Oops I seem to have missed reading Anna and Anthony's email earlier. Gay, I can see the new comments. Check if you have "Track Changes" under the Review menu turned on, and the comments may show up.
Regards Min
On 6/03/2020 11:12 pm, Gay Buckingham wrote:
Thanks Anthony and Anna. Your comments didn't show up when I opened the doc. Have others been more successful? G
Gay Buckingham +64 27 4544012
On 6/03/2020, at 9:13 PM, Anna Maxwell <akmaxwell@orcon.net.nz mailto:akmaxwell@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Hi Min Many thanks to you and others for all your work on these rules so far
- they’re looking good.
We’ve made a few comments on the attached. Let me know if you can’t see them.
Kind regards Anna and Anthony <UCOL-BC-v05.6-DistribCopy.docx>
On 25/02/2020, at 9:59 PM, Y Lee <yblees@orcon.net.nz mailto:yblees@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
HI Alex, Thanks for picking out the typos. I've attached v 5.6 with the errors fixed, and the items renumbered from 14 on wards.
I think some of Alex's questions may need to be answered by someone with more legal background, but I think it's useful respond publicly as others may have the same queries. This is how I understand things:
Re: 1c. Owners and Occupiers.
1c seems contradictory:
“Owner” has the same meaning in these Rules as it has in the Act and for the purposes of these Rules also includes all Occupiers of a unit in the unit title development, unless the context requires otherwise.
Which one is it, does "owner" in the rules mean "owner", or does it mean "owners and occupiers"?
As I understand it, the BC Rules apply to all owners. And they also apply to non-owner people living in the units (occupiers). However, some rules are specific to Owners only, for example, paying fees and being on the Register of Owners. Some rules apply to owners even if they don't live in the unit. Occupiers can include the children, boarders, and tenants of Owners. In general, the Rules apply to occupiers as well, unless it's not applicable to an occupier - eg, paying body corp fees, attending meetings for child occupiers, etc
*Re: 10. Vehicle Parking - Electric car charging & water supply*
10 Vehicle parking:
"Electric car charging stations and water supply for car washing will be available." I don't think this needs to be in the BC rules. Can you give a reference to where this was decided, and whether it was intended to go in the rules? I think it should be like any other operational policy, there is no particular need for it to go in the rules. I don't think facilities for cars should be special.I agree they don't need to be in the BC Rules as they can be separated out into Operating rules if required. If no body objects, I can take 10.d out
**Re: Aerials, Signs, Setting up permanent laundry structures*
11 Aerials, Satellite Dishes, Antennas and Air Conditioning Units:
Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process? We all have different colour front doors. Why can't people just put up what they want? (may need to replace it with something giving effect to our resource consent conditions.)
12 Signs, Notices, Advertising and Promotion:
Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process?
16 Laundry
I'm not sure it's really necessary.(There are a few more rules between 16 and 22 that I think are superfluous.)
This comes down to the balance between having more Body Corp Rules up front, vs sorting things out later. As I have been specifically informed by multiple persons that it may not be appropriate to cut down the number of rules in the existing document, this will need to go to the group to decide.
**Re: 13. Rubbish, Waste Disposal, Composting*
13 Rubbish, Waste Disposal and Composting:
I would like to remove 13e "shall strive to keep the unit, including private outdoor areas free of vermin, rodents and pests." since it demonstrates a nature-phobic attitude. And would be inconsistent with people wanting to keep pet mice or rats. And the health aspects are already covered by rule 13c. Again most of 13 is fine but I'm not sure it provides any value over and above leaving it out and dealing with disputes.
I agree that 13e is already covered by 13c, and should be removed. Have done so in the Body Corp Rules v5.6
*RE: Replacing Glass. (renumbered as 15 to avoid confusion)*
*15 Cleaning and Replacing Glass
I think 15a and 15b are problematic, since it may require owners to replace broken windows with new ones from Germany at huge expense. If this is to be mandated there should be a sharing of cost between the unit owner and body corporate maintenance fund. Is there a reference to the meeting where we made this decision?15a Replacing broken glass with one of the same weight/thermal properties. Won't this be required for us to maintain the Passivhaus rating? It was discussed in a meeting ages go, but I can't find the minutes for it - from memory, someone asked Tim if there was a NZ supplier of triple glazing, or if we would have to import replacement windows from Germany in case of breakage. And Tim said NZ manufacturing was not up to standard for the triple glazing.
