith.

      To justify $1000 to pickup a bucket, and throw it in the bin that nobody collected after a few days is a (profanity) joke.

      • +2

        There's no difference. If you don't want it, sell it, give it away or dispose of it properly. Like how you can argue leaving damaged items in the trash area isn't dumping trash lol.

        Agreed that the fine is ridiculous though.

  • +1

    The fine amount is over the top, but the fine itself is reasonable. As someone on a strata exec committee we're stuck dealing with residents and tenants dumping stuff all the time and it just really needs to stop. You'd be surprised how many folks find it difficult to place things inside a bin or call a council pickup.

    Not a lawyer disclaimer, conduct your own research/checks etc - I think these compliance notices/fines can only be issued to a lot owner.. who would then pass it onto the tenant or take it out of their bond (afaik stratas don't have a direct relationship with tenants, only lot owners). Tenants agree to comply with strata bylaws via their tenancy agreement which usually has a comply with building rules/bylaws clause.

    • +2

      As someone on a strata exec committee why aren't you providing adequate waste services?

      You're only "stuck dealing with residents and tenants dumping stuff all the time" because you don't supply hard waste collection. This is super common in Strata buildings. What do you expect people to do?

      • +1

        What makes you think there aren't adequate household waste disposal facilities available?

        The ones I've overseen, folks have dumped randoms bits of junk literally next to the bin and couldn't conjure up the effort for the last 40cm's. Noticeboards clearly advising residents to organise council pickups for larger items. Unless you believe strata management should be in the business of large waste disposal?

        Committee members have their own lives and would prefer not having to treat residents like children asking them to pickup their own rubbish. Ultimately the services and facilities available in a strata complex are borne by all owners and tenants via rent, collectively decided upon at AGM/EGM (its not a dictatorship). When you choose to buy or rent in a strata complex, part of that decision includes the services and facilities typically available in said buiding. e.g. reception, pool, gym.. etc etc consequently what owners and tenants are willing to pay for.

  • +4

    Regardless of what the trash is (a bucket or a couch), every penalty will carry 350 + 242 = 612$ on top. Someone has to pay for this, either by the person who commit the breach or by all owners via strata.

    • +14

      They should sack building manager either way, for wasting $692 investigating a bucket.

  • +14

    Ive been in this industry for over a decade and what I've seen is that stratas are changing in that they are removing spurious fines as they are unable to enforce them legally.

    eg. many stratas uses to have fines from $250-$750 for tenants parking in visitor spaces.

    Now they just have a warning sign that tenants can ignore.

    As a tenant you didnt sign anything with the strata so they cannot legal force fines out of you.

    They cannot force you to leave either, the only option for them is to put pressure on the landlord.

    My advice to the tenant is to ignore the letter but do not throw it out… save all the correspondence in case you need it.

    However protect yourself… start looking for other accomodation. This is your only weapon.

    You leave they cant force shit and your landlord may lose rent as a result.

    My advice to the landlord is to also ignore any threats of the strata to pass on the fine. The implicit contract is between the strata and agent.

    Right now lodge the case with vcat or whoever so it doesnt become a surprise when you try to get your bond back.

    Strata management is straight garbage.

    • +4

      Don't agree with the amount of the fine, but agree with there being a fine. Otherwise, tenant dumps rubbish. Refuses to pay for removal/cleanup of said rubbish. And is happy to pass that cost onto all building owners? Excellent moral compass.

      • Why aren't facilities for hard rubbish provided? Cheap strata's cutting corners and not providing adequate facilities are the one with the broken moral compass.

        • +1

          Household rubbish disposal should absolutely be readily available. Do you think strata committees should be providing large/hard waste disposal services? Even when councils typically already provide this service via council rates?

          Why doesn't strata provide a car wash service too while we're at it. Ultimately the services are borne by owners (and tenants via rent). Resident can choose to pickup the phone and call for a council pickup of their large rubbish. Or we can have strata organise it, which subsequently everyone pays for. That's hardly fair.

  • -1

    Don't OC management get paid fees to manage? so why are they charging or fining on top of management fees to manage?

    They cant fine breach of contract fee maybe.

