[200William-EC SP67851] Fwd: Dog brought onto Marquis Property

[CSCL]

Hello all,

Another example of where tenants have been unjustly treated and a member of
the EC has a privilege, against what the by-law states!

In some cases tenants have been served notices to get rid of their pets.  No
matter what Ms Dennison states, I've seen dogs staying over in her apartment
602 on various occasions, for several days at a time.

I would like to recommend that the EC changes this particular by-law, and
makes it fair for everyone, tenants and owners.....and not just Ms Dennison.
And until this change happens, let's not send out any more notices to
tenants, who have pets in their apartments.

Regards
Craig Laforest


From: ec-bounces at 200william.com [mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com] On Behalf
Of Diana Dennison
Sent: Friday, 21 March 2014 10:53 AM
To: Matt Perkins
Cc: ec at 200william.com
Subject: Re: [200William-EC SP67851] Fwd: Dog brought onto Marquis Property

Hi all,

When Craig Laforest rode past me on his bike in the garage yesterday
muttering "by law" I wasn't unpacking the car but leaving with my daughter
's dog and we are now at Palm Beach. The only dogs in the building are the
resident one or two which cause no trouble to anyone. I would not dream of
having a Labrador living in the building. This one lives on 100 acres in the
Hunter.

On January 22, we were looking after the dog at Palm Beach, and had to come
up for the fire inspection, on the same day as the Council attended to
request that Craig cease breaching Council Fire Regulations by propping his
front door open for hours on end whenever he was at home.

As for the by- law - I wasn't aware that it applied to the occasional
visiting dog. I thought it meant 'no resident pets'. My mistake. The dog
created no disturbance, nor did it damage common property.

Sincerely,

Diana Dennison



Sent from my iPhone

On 21/03/2014, at 9:02 AM, Matt Perkins <matt at spectrum.com.au> wrote:



-------- Original Message -------- 
Subject: 	Dog brought onto Marquis Property	
Date: 	Fri, 21 Mar 2014 08:39:51 +1100	
From: 	CSCL <cscl at optusnet.com.au> <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au> 	
To: 	Maxine Wickey <mwickey at stratatitle.com.au>
<mailto:mwickey at stratatitle.com.au> , George Ziri <georgeziri at bfms.com.au>
<mailto:georgeziri at bfms.com.au> 	
CC: 	Andrew James <Andrew.James at lh.org.au>
<mailto:Andrew.James at lh.org.au> , Barney Kitay <barnet at kitays.com>
<mailto:barnet at kitays.com> , Diana Dennison <didee.cd at gmail.com>
<mailto:didee.cd at gmail.com> , Dave Petschack <dave at robadda.com>
<mailto:dave at robadda.com> , Rob Willett <rob at robadda.com>
<mailto:rob at robadda.com> , 'Matt Perkins' <matt at spectrum.com.au>
<mailto:matt at spectrum.com.au> , <rowanholloway at gmail.com>
<mailto:rowanholloway at gmail.com> , <brookbeves at bigpond.com>
<mailto:brookbeves at bigpond.com> 	

Hello George and Maxine,
 
Further to my email below, dated January 22, once again unfortunately I have
to inform you that my neighbour in apartment 602, Diana Dennison, continues
to break the by-law by bringing a dog onto the property to stay in her
apartment.
 
Yesterday afternoon, I witnessed her unloading her vehicle on P3 with a dark
brown Labrador at her side.  I have seen this dog several times with her,
and her partner Phillip Quirk, in the past.
 
Why does someone on the Executive Committee deem herself entitled to break
this by-law continuously and at the same time you are serving notices on
tenants who commit the same "offence"?!!  It's a disgusting situation that
our tenants have to suffer and yet someone on our committee feels privileged
enough to totally disregard our tenants' plight and abuse the by-law.
 
While the current by-law stands (and I personally don't agree with it),
there are several tenants who "live in fear" that they will be reprimanded
should someone find out that they have a pet in their apartment.  I believe
our EC Chairman once stated in an email that such tenants should be kicked
to the kerbside, along with their pets.  Another disgusting comment....
about our tenants.
 
I trust you will take the appropriate written notice/action and advise Ms
Dennison that such entitlement has to stop immediately.
Thank you and regards,
Craig Laforest
 
 
 
 
From: CSCL [mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au] 
Sent: Wednesday, 22 January 2014 10:47 AM
To: George Ziri; Maxine Wickey
Subject: Apartment 602
 
Hello George and Maxine,
 
Further to my discussion with George this morning, would you please note
that from time to time my neighbours have had various dogs staying in their
apartment.
 
Over the years there have been several complaints from owners whose tenants
in the building have dogs.  Many tenants have been served notices as a
result of our by-law which states that we are only able to have a goldfish,
as a pet.  Until such time as our by-law is changed so that everyone can
have enjoy having a (real) pet in the building, I believe that as a member
of the Body Corporate, Ms Dennison (and her partner) are setting a bad
example for everyone and should desist from bringing any dog into the
building.
 
Would you please put them on notice, not to do this again and advise me when
the notice has been served.
 
Thank you and regards,
Craig Laforest
Apartment 601
"Marquis"


_______________________________________________
EC mailing list
EC at 200william.com
http://200william.com/mailman/listinfo/ecI I
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://200william.com/mailman/private/ec/attachments/20140321/9643253c/attachment.html