15b Not replace with glass that will alter the external appearance of the unit. I admit, I don't really care about this one. If nobody else cares, I'll remove it.
*Re: Notice of Damage, Defects, Accidents or Injury* Oops. "Accidents or Injury" removed from heading.
Re: Tenancy (renumbered to 24 to avoid confusion)
*24. Leasing a Private Unit
The following clauses seem to be huge over-reach: b (I can understand contact details, but entire tenancy agreement? It is nothing to do with the BC) and e. "the Body Corporate shall be deemed to be the agent of the registered Owner of the unit for the purposes of exercising the rights of the Owner in respect of any lease or tenancy" It is just unnecessary, as long as the occupiers are abiding by these rules and the group process, which is dealt with elsewhere (e.g. in a), there is no need for this? Or can someone explain it to me?
I would be inclined to leave this whole section (apart from a) out, and instead keep a register of occupiers as part of 26, including part a there.
Clauses 24.c), d), and e) come from the Unit Titles Act. (d and e are directly out of section 81). And for the Body Corp to act on behalf of the owner, if the owner is not available, as in part e, the Body Corp should have a copy of the lease. I used "tenancy agreement" because that seems to be the correct term for this type of lease.
**Re: 25. Working Bees*
"The following suggestions for organising the actual operation of working bees are included for further discussion, with the outcome to be decided using the Group Decision Making Process.": Do we intend to leave that statement in the rules that we formally adopt, or are we going to do further work on 24 before adoption? The suggestions seem reasonable except : "f) Hours may be traded...." I don't want this in the rules.We can leave it as is, or work on it further if there is time. I'm in favor of leaving Operational Rules separate from the actual Body Corp Rules, as Operational Rules may have to be changed more often as we test them out. 25 f) Hours may be _traded _has been removed in v5.6. However, there are good reasons for allowing hours to be bought out
- including that it will be useful to have extra cash for
improvements, especially during setup. And it allows flexibility for those who occasionally find themselves time poor due to work or other commitments to still contribute if they wish. We can write in something about buying out work hours not being a permanent option.
Regards Min
On 22/02/2020 7:37 pm, Alex King via Ucol-shareholders wrote:
A few queries, perhaps someone from the BC group can comment at our next meeting?
1c seems contradictory:
“Owner” has the same meaning in these Rules as it has in the Act and for the purposes of these Rules also includes all Occupiers of a unit in the unit title development, unless the context requires otherwise.
Which one is it, does "owner" in the rules mean "owner", or does it mean "owners and occupiers"?
10 Vehicle parking:
The sub-numbering is inconsistent and needs to be fixed. (a b a b c). "Electric car charging stations and water supply for car washing will be available." I don't think this needs to be in the BC rules. Can you give a reference to where this was decided, and whether it was intended to go in the rules? I think it should be like any other operational policy, there is no particular need for it to go in the rules. I don't think facilities for cars should be special.
11 Aerials, Satellite Dishes, Antennas and Air Conditioning Units:
Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process? We all have different colour front doors. Why can't people just put up what they want? (may need to replace it with something giving effect to our resource consent conditions.)
12 Signs, Notices, Advertising and Promotion:
Can't we remove this and deal with any disputes through the group decision making process?
13 Rubbish, Waste Disposal and Composting:
I would like to remove 13e "shall strive to keep the unit, including private outdoor areas free of vermin, rodents and pests." since it demonstrates a nature-phobic attitude. And would be inconsistent with people wanting to keep pet mice or rats. And the health aspects are already covered by rule 13c. Again most of 13 is fine but I'm not sure it provides any value over and above leaving it out and dealing with disputes.
Unit Cleaning, Maintenance and Fencing
Presumably this should be a heading and be numbered 14, with the remaining sections renumbered.
*14 Cleaning and Replacing Glass
I think 14a and 14b are problematic, since it may require owners to replace broken windows with new ones from Germany at huge expense. If this is to be mandated there should be a sharing of cost between the unit owner and body corporate maintenance fund. Is there a reference to the meeting where we made this decision?
16 Laundry
I'm not sure it's really necessary.
(There are a few more rules between 16 and 22 that I think are superfluous.)