    This smells to be not legal or enforceable

    • +3

      It depends. Strata management usually organises routine maintenance, collecting levies from owners, building insurance, paying common area bills etc. They tend to charge more for 'extras' that are beyond the standard administrative service. So issuing notices to comply, attending NCAT/VCAT, managing contractors for defects etc tend to attract extra fees. So YMMV depending on strata management company. Eventually someone pays, either the offender (the more fair outcome imo) or all owners which hardly seems fair when an individual couldn't be bothered to follow the rules.

  • +3

    you'll need to read the strata rules to see what rule you've breached and what the penalty can be .. the rest is the OC manager putting its bits on top… probably says 'reasonable expenses' so you'd argue they are unreasonable .. maybe end up paying less.

    When you leave your shit somewhere .. someone has to clean it up… bit different if you live in suburbia and put shit on your own nature strip, because you will pick it up when no one else does (and still risk council fines unless its collection time) … when you are in a building that's just being dumb… no one wants your dented marvel mop bucket.

  • Unlucky OP that’s pretty brutal. Just give them a call and try to negotiate for lesser fine but most likely wont reduce the already incurred costs such as footage and removal as it must have been paid by now

  • +4

    Living in an apartment complex myself, people like you who leave hard rubbish everywhere piss me off.
    No one wants to use your rubbish and it just stays there for months.

    Tenants are the worst offenders, leaving their bed frames, furniture, cabinets etc as they don't want to move it to their next place.

    Just dispose of it correctly and hopefully the fine teaches you a valuable lesson. :)

    • +1

    • +3

      I agree it pisses me off too. But recently I've also seen landlords do it too when a tenant leaves belongings behind after moving out. I know it's shitty but just because a tenant has dumped their stuff doesn't mean it's OK for landlord to not dispose properly.Take it to the tip and pay up like everyone else.

    • +2

      It's not tenants, average renters can't afford to just throw out all their furniture when the move and buy all new stuff.

      It's actually LANDLORDS dumping the possessions of tenants they've evicted.

      Why are hard rubbish facilities/pick-ups are almost never provided by strata's? What do they expect people to do?

      I've only lived in one building that provided a space for hard-rubbish. It's also the only building that didn't have hard rubbish regularly dumped on the street… funny that.

      The solution is for the strata to organise and fund collections (monthly), but strata bodies are usually too cheap, so everyone suffers.

  • +7

    $100 to remove a bucket…
    $350 penalty…

    Attending to breach and obtaining CCTV footage!?

    Yeahnah i wouldn't buy it.
    They'd need to prove the damages are in line with the fine penalty.
    Strata owner is using this as an opportunity to fleece you. Request a full itemised invoice list (it's your right)

  • -1

    Im the chair of a body corporate and im ok with this fine. I am sick of people just dumping stuff near the bins "just in case" someone else may want it. If you wanted to give it away, put it in a buy nothing group or ad on gumtree. This is more time intensive. When you just dump something and someone doesnt want it, then its someone else's problem to dispose of.

    I think the fine is a deterrence to stop everyone doing this as the cost of regularly disposing of hard waste that has been abandoned on common property does add up.

    • +9

      It's completely unreasonable. As a BC chair surely you are aware that the only way to enforce the fine would be to get a magistrate to enforce a court order on the tenant - and that the fine needs to be reasonable otherwise you a magistrate reducing the amount to being less than your expenses on application fees and appearing in court.

      • Sorry I may be speaking too broadly. Yes I admit the "failure to comply with the rules" would be problematic to enforce. Everything else I am fine with.

        • +5

          Are you fine with issuing $1k in fines for placing a bucket on the floor of a wasteroom? You don't think that's unreasonable at all?

          • @studentl0an: Im pasting from my other comment.

            It starts with a bucket but then we see Ikea furniture, then washing machines, then microwaves, the bedframes that are left in case "someone else wants it". Then the body corp is spending $5k a year on hard waste disposal.

            • +7

              @nedski: As BC chair - do you think that issuing $1k in fines is reasonable for placing a single bucket on the wasteroom floor? If yes, do you understand that a magistrate will most likely see that amount as being an egregious overreach and will drastically reduce it to a 'reasonable amount' for placing a single bucket on the floor of the wasteroom?

              He didn't place furniture or anything that would require costs be paid to the council for removal. He placed a single bucket on the wasteroom floor that required a single person to pick it up and put it in the bin no more than a few metes away.

