Belvue Apartments Crosslease 93132
After the clearing of the shrubs, at our OCM meeting on 11.09.12, Warrick Smith was not happy with the appearance of the front garden. He remarked "it looks like Rarotonga, not like Newmarket" and proposed to come up with further improvement plans.
At our 9.10.12 OCM, Warrick Smith circulated a hand-drawn plan for a 1.80m high wall around the front garden, effectively suggesting to hide the garden behind a high wall rather than improving its appearance. In that meeting, I (Christoph Paszyna) questioned Warrick if he had checked, whether a resource/building consent or any other approvals would be necessary. He did not have a reply at that time.
Three weeks later, at our 1.11.12 AGM, Warrick Smith mentioned his idea of a wall informally, without detailled plan.
At our next OCM, on 5.03.13, we were informed that an e-mail has been sent by Stephen Morgan (owner of 502), asking about progress on the front garden. The e-mail itself was not presented to the Committee. Graham Smith informed us that he had spoken to his tenant in apartment 514, who is a building contractor, and was told that a wall up to 1.20m would not require a resource consent. Graham suggested a block wall up to the allowable height limit, topped up by wooden trellis to 1.80m height. No quotes were presented to the Committee and no decision was made. This is what our meeting minutes said:
Request from Stephen Morgan (Flat 54) regarding appearance of the Caretaker's Flat - BCA Ltd is to respond to Stephen Morgan advising that a meeting has taken place and quotes are coming in for a 1.2 metre high wall. BCA Ltd is to supply Graham Smith with a contractor's name.
At the next OCM, on 6.08.13, Graham Smith said, he would obtain a firm quote for building the wall. I (Christoph Paszyna) replied that building the wall could only proceed after the prior consent of all apartment owners and a change to our building plan with the land registry. Warrick Smith's response to my warning was: "If someone doesn't like it, we can knock it down again".
Our next OCM was scheduled to be held on 29.10.13. On Friday, 18.10.13, Alana (BCA) sent out an e-mail asking if OCM members would be willing to re-schedule the planned meeting 8 days earlier to Monday evening, 21.10.13, because of the unavailability of one Committee member on the scheduled day. I objected, because it was too short to cancel my other commitmets. There was no other notification that the meeting has indeed been re-scheduled. In the end, only a minority of 3 out of 7 Committee members could attend this non-notified meeting. On the morning of that Monday, 21.10.13, the unauthorised building activity started as described on page Wall. BCA Ltd has so far ignored my urgent request to inform all owners about the violation of their property rights. It would be fair to say that BCA Ltd is complicit in siding with the perpetrator(s) of this unauthorised building activity.