- Notice of Damage, Defects, Accidents or Injury
This title should be changed because none of the rules relate to injury.
- Leasing a Private Unit
a) is missing "and" from the last line.
The following clauses seem to be huge over-reach: b (I can understand contact details, but entire tenancy agreement? It is nothing to do with the BC) and e. "the Body Corporate shall be deemed to be the agent of the registered Owner of the unit for the purposes of exercising the rights of the Owner in respect of any lease or tenancy" It is just unnecessary, as long as the occupiers are abiding by these rules and the group process, which is dealt with elsewhere (e.g. in a), there is no need for this? Or can someone explain it to me?
I would be inclined to leave this whole section (apart from a) out, and instead keep a register of occupiers as part of 26, including part a there.
- Cohousing Working Bees and Administration Duties
"The following suggestions for organising the actual operation of working bees are included for further discussion, with the outcome to be decided using the Group Decision Making Process.":
Do we intend to leave that statement in the rules that we formally adopt, or are we going to do further work on 24 before adoption? The suggestions seem reasonable except :
"f) Hours may be traded...." I don't want this in the rules.
On 20/02/20 8:56 pm, Y Lee wrote:
_BODY CORPORATE GROUP REPORT - 20th February 2020_
In January this year, Claire Loftus offered her proofreading and editing skills to get our Draft Body Corporate Rules document into a consistent format. This month, the document was returned to me with the full glory of "track changes", and lots of Claire's very useful comments.
On the 9th of February, Gay, Warren and Min met to read through all the 'track changes' and comments, and eventually agreed on a copy to be sent out to the rest of the UCOL shareholders.
The Ucol Body Corporate Rules v.5.5 is attached to this report as a PDF. Anyone who wants the Word document, email me for a copy.
A few Definitions used in this document:
- The Ucol build is a *Unit Title Development*, and subject to the Unit Titles Act 2010
- *Owner* means the people who's names are on the purchase agreements.
- *Occupier* means anyone living in one of the units, including children, tenants, etc
- A *Tenant* issomeone who rents a home from a landlord and is named on a signed tenancy agreement. Tenants are covered by the Residential Tenancies Act 1986
- A Flatmate lives in the rental property, but is not named in the tenancy agreement
- A *Boarder *is someone who lives in the home with the owner.
- Flatmates & Boarders are not covered by the Residential Tenancies Act, but they are both still *Occupiers*. They have to obey the Rules, but should they have voting rights in the group when they are not required to attend meetings?
I think they should have voting rights in the group. However for sure since they are bound by the body corporate rules, it seems only fair that they would get a vote when the rules are amended?
The principle "Responsibility for decisions shall be shared by Owners and adult (18+ years) Occupiers" seems to suggest to me that occupiers (18+) get a vote.
Also, I would like to change the "adult" age to 16+.
Items in the BC Rules that need another Discussion Workshop
- _Shared Meals_ (25) - We have had one workshop discussing shared meals. However, when Gay, Warren & Min went through this document, we could agree on only three things (see 25). So it may be advisable to have another workshop for open discussion and brainstorming on Shared Meals before we can progress to formulating operating rules.
- _Procedure to Amend the Rules (29.e)_. We need to agree who forms part of the "Group" in the Group Decision Making Process. Whose colour card vote must be counted as part of the 75% quorum required to amend the Rules? Definitely the owners and tenants as defined above. But what about other non-owner, non-tenant occupiers. What about children, flatmates and boarders. Note that they are all also subject to these Rules.
NEXT WORKSHOP. The February Body Corp Discussion workshop was originally scheduled for this weekend, but it was cancelled as I was busy and could not host it. The next Body Corp Workshop should be either on the 21st or 22nd of March. I am away in April, and prefer not to organize anything for that month, so I strongly recommend we have a the Workshop in March to discuss the above two items, or else postpone discussion until May 2020
Regards
Min
Thank you Min and everyone for your work on the rules. I look forward to a lively discussion :)
Thanks, Alex
Ucol-shareholders mailing list Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders
<UCOL-BC-v05.6-DistribCopy.docx> _______________________________________________ Ucol-shareholders mailing list Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz mailto:Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders
Ucol-shareholders mailing list Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz mailto:Ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz https://list.king.net.nz/listinfo/ucol-shareholders
ucol-shareholders@list.king.net.nz
-
Y Lee