              • +1

                @studentl0an: They weren't issued with a $1k fine, they had $650 of costs passed on to them and a $350 fine. A large part of the $650 is probably fixed due to costs imposed by 3rd parties which the BC absolutely should not have to wear. yes they are all steep and I think the $350 fine is probably unnecessary, simply passing all the costs on for the investigation and removal is more than sufficient deterrent.

                • @gromit: Are you sure that's the case that the costs were passed on?

                  Having a wasteroom and CCTV implies that strata already employs staff which tends to them and those costs are not being passed on. Rather it's just what BC are charging for it.

                  • -1

                    @studentl0an: often those items are outsourced and you have a trade off in the contracts, cheaper contracts but more expensive callouts or incidents.

                    • @gromit: So you're not sure?

                      Even if that was the case it's still completely unreasonable to charge more than $100 for the callout to do so. It would have taken 10 seconds to move the bucket to the bin it was placed near to, no more than 15 minutes to check CCTV and transport costs - $100 maximum would seem reasonable if that's the case.

                      But the facts are not charitable to that being the case. If there is onsite CCTV and an internal wasteroom then more than likely it is a managed complex with rostered staff spending time onsite.

                      • @studentl0an: of course I am not sure, I don't live there or work with that BC. But the prices are not that unusual. 3rd party contracts are usually negotiated to make them to the benefits of those obeying the rules and the expense of incidents costing more.

                        • +2

                          @gromit: It occurred to me that obviously it's a managed property because no strata would pay for a contractor to come out to put a bucket in a bin. Think about that hard for a moment.

                          If you think it's not unusual to charge $1000 for less than an hour of labor to essentially go to and from an already contracted property to place a bucket in a bin and check a video file and FOB access logs then I don't know what to say. It's so insane to me to think that anyone could think that to be usual cost for the time/labor involved.

                          It's unreasonable to charge that amount even if it was a contractor. It's less than a single hour of labor for transport, putting a bucket into a bin and checking CCTV/FOB access.

                          • @studentl0an: You are making a huge amount of assumptions and the way they are itemised makes me think it is NOT a single company managing it. regardless he should be able to request receipts for all of those seperate items to verify they are real charges. It is common when you have a 3rd party CCTV monitoring service for them to require an incident fee which is fixed in the contract at $xxx whether it takes them 10 mins or 10 hours to retrieve it. The cheaper the contract the more expensive the incident.

                            • +2

                              @gromit: Wait, you're going to accuse me of making a huge amount of assumptions without addressing your equal if not more amount of assumptions?

                              I've given sound reasoning as to why my assumptions are most likely to be the case. Whereas with your assumptions it appears everything is resting on strata agreeing to all those costs to put a bucket in a bin, which in itself is unreasonable.

                              Could you imagine a magistrate asking strata about why they chose to spend $650 on contractors for essentially moving a bucket into the bin it was placed next to and checking CCTV? It's not going to go well for strata if they try to get a court to enforce their unreasonable decisions. The costs are not reasonable by any stretch of the imagination.

                              • @studentl0an: Except your reasoning is not sound at all. The costs are itemised in a way that is common for BC's, especially those that have 3rd parties involved with fixed contract prices. All the evidence thus far suggests you aren't correct. I am not saying the prices are reasonable or particularly fair, but it is not unusual for these sort of contracts to be negotiated and the result is whether it is a bucket or a house full of furniture the costs to investigate, attend and retrieve CCTV will be fixed, disposal may differ.

                                and no it is not unusual to charge $650 for less than an hours labour for a couple of people, especially when dealing with 3rd parties.

                                • +1

                                  @gromit: You're saying my reasoning isn't sound because you think it's reasonable for strata to contract multiple different teams to investigate and deal with this issue?

                                  That is in itself unreasonable for the reason that we are talking about a bucket next to a bin. It's not destruction of property. It's not theft. It's a bucket next to a bin.

                                  Strata would have to be unreasonable to incur all of those line items in the first place, let alone the costs for them or expecting the person they want to fine to pay them - for what is a bucket placed near bins in a wasteroom.

                                  $650 is incredibly unreasonable given the tasks that were completed.

                                  • +1

                                    @studentl0an: They don't contract different teams to deal with this incident. THE CONTRACTS EXIST ALREADY. they will have a schedule of fees related to each service. i.e. They will have had a callout fee, in order for that person to actually identify who did it they then need to make a request to the company operating the CCTV which will also have a listed fee. They could have stopped before then and just worn the cost but guessing they probably have had other incidents in the past so they didn't want to even wear the initial call out cost.

