Introduction

Living in a strata community is like sharing a large cosy house with heaps of neighbours, but it can have its fair share of bumps. Imagine little squabbles about noisy pets or dodgy plumbing bringing some headaches. However, there is a sneaky trick up the sleeve for keeping everything peachy: negotiation. This yarn spills the beans on typical tiffs that pop up in a strata community and gives some straightforward negotiation advice that’ll make life feel like a breeze again, no need to pop over to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Stick around to uncover these handy tips and bring back that laid-back neighbourly vibe.

Common Types of Strata Disputes

Type of Dispute	Common Issues
Noise Nuisances	Loud music, late-night gatherings, noisy renovations disrupting community peace.
Parking Issues	Disputes over unassigned spots, guest vehicles, and exclusive use of parking areas.
Pets and By-Law Violations	Issues with barking dogs, leash violations, and unauthorised pets.
Maintenance and Repairs	Disagreements on repair responsibilities, maintenance timing, and quality of work on common property of strata buildings.
Renovation Problems	Conflicts due to unauthorised renovations, construction noise, or damage to common property.
Financial Contributions	Disagreements over the amount of levies or fees required for the upkeep of common property and services.
By-Law Enforcement	Conflicts arising from non-uniform enforcement of by-laws, leading to unfair treatment or bias perceptions.
Use of Common Areas	Disputes over use and allocation of common areas like pools, gyms, and gardens; issues with booking systems or shared responsibilities.
Property Damage	Issues related to damage to common property or neighboring units, disputes over liability and repair costs.
Behavioral Issues	Conflicts stemming from behaviors like smoking in prohibited areas, improper garbage disposal, or non-compliance with community rules.
Management and Governance	Disputes regarding strata committee decisions, including transparency, decision-making processes, and perceived mismanagement.
Security Concerns	Problems with the effectiveness of security measures such as locks, surveillance systems, and access controls.
Alterations to Units	Conflicts over alterations to units that affect common property or other units, especially if done without approval.
Subletting and Short-Term Rentals	Issues arising from subletting units or using them for short-term rentals, which can cause disturbances or violate by-laws.

Why Use Negotiation to Resolve Your Strata Disputes?

Negotiation is a fundamental form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) that offers a flexible and informal approach to resolving disputes. It can be particularly effective in the context of strata disputes due to its inherent characteristics and benefits, as opposed to dispute resolution before NSW Fair Trading or the NCAT. Here’s why negotiation can be a valuable tool for resolving strata disputes, and how it differs from other forms of ADR such as mediation and conciliation.

Benefits of Negotiation for Common Strata Disputes

1. Flexibility and Informality:
   • Negotiation is less formal than other ADR methods. It can take place at any time, using various communication tools such as emails, phone calls, or face-to-face meetings.
   • Parties have complete control over the process and can tailor it to their specific needs and schedules.
2. Confidentiality:
   • Negotiations are typically private, ensuring that the discussions and outcomes remain confidential.
   • This privacy can encourage open and honest dialogue, which is essential for reaching a mutually acceptable agreement.
3. Cost and Time Efficiency:
   • Negotiation is generally quicker and less expensive than litigation or other formal ADR processes.
   • It avoids the need for legal representation and extensive documentation, which can reduce costs significantly.
4. Maintaining Relationships:
   • By fostering direct communication between the parties, negotiation can help preserve and even strengthen ongoing relationships.
   • This is particularly important in strata communities where long-term cooperation is essential.
5. Control Over Outcomes:
   • Parties retain full control over the decision-making process and the final agreement.
   • This autonomy ensures that the solutions are tailored to their specific needs and circumstances.

Negotiation vs Mediation vs Conciliation: Which is Better for Strata Disputes?

While negotiation shares similarities with other forms of ADR, it is distinct in several key ways. The following table compares and contrasts negotiation with mediation and conciliation:

Feature	Negotiation	Mediation	Conciliation
Third-Party Involvement	None	Mediator (facilitates discussion, does not impose decisions)	Conciliator (actively participates and suggests solutions)
Formality	Informal	Semi-formal	Semi-formal
Control Over Outcome	Full control (parties decide terms)	Shared (mediator facilitates but parties decide)	Shared (conciliator suggests but parties decide)
Confidentiality	High	High	High
Cost	Low	Moderate	Moderate
Time Efficiency	High	Moderate	Moderate
Focus	Direct negotiation between parties	Facilitation of dialogue and mutual understanding	Suggesting solutions and advising on possible outcomes
Relationship Impact	Can maintain/improve relationships through direct dialogue	Can maintain relationships with structured dialogue	Can maintain relationships with structured dialogue
Flexibility	High (parties set their own process and timeline)	Moderate (process guided by mediator)	Moderate (process guided by conciliator)

Our detailed guide here discusses more about ways to resolve construction disputes without tribunal hearings, ensuring you find the right solutions to your issues.

How to Maximise Success in Your Strata Dispute Negotiation?

