543dsa wrote:

Australia, strata title, which has some similarities to the US condominium
system but we don’t have home owners associations here. How things
must be done it spelt out in the strata title legislation.

Which from reading the bumph

https://www.strata.community/understandingstrata/what-is-strata

the individual lots should be precisely marked on the plans, so the
ownership of the balcony should be clear, and there is a legal entity
behind the common parts, so doesn't the legal entity just sue the
lock-changing dickhead?

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
543dsa wrote:

Australia, strata title, which has some similarities to the US
condominium
system but we don’t have home owners associations here. How things
must be done it spelt out in the strata title legislation.

Which from reading the bumph

https://www.strata.community/understandingstrata/what-is-strata

the individual lots should be precisely marked on the plans, so the
ownership of the balcony should be clear,

Yes.

and there is a legal entity
behind the common parts, so doesn't the legal entity just sue the
lock-changing dickhead?

Yes, but as I said elsewhere, the only viable way to do that
with such a small cost is to use the small claims court and
the problem is that its decision is not enforceable using
a bailiff and it is trivial to ignore debt collectors and they
wouldn’t be interested in such a small debt anyway.

Which is why I was asking if anyone could think of any
mechanical way to stop the miscreant from keeping on
getting a locksmith to keep changing the lock and we
have now confirmed that no one can come up with any
legal way of actually preventing him from doing that.

Yes, it is certainly possible to get a court injunction
to stop him getting the lock changed by a locksmith,
but that wouldn’t be cheap and he is likely to just ignore
that and is very unlikely to be jailed if he ignores that
with a civil matter.

"543dsa" wrote in message
...


"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
543dsa wrote:

Australia, strata title, which has some similarities to the US
condominium
system but we don’t have home owners associations here. How things
must be done it spelt out in the strata title legislation.

Which from reading the bumph

https://www.strata.community/understandingstrata/what-is-strata

the individual lots should be precisely marked on the plans, so the
ownership of the balcony should be clear,

Yes.

and there is a legal entity
behind the common parts, so doesn't the legal entity just sue the
lock-changing dickhead?

Yes, but as I said elsewhere, the only viable way to do that
with such a small cost is to use the small claims court and
the problem is that its decision is not enforceable using
a bailiff and it is trivial to ignore debt collectors and they
wouldn’t be interested in such a small debt anyway.

Which is why I was asking if anyone could think of any
mechanical way to stop the miscreant from keeping on
getting a locksmith to keep changing the lock and we
have now confirmed that no one can come up with any
legal way of actually preventing him from doing that.

Yes, it is certainly possible to get a court injunction
to stop him getting the lock changed by a locksmith,
but that wouldn’t be cheap and he is likely to just ignore
that and is very unlikely to be jailed if he ignores that
with a civil matter.

And while it would certainly be feasible to setup a
surveillance camera with movement detection so
that any time a locksmith shows up change the lock
someone can show up in person or remotely tell the
locksmith that he isnt allowed to change the lock and
it is unlikely that any locksmith would change it anyway,
there isnt anyone there full time who is prepared to do
that and it obviously isnt feasible to pay some
commercial operation to do that.

On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:37:06 +1000, 543dsa, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote:

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
543dsa wrote:

Australia, strata title, which has some similarities to the US
condominium
system but we don¢t have home owners associations here. How things
must be done it spelt out in the strata title legislation.

Which from reading the bumph

https://www.strata.community/understandingstrata/what-is-strata

the individual lots should be precisely marked on the plans, so the
ownership of the balcony should be clear,

Yes.

and there is a legal entity
behind the common parts, so doesn't the legal entity just sue the
lock-changing dickhead?

Yes, but as I said elsewhere,

As I said already and others hinted several times in this thread: you are
simply TROLLING, you senile Ozzie pest!

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID:

543dsa wrote:

the only viable way to do that with such a small cost is to use the
small claims court and the problem is that its decision is not
enforceable using a bailiff

Can't you escalate it to a higher court for enforcement?

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...

543dsa wrote:

the only viable way to do that with such a small cost is to use the
small claims court and the problem is that its decision is not
enforceable using a bailiff

Can't you escalate it to a higher court for enforcement?

No. It has to be a whole new action at a stupid cost.

And we have never had debtors prisons.

543dsa wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:

Can't you escalate it to a higher court for enforcement?

No. It has to be a whole new action at a stupid cost.

Which presumably you can heap onto the dickhead?

On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 17:55:23 +1000, 543dsa, better known as cantankerous
trolling senile geezer Rot Speed, wrote:


And while it would certainly be feasible to setup a
surveillance camera with movement detection so
that any time a locksmith shows up change the lock
someone can show up in person or remotely tell the
locksmith that he isnt allowed to change the lock and
it is unlikely that any locksmith would change it anyway,
there isnt anyone there full time

But YOU have all the time, you trolling piece of senile ****!

--
Bill Wright addressing senile Ozzie cretin Rot Speed:
"Well you make up a lot of stuff and it's total ******** most of it."
MID:

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
543dsa wrote:

Andy Burns wrote:
Can't you escalate it to a higher court for enforcement?

No. It has to be a whole new action at a stupid cost.

Which presumably you can heap onto the dickhead?

Only the most outrageous frivolous civil actions
ever see costs awarded against the losing party.

And like I said, we have never had debtors prisons.

543dsa wrote:

we have never had debtors prisons

We don't have them now, yet somehow we manage to get debts settled over
here.

On Wed, 26 Sep 2018 10:55:29 +0100, Andy Burns wrote:

543dsa wrote:

we have never had debtors prisons

We don't have them now, yet somehow we manage to get debts settled over
here.

Can't you see, unlike others here, that the lonely senile 85-year-old loser
is only TROLLING? No advanced civilized country doesn't provide for cases
like that! tsk

"Andy Burns" wrote in message
...
543dsa wrote:

we have never had debtors prisons

We don't have them now, yet somehow we manage to get debts settled over
here.

Quite a bit of the time, you don’t.
https://www.news.com.au/finance/mone...2e9c74b8fc6cd0