- UID
- 339792
- 热情
- 15762
- 人气
- 21317
- 主题
- 204
- 帖子
- 4457
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 20960
- 分享
- 0
- 记录
- 0
- 相册
- 2
- 好友
- 0
- 日志
- 0
- 在线时间
- 8955 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-9-1
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 最后登录
- 2024-11-18
升级 4.8% - UID
- 339792
- 热情
- 15762
- 人气
- 21317
- 主题
- 204
- 帖子
- 4457
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 20960
- 阅读权限
- 30
- 注册时间
- 2012-9-1
|
本帖最后由 bungyjumping999 于 2021-2-18 17:06 编辑
if low density, like 4 houses (freehold terrace) is still acceptable and owned by one common owner.
If more than 4 houses, i think body corp is better and important, at least there is some control on the whole environment, especially on behavioral issues, planting, painting, renovation etc.
Take for example, this roll of terrace houses are freehold, and people decide to add a staircase and putting an "outdoor kitchen" at the back of the house, it just spoils the whole ambiance. If it is a unit title, no way body corp will allow that.
Also body corp has a "long term plan", they can collect money from each household say $1000 a year for long term maintenance (after the meeting and members vote in favour) over a period to achieve the long term budget, and has debt collection agency involved if the fee is not paid.
Some other issues associated with freehold terrace houses - common areas grass (no one coordinating to arrange a gardener and collect payments), broken fences (blown by the wind), troublesome tenants with continuous parking issues, clothes handing all over the places, house being used as a brothel etc.
If under Body Corp rules, those problem issues would have been addressed and body corp would help to enforce the rules.
Some well-run body corp units actually help to increase the property value.
|
附件: 你需要登录才可以下载或查看附件。没有帐号?注册
|