Understanding the Structure of a Negotiation

Negotiations typically follow a structured format, which helps in organising the discussion and ensuring all relevant issues are addressed. The structure generally includes formalities, opening statements, exploring interests, and generating options.

• Formalities: Begin by setting the tone with introductions and outlining the agenda.
• Opening Statements: Each party presents their perspective on the dispute.
• Exploring Interests: Identify the underlying interests and needs of both parties.
• Generating Options: Collaboratively brainstorm potential solutions.

Thorough Preparation

Preparation is critical for successful negotiation. Thoroughly research the issues, understand your rights and obligations, and gather all relevant documents and evidence. This foundation will allow you to present your case clearly and confidently. Thinking how to be well-prepared for negotiating your strata dispute? We answer all your questions in the next section.

Effective Communication

Effective communication is key to successful negotiations. Listen actively to understand the other party’s perspective and articulate your points clearly and respectfully. Avoid misunderstandings by asking clarifying questions and summarising discussions.

Building Rapport

Start with what you have already agreed on. Highlighting areas of agreement early in the negotiation can foster a sense of collaboration and trust. This positive start can pave the way for resolving more contentious issues.

Documentation

Documenting the negotiation process is essential.

• Record Agreements: Ensure that all agreements reached during the negotiation are documented in writing. This helps prevent misunderstandings and ensures enforceability.
• Review Details: Carefully review all documents and agreements before signing. Make sure all terms are clearly stated and understood by all parties involved.

Seeking Professional Help

Consider seeking professional help from a mediator, lawyer, or strata manager. These experts can provide valuable insights, mediate disputes impartially, and help navigate complex legal and procedural issues. PBL Law Group specialises in all aspects of strata law and offers unmatched holistic legal advice to resolve your strata dispute.

By following these steps, you can maximise the chances of a successful outcome in your strata dispute negotiation.

How to be Well-prepared to Negotiate Strata Disputes?

Gather Essential Documents and Information

Before entering into negotiations, ensure you have all relevant documents and information related to the dispute. This includes:

• Written Agreements, Contracts, or Receipts
• Emails, Letters, and Text Messages
• Notes from Conversations

If the dispute has been ongoing, creating a timeline of events with dates will help you confidently discuss the issue’s history. Even in disputes involving neighbors or friends, organising any available evidence is crucial.

Understand Your Legal Position

For disputes involving legal rights and obligations, seeking legal advice is highly recommended. A lawyer can provide insights into:

• Relevant laws and how they apply to your situation
• Your chances of success if the dispute goes to court
• The court process, including time and cost estimates
• Deadlines for initiating legal action

Clarify Your Goals

Identify what you want to achieve from the negotiation. This might include:

• Receiving an apology
• Obtaining a specific sum of money
• Stopping the pursuit of money owed or negotiating a lesser amount
• Recovering goods
• Resolving the dispute to move forward
• Establishing respectful future communication

Be Ready to Listen

Consider what the other party might want or need. Understanding their perspective can help find common ground. During negotiations, new information might emerge that changes your viewpoint or helps you understand the other party’s needs better. For example, if time is not crucial for the other party, you could propose a longer repayment period.

Explore Potential Solutions

Start with your preferred outcome, but also consider:

• The realism and feasibility of your expectations
• The other party’s desires
• Potential common ground
• Willingness to compromise
• Your minimum acceptable terms

Both parties might need to make concessions to reach an agreeable solution.

Anticipate Possible Outcomes

Think about the consequences of not reaching an agreement. For example, if the dispute goes to court:

• The court might not order an apology, even if you want one
• You may receive less money than expected or less than offered during negotiations
• You could be responsible for your own costs and possibly those of the other party

Identify your “non-negotiables” and “nice-to-haves.” Non-negotiables are essential, while nice-to-haves are preferred but not critical.

Negotiation Techniques for Effectively Resolving Strata Disputes

BATNA Approach

The BATNA approach in negotiation stands for “Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement.” BATNA represents the most advantageous course of action a party can take if negotiations fail and an agreement cannot be reached. Understanding one’s BATNA is crucial as it sets the threshold below which a negotiator should not accept a deal.

To understand this approach better, consider a scenario where a strata management committee and a resident are in dispute over the use of a common area. The resident wants to set up a personal garden in a section of the common area, while the strata committee believes this would unfairly restrict access for other residents.

