[200William-EC SP67851] SMOKING IN MARQUIS

[Matthew Perkins]

I tend to agree Ed,

Matt


On 17/4/21 5:03 pm, Edward Sainsbury wrote:
>
> Hi EC,
>
> I would say no to sending around the letter to residents. I do not 
> want to tell people how to live their lives in their own homes.
>
> I would however enforce a no smoking rule in all common areas. A 
> letter to this effect would have my support.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed
>
> *From:*Brook Beves <brookbeves at bigpond.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, 17 April 2021 3:37 PM
> *To:* 'Edward Sainsbury' <edwardsainsbury at hotmail.com>; 'Craig 
> Laforest' <cscl at optusnet.com.au>; ec at 200william.com; 
> ec-bounces at 200william.com
> *Cc:* 'Marquis' <Marquis at bfms.com.au>
> *Subject:* RE: [200William-EC SP67851] SMOKING IN MARQUIS
>
> Good afternoon Ed and Ors
>
> Several published studies and recent case law, evidence that while 
> smoking is banned in enclosed COMMON or SHARED AREAS of multi-unit 
> housing in Australian states and territories, private living areas are 
> generally exempt from these bans.
>
> Accordingly, to ban smoking in private living quarters is as you say 
> not “within the practical reach of the EC” and nor is it practically 
> enforceable.
>
> I also do not smoke and whilst I do not encourage smoking within my 
> unit, I certainly do not ban my guests from smoking.
>
> Regards
>
> Brook
>
> *From:*ec-bounces at 200william.com <mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com> 
> [mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com <mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com>] 
> *On Behalf Of *Edward Sainsbury
> *Sent:* Saturday, 17 April 2021 2:33 PM
> *To:* Craig Laforest <cscl at optusnet.com.au 
> <mailto:cscl at optusnet.com.au>>; ec at 200william.com 
> <mailto:ec at 200william.com>; ec-bounces at 200william.com 
> <mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com>
> *Cc:* 'Marquis' <Marquis at bfms.com.au <mailto:Marquis at bfms.com.au>>
> *Subject:* Re: [200William-EC SP67851] SMOKING IN MARQUIS
>
> Hi Exec Committee,
>
> Can the Body Corporate ban smoking inside a person’s apartment? Is 
> this within the practical reach of the EC? I want to ensure we are not 
> over reaching.
>
> My personal opinion is I am not for smoking, I do not smoke, and my 
> apartment is non-smoking.
>
> Regards,
>
> Ed
>
> *From:*ec-bounces at 200william.com <mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com> 
> <ec-bounces at 200william.com <mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com>> *On 
> Behalf Of *Craig Laforest
> *Sent:* Friday, 16 April 2021 9:34 AM
> *To:* ec at 200william.com <mailto:ec at 200william.com>; 
> ec-bounces at 200william.com <mailto:ec-bounces at 200william.com>
> *Cc:* 'Marquis' <Marquis at bfms.com.au <mailto:Marquis at bfms.com.au>>
> *Subject:* [200William-EC SP67851] SMOKING IN MARQUIS
>
> Good morning committee members,
>
> _In line with the law_, we have agreed that there is to be no smoking 
> in any lot (inside and outside) and also in common areas. I am still 
> smelling smoke from some areas of the building and think it would be a 
> good idea to send the following out to each apartment and to put it in 
> the notice box for a short time, in each elevator.
>
> Unless you have an objection to this, I will ask Darren to distribute 
> a letter to all apartments to advise tenants/owners that smoking is 
> prohibited, including the information below, as soon as he can.  This 
> hasn’t been done before, I believe.
>
> Thank you and regards,
>
> Craig
>
> *Breach of a by-law and penalties*
>
> In NSW, residents in breach of any by-law risk that the Owners 
> Corporation makes an application to NCAT 
> <http://www.ncat.nsw.gov.au/> for the imposition of a civil penalty 
> for breaching the by-law. Such penalties are quite severe. This 
> penalty carries a monetary penalty of up to 10 penalty units (which is 
> $1,100). A repeat offender (ie one who was fined $1,100 and breached 
> the by-law again within 12 months of being fined) can be fined $2,200.
>
> Any owner who is in breach of the occupancy limits set out in the 
> legislation are potentially liable to fines of $5,500 and $11,000.
>
> In the event that an owner breaches a NCAT Order to, for example, stop 
> smoke drift, or remove an animal, Section 72 (3) of the Civil and 
> Administrative Tribunal Act 2013 
> <http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/#/view/act/2013/2/full> provides 
> for a civil penalty. These penalties have increased to up to $11,000 
> for an individual and $22,000 for a corporation.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> EC mailing list
> EC at 200william.com
> http://200william.com/mailman/listinfo/ec
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://200william.com/mailman/private/ec/attachments/20210417/0ee030dd/attachment.html