How a landlord’s refusal to allow access to apartments led to a $68,650 Tenancy Tribunal Order against them…

In a recent case, between a body corporate and an owner of a number of apartments in a building, the Tenancy Tribunal ordered the owner to pay a total of $68,659 after repeatedly blocking the Body Corporate’s access to their units, forcing the Body Corporate to resort to using a drone for building maintenance.

The Body Corporate needed access to the owner’s units for essential tasks, including performing a building wash, certifying anchor points, assessing and repairing a broken glass balustrade, and checking the fuse box. These were necessary for building safety and compliance. However, the owner installed an electronic door lock and denied access despite multiple requests.

When the matter went before the Tenancy Tribunal the owner did not attend the hearing after receiving many notifications. The Tribunal found that the owner had breached their obligations under the Unit Titles Act 2010 by denying reasonable access to the Body Corporate.

The Tribunal eventually ordered the owner to pay $68,659 to the Body Corporate, including outstanding levies and the interest, debt collection costs, legal costs, compensation, and filing fee. The Tribunal also directed the owner to provide the Body Corporate with a means of emergency access to its unit within three days.

The Unit Titles Act spells out the responsibilities of owners of principal units. Key takeaways for owners of unit titled properties are as follows:

• Access rights are serious - If you own a unit, you are legally required to allow the body corporate reasonable access for maintenance and safety checks and emergencies. Denying access can trigger not only practical problems but also significant legal and financial penalties.
• Communication and cooperation - Engaging with the Body Corporate in good faith, such as responding to notices, attending scheduled hearings, and offering solutions, can prevent disputes from escalating. In this present case the owner’s late-night emails and unclear excuses worked against them.
• Legal costs add up quickly - Once a dispute goes to the Tribunal or Court, the losing party often has to pay not just the initial amount owing but also legal fees, interest, and administrative costs. In this case a disagreement over access turned into a financial burden for the owner many times greater than the cost of simply cooperating.
• Electronic locks and security changes must be handled carefully - Installing locks that block the Body Corporate’s access rights can create a direct breach of your obligations. It is beneficial to check the body corporate rules and seek legal advice if you are considering doing this.
• Proactivity avoids litigation - Had the owner cooperated early, allowing maintenance and paying outstanding levies, they would have saved tens of thousands of dollars and avoided reputational damage.

Owning property within a Body Corporate comes with shared responsibilities. If you are unsure about your rights or obligations, getting clear legal advice early can protect your investment, your finances, and your reputation.

Leading law firms committed to helping clients cost-effectively will have a range of fixed-price Initial Consultations to suit most people’s needs in quickly learning what their options are.  At Rainey Collins we have an experienced team who can answer your questions and put you on the right track.