Columns
Residents' Association Image

Residents' Association

A visionary proposal for Southbank
Read more >>

Business in Southbank Image

Business in Southbank

Cutting edge living
Read more >>

St Johns Southgate Image

St Johns Southgate

Religion: It ain’t sexy. Or is it?
Read more >>

Owners Corporation Law Image

Owners Corporation Law

OCs will be forced to fix dodgy cladding
Read more >>

Montague Community Alliance Image

Montague Community Alliance

Cautious welcome of new governance
Read more >>

Metro Tunnel

Transforming Metro Tunnel construction sites
Read more >>

Federal Politics Image

Federal Politics

Supporting the peaceful struggle of the Tibetans
Read more >>

We Live Here Image

We Live Here

Government ignores Airbnb stabbing death
Read more >>

Southbanker Image

Southbanker

Boating on Cloud 9
Read more >>

Housing Image

Housing

We are leaving an intergenerational time bomb for our children
Read more >>

History Image

History

“Mansions” in Southbank
Read more >>

Southbank Sustainability Group Image

Southbank Sustainability Group

Zero waste: personal and community
Read more >>

Health and Wellbeing Image

Health and Wellbeing

How to break the cycle of fear
Read more >>

Skypad Living Image

Skypad Living

Luv thy NABERS (for apartments)
Read more >>

Pets Corner Image

Pets Corner

Calling out for a companion
Read more >>

Southbank Fashion Image

Southbank Fashion

Spring racing in Southbank
Read more >>

Street Smarts Image

Street Smarts

Power Street – Southbank
Read more >>

Letters Image

Letters

Name it Domain!
Read more >>

Owners corporation law

12 May 2017

Buyer beware when it comes to conveyancers’ advice

Last month in the Supreme Court, an owners’ corporation (OC) in South Yarra unsuccessfully attempted to join two firms of solicitors that acted for lot owners in the purchase of their units, in an effort to see them held responsible for incorrect and/or misleading advice.

The dispute arose because the OC had only 24 car parking spaces shared between 32 owners. The OC subsequently undertook a process to grant use rights and leases to certain owners by special resolutions. Two of the lot owners who were not granted use rights over the car parking spaces challenged the decision at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT).

In response, the OC defended its decision and sought to join the conveyancing solicitors to the dispute, presumably to allege that the possible future divestment of the common property car parking spaces should have been disclosed as part of the conveyancing process.

The Honourable Justice Bell dismissed the application, finding that it was “simply untenable to suggest that solicitors acting on behalf of clients purchasing units in apartment buildings have a general duty of care to give advice …” in relation to the facts of the case.

Of course, the situation may be different in the case of solicitors who were engaged because of their specialised expertise, or where some particular fact or circumstance tenably gives rise to the existence of such a duty.

If the claim were successful, the effect would have been that every conveyancing solicitor in Victoria who is retained by a client who has purchased or who intends to purchase a lot on plan of subdivision affected by an OC must advise the client:

(a) That the OC has a power to lease or licence common property;

(b) Of all provisions of the Owners Corporations Act 2006 (including section 14, which confers the power to lease or licence), which might conceivably affect the client’s right to enter upon or occupy or use common property; and

(c) That the client ought to inspect the records of the OC on the off-chance that they contain a document which might point to a future risk.

In my view, the door is not closed on bringing a future claim against a conveyancing solicitor for inadequate or incorrect advice, but the facts and circumstances would have to be compelling.

The lesson for owners and prospective purchasers here is that proper care must be taken to ask the right questions of your conveyancer and to brief them adequately.

This may mean that the professional fees to be charged for the service will need to increase, but that comes with the territory.

Unless the conveyancing solicitor is properly directed to the client’s concerns and issues, there is every risk that the issue might be missed.

As always, caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) …

 

Tom Bacon

Principal - Strata Title Lawyers

Stay in touch with Southbank. Subscribe to FREE monthly e-Newspaper.

You must be registered with Southbank Local News to be able to post comments.
To register, please click here.