Cat in the flat makes a wallet fat

WHILE some people think the only good cat is a flat cat, research shows that cats in flats can be good for everyone.

"There are so many places I'd live in, and I'd gladly pay to live in them, but I find with pets you have to live in worse houses because despite the fact that you can pay for a nice place you can't get it because they don't allow pets," she said.

A Queensland study has shown that a pet-friendly unit can add up to $15,000 to its resale value.

Australian National Cats spokesman Dr Peter Higgins said units that allowed pets under a strata plan could attract extra revenue when marketed as pet-friendly.

"Everyone knows that cats are good for people's health and this shows there's also a commercial benefit," he said.

Real Estate Institute of South Australia President Greg Moulton said cats were generally considered to be a low-risk pet.

"If the pet happens to be a cat, the risk of damage to the property is minimal, so I guess there is a financial advantage to that particular landlord," he said.

He said landlords could charge more for pet-friendly accommodation to cover costs of potential damage, but tenants could still find good homes that allowed pets.

"I don't think you need to drop your quality of property, but there's no doubt that there's not quite as much choice," he said. "But there are still a heap of landlords that allow pets."

Katie Hannan, 33, of Magill, has been renting with cats for about 12 years and said pet-friendly accommodation was hard to find.

"There are so many places I'd live in, and I'd gladly pay to live in them, but I find with pets you have to live in worse houses because despite the fact that you can pay for a nice place you can't get it because they don't allow pets," she said.

NEWS LTD

Owners face big bills over falls from apartments

It is just a matter of time before individual unit owners will be asked to pay multimillion-dollar damages if a child falls from their apartment building, the head of a strata industry body says.

Mark Lever, the CEO of industry body the Strata Community Association, said that while strata schemes were required to have at least $10 million in public liability insurance, damages payouts for severe injuries where a duty of care was owed could go much higher.

''You would not have to go far in the insurance industry to find that a severely brain-injured child, if it came to a liability claim, would cost you significantly more than $10 million,'' he said. '

'The owners individually would have to make up the shortfall. It's certainly a matter of time before it's tested.''

Mr Lever's views were supported by a strata specialist lawyer, Colin Grace, whose company, Grace Lawyers, acts for owners corporations.

''The horror scenario is a child has up to 18 years of age to sue,'' said Mr Grace. ''If you've got a young child and their entire life is gone, and they can't earn any income - I can see the day where a plaintiff law firm could come up with a pretty serious case.''

Mr Grace said multimillion-dollar cases were rare but increasingly forseeable as more young families move into apartments.

Sydney's two biggest children's hospitals treat, on average, three children a month for critical injuries after falls from buildings.

This month an 18-month-old girl and a three-year-old boy were critically injured after falling from unit windows in incidents in Campsie and the central coast.

Owners corporations have a duty of care to keep common areas safe. Liability is clear where an owners corporation has failed to repair a faulty balcony railing and someone is injured after falling through it.

But some strata law experts argue there may be a further duty of care where the owners corporation has been told about a potential safety risk - such as balconies with low balustrades or windows without child safety locks installed - and has chosen not to act despite the forseeability of accidents.

Jesse Borthwick, from the state's biggest strata insurance company, CHU, said it was seeing more claims for injuries as a result of failure to implement occupational health and safety standards, mostly from incidents in older buildings.

But citing the example of a child climbing on furniture and then falling from a balcony or window, he said it would be ''very difficult to portion any liability to the owner of the unit or the building. People do have some level of responsibility.''

A spokeswoman for the Department of Fair Trading said insurance requirements would be considered in the government's current review of the strata and community title legislation.

SMH

Home Building Act Reforms

Home Building Act Reforms: The second phase of the Home Building Act came into force on 1 February 2012. Key changes are:
                                
Statutory warranty periods

• Builders, developers, owner–builders and tradespeople must warrant that, amongst other things, their work has been performed in a proper and workmanlike manner. Under the current law a homeowner, or subsequent purchaser, has the right to enforce these warranties for up to 7 years after the work was completed.

• Commencing 1 February 2012, the warranty period will be 6 years for structural defects and 2 years for non–structural defects. These periods will be extended by 6 months if the homeowner or subsequent purchaser becomes aware of a defect in the last 6 months of these time periods.

Threshold for mandatory home warranty insurance and cooling off periods

• Commencing 1 February 2012, all residential building work worth more than $20,000 must be covered by mandatory home warranty insurance. The current threshold is $12,000. The new threshold will also apply to the sale of a home by an owner–builder and to cooling off periods.

New small job contracts category

• Residential building contracts must be in writing and include a number of requirements.

• Commencing 1 February 2012, a new category of written contracts for ‘small jobs’ worth between $1,001 and $5,000 will come into effect. A small job contract must be in writing, dated and signed on behalf of both of the parties and contain the following information:

• the names of the parties, including the name and number of the holder of the contractor licence,    a description of the work (including any plans and specifications for the work) the contract price, if known.

Additional home warranty insurance benefits for homeowners

• Under the existing law, if a homeowner makes a home warranty insurance claim, they must pay the first $500 of that claim. After 1 February 2012, homeowners will only be required to pay the first $250 of any claim.

• In addition, all home warranty insurance policies issued after 1 February 2012 will receive a minimum cover of $340,000, regardless of the value of the work.

Definition of ‘related’ corporations to a builder or developer

• Under the existing law, an insurance policy may prevent a builder, developer or a ‘related’ corporation to a builder or developer from being a beneficiary of the home warranty insurance policy for that work.

• The definition of a ‘related’ corporation in the existing law is quite narrow and doesn’t include corporations that most people would consider as being ‘related’. Accordingly the new law provides a wider definition of what it means to be a ‘related’ corporation.

                            
For further details refer to OFT web site at: http://tinyurl.com/6cop68e