                                    • +3

                                      @gromit: I was being charitable to your case, steelmanning your argument with the 'teams' because at least in that case the costs could be explained by sending many people rather than sending a single contractor out to do those tasks for an hour then bill them as separate line items and charging such as egregious amount.

                                      It's completely unreasonable by every stretch of the imagination to think that 1) a building manager contractor would charge that amount for an hours labor regardless of line items given we are talking about a bucket next to a bin in a wasteroom and checking CCTV/logs and 2) that those unreasonable costs could be passed onto the tenant given how unreasonable they are.

                                      The way you are trying to justify the amount charged is unreasonable to me and I strongly believe that reasonable people and a magistrate would see that to be the case also if/when it comes time to enforce the fine. You can look at the poll results to see just how many people believe the costs to be unreasonable.

                                      • @studentl0an: you obviously haven't dealt with contractors before, unbelievably rare to find any that will charge you less than 1 hours work regardless of how fast or easy it is. it doesn't matter whether it is a bucket or a semi trailor dumped on the steps. The contract for the CCTV or incident call out will be fixed, they are usually negotiated with the intension of being in the owners best interests, more expensive incidents if they expect less incidents or think they can pass on the costs. My parents holiday apartment building used to have such an expensive CCTV incident cost, however they had to renegotiate it as too often some of the car park incidents were kids and hence the BC ended up wearing the cost of many of the CCTV requests with no ability to identify and pass on the cost.

                                        • +4

                                          @gromit: Not only do I deal with them, I am a contractor and have done work for strata before (although not as a building manager or CCTV). $100/hr for going to the site, putting the bucket into a bin and checking the logs is very reasonable to me. To suggest that $650 is anywhere near the realm of reasonable I think would show to others how out of touch with reason you are.

                                          I also own an apartment in a managed complex and have experience in dealing with issues such as a bucket next to a bin when they arise. Thankfully my strata are not as insane as it seems all the ones you deal with are and would never agree to pay costs like that for an infringement such as putting a bucket into the wasteroom next to the bins.

                                          For you to try and justify the costs given the 'crime' and the community response here shows to me that you are out of touch with what 'reasonable' actually means.

                                          • +1

                                            @studentl0an: If you have cheap BC costs AND reasonable service fees then you are lucky. Usually you trade one for the other. $100 for someone to put the bucket in the bin was all they charged. The rest were costs incurred to attend the incident and identify the offender as well as the fine. As an owner are you happy to wear that $100 cost every time someone leaves a piece of garbage? I think your mind may change after the 10th or 100th incident in a year or would you prefer the BC spend more money to identify the offender and pass on the cost to them? or perhaps choose to pay a much higher CCTV contract fee so you get easy access to identify the offender? Most people say "screw the a hole that offended, they can wear the damn costs"

                                            e.g. here is a good sample of a CCTV request form. cheaper than the one listed here, but not much.

                • @gromit: *$650 in fictional costs

    • Yes, I understand the deterrence part and I know what to do next time.

      Just think 1k seems too much for a bucket.

          • +11

            @iregretmyusername: It's actually not. He's saying that you should pay $1k for placing a bucket on the wasteroom floor to deter people from placing furniture there because of hard rubbish removal costs from the council.

            You didn't place any furniture or anything that required the council to come remove it. You placed a single bucket that required a single person to spend less than 10 seconds to pick it up and put it in a bin in the same room that you placed the bucket. I don't think nedski is acting in good faith when it comes to giving advice to you.

            I also think that from reading your replies you seem like a very agreeable person who wants to do the right thing, and that's probably why strata thought they could scam you out of $1k for something that would be unreasonable to charge more than $100 for.

            • +1

              @studentl0an: You're right. I'm an immigrant and these laws really spook me tbh.

              I really appreciate your input in it, so thank you.

    • -2

      What is your position on fixed red light/speed cameras or mobile speed cameras? Are you fully supportive of this as a deterrent? Conceptually it's the same, so keen to hear your thoughts on it.

      • +2

        Go away

        • -1

          Go away


    • +1

      As a BC chair what have you done to organise regular hard rubbish collections to prevent the dumping occurring?

      Why are unenforceable fines your only solution? There is clearly an ongoing demand from your tenants for a service, so do you job as a body corporate chair and organise it!!

      • Thank you for your comment and your assumptions.

        As the chair, in the state where I live, they have free bulk waste collection twice a year. When this happens, I instruct the building manager to put up posters in common areas to alert residents to this as well as send out emails to residents. These posters and emails advise that if residents want to get rid of bulky waste, they are to call the building manager to arrange collection of the items on the residents behalf. This scheme is usually well utilised when residents are reminded.

        As for how we handle things, we have CCTV that the building manager uses to locate people who have dumped hard waste and they are told to come and collect it. If they dont, the building manager removes it and the cost of the removal is passed along to that unit holder. This has resulted in people trying to dump hard waste in areas not serviced by CCTV which has resulted in us having to deploy more CCTV around the complex.

        • That's a good start, but twice yearly? There is your problem… Surely a strata should do it monthly?

          Every home gets twice yearly, but you have dozens of units/tenants to serve, not one house.

          People being evicted in 60 days (through no fault of their own) can't wait 186 days for a hard rubbish pick-up.

          How are they meant to dispose of hard rubbish without incurring unreasonable costs?

          After all it is often the owner/landlord that is forcing the eviction (for sale, moving back in, etc).

          I suggest you either arrange a monthly pick-up or supply a space (eg 1 car garage) for storage of hard rubbish until the next 6 monthly pick-up.

          Not doing so will only continue to see rubbish "dumped".

          No one want's to dump rubbish. They do it when they have no other option (including the inability of poor renters being evicted being able to afford it).

          • +2

            @field1985: I struggle to understand how its the body corporates issue if someone gets evicted and has to get rid of stuff in a timely manner. That is between that person and their landlord. The body corporate has no involvement and shouldnt be burdened by any costs associated with it.

            • +1

              @nedski: If waste services aren't provided in a timely manner, people will dump, then it becomes your problem. Which is the problem YOU complained about. This isn't rocket science…

              Clearly both tenants and landlords are being caught out by your are minimum service. Is it any wonder they do the bare minimum in return?

              • @field1985: How is this different if they were leaving in a separate title house and they had to dispose of bulky waste? What would they do? They would take it to the tip and pay a disposal fee.. So why is it different for strata properties?

                • @nedski: Separate titled houses are entitled to request/book (at their convenience) 2x hard waste pick-up's by their council each year. This can vary by council, but that's how most now deal with it.

                  "So why is it different for strata properties?"

      • +1

        In addition, when someone dumps bulky waste at a complex, they are causing someone else to incur a cost because they are too lazy to dispose of it themselves. Unless the complex advises they have a service to remove bulky waste, people should know not to dump it there. It is selfish when people do this and making it cost prohibitive to do so can force people to actually get rid of it themselves in the first place.

        If bulk waste is not removed in a timely manner then people think its ok for them to add to the mess and soon the complex is overwhelmed with garbage which makes the place look like a hoarders hell.

        We arent talking about a complex concept here. Essentially, dont be an ass by dumping your rubbish for others to deal with. How hard is it for people to NOT do that in the first place.

        • You are so close to the solution here:

          "If bulk waste is not removed in a timely manner" - A six monthly hard rubbish collection is NOT a timely manner. People have 3 and 6 month leases expiring all the time, then there are no fault 60 day evictions.

          Monthly would be "timely" (eg last weekend of every month) for a strata property. Provide that and your problem will disappear.

          • +2

            @field1985: Here's an idea. How about people be goddamn adults and not dump their stuff on common property. The six monthly collection is a curtesy that we offer. Residents are free to arrange it for themselves with the Government for collection.

            The default position for this and for anyone is DONT DUMP THEIR CRAP ON COMMON PROPERTY.

            • @nedski: Sounds like you don't like managing common property for the common good. Maybe consider retiring?

              You clearly are reactive (MOAR CCTV!!) and not pro-actively looking for an actual solution (provide a room/monthly pick-up).

    • +2

      Are you OK?

  • +2

    I talked with your body corporate on your behalf.

    They're sending you an additional bill for wasting their time.

    You're welcome.

  • +10

    I think everyone is missing something very critical - WTF is a Marvel Bucket?

    • +4

      A bucket with the Hulk on it obviously

    • Clearly it is one of these

Login or Join to leave a comment