Key aspects of resolving this dispute with the BATNA approach include:

1. Preparation: Before entering negotiations, parties should thoroughly analyse and understand their BATNA. This involves identifying and evaluating all possible alternatives if the current negotiation does not result in an agreement. In our illustrative dispute:
   • Resident’s BATNA: The resident explores alternatives, such as proposing a different common area location for the garden, seeking approval for a smaller garden, or finding another nearby plot of land outside the strata property.
   • Strata Committee’s BATNA: The committee considers alternatives, such as allocating a small section for gardening that can be rotated among residents, installing community garden beds accessible to all, or enforcing a strict no-private-use policy.
2. Strengthening BATNA: A strong BATNA gives a negotiator leverage. It is beneficial to improve or enhance one’s BATNA during the negotiation preparation phase. This can involve seeking other offers, exploring different opportunities, or finding ways to reduce reliance on the current negotiation outcome. Applying this to the current scenario:
   • Resident: The resident might strengthen their BATNA by gathering support from other residents who would also like personal garden spaces, or by showing the benefits of having a garden (e.g., improved aesthetics, community benefits).
   • Strata Committee: The committee could strengthen their BATNA by consulting legal advice to ensure their position is compliant with strata laws, or by gathering evidence that shared access to common areas is more beneficial for the majority of residents.
3. Assessing the Opponent’s BATNA: Understanding the other party’s BATNA can provide strategic insights. If their BATNA is weak, they may be more inclined to agree to favorable terms. Conversely, if their BATNA is strong, it may require a more attractive proposal to reach an agreement. In our example, this step would include:
   • Resident: The resident assesses the committee’s BATNA and understands that the committee’s alternative could be to reject the proposal outright and enforce the existing rules strictly.
   • Strata Committee: The committee assesses the resident’s BATNA and realises that the resident might propose a smaller garden area or gather community support to influence the decision.
   • Resident: If the committee offers a compromise where the resident can have a small garden that doesn’t obstruct access, the resident compares this offer to their BATNA (e.g., finding another location or getting community support) to see if it’s a better option.
   • Strata Committee: The committee, on the other hand, evaluates if allowing a small garden would be better than enforcing a strict policy, which might lead to dissatisfaction among residents who support the idea of a garden. Using BATNA as a Benchmark: During negotiations, BATNA serves as a benchmark to evaluate offers. If a proposed agreement is better than one’s BATNA, it is worth considering. If not, a negotiator is better off pursuing their BATNA. During negotiations in our current scenario, the resident and the committee both use their BATNAs as benchmarks. 
4. Decision Making: BATNA helps negotiators make informed decisions and avoid bad agreements. By having a clear alternative, negotiators are less likely to accept unfavorable terms out of desperation or lack of options. Coming to the example we have been referring to:

• Resident: If the resident finds the committee’s compromise better than their BATNA (e.g., the hassle of finding another plot or dealing with strict enforcement), they might accept the offer.
• Strata Committee: If the committee believes that allowing a small garden is better than facing potential unrest from other residents, they might agree to the resident’s proposal.

Interest-based Approach

The interest-based approach to negotiation, also known as integrative or principled negotiation, focuses on understanding and addressing the underlying interests, needs, and concerns of all parties involved, rather than sticking to fixed positions. This approach seeks win-win solutions where everyone can benefit, as opposed to the positional approach, which often results in a win-lose outcome where each party stubbornly holds onto their demands.

For better understanding, let’s discuss this approach in light of the hypothetical strata dispute example we referred above.

1. Focus on Interests, Not Positions: Identify the underlying interests behind the stated positions. This involves understanding why each party wants what they are asking for. In our illustrative dispute:
   • Resident’s Interests: The resident may want a personal garden to grow fresh vegetables, enjoy gardening as a hobby, or improve their quality of life.
   • Committee’s Interests: The committee wants to ensure fair access to common areas for all residents, maintain the aesthetic of the property, and avoid setting a precedent that could lead to disputes among other residents.
2. Generate Options for Mutual Gain: Brainstorm multiple options that could satisfy the interests of all parties involved. Applying this to the current scenario:
   • Option 1: Designate a small section of the common area as a community garden where all residents can have plots to grow their own plants.
   • Option 2: Allow the resident to set up a garden in a less frequently used part of the common area with specific guidelines and time limits.
   • Option 3: Organise gardening workshops and communal gardening activities to foster community spirit and shared use of the common space.
3. Use Objective Criteria: Base the negotiation on objective standards and criteria to ensure fairness and mutual benefit. In our example, this step would include:
   • Guidelines: Establish guidelines for garden size, location, and maintenance based on local regulations and best practices.
   • Survey: Conduct a survey of residents to gauge interest and gather feedback on the proposed solutions.
4. Separate People from the Problem: Address the issue at hand without personal attacks or blame, maintaining a collaborative rather than adversarial approach. Coming to the example we have been referring to:
   • Open Dialogue: Engage in open and respectful dialogue to understand each other’s concerns and perspectives without personal attacks.
   • Neutral Mediation: Use a neutral mediator if needed to facilitate discussions.
5. Build Collaborative Relationships: Foster a relationship of trust and cooperation, which can facilitate better communication and more effective problem-solving. Applying this to the current scenario:

• Community Involvement: Foster a sense of community and cooperation by involving more residents in the discussion and decision-making process.
• Ongoing Communication: Encourage ongoing communication and feedback to address any future concerns collaboratively.

By using the interest-based approach, both the resident and the strata committee can move beyond their initial positions and work towards a solution that addresses the interests of all parties. This could lead to a more satisfying and sustainable agreement, such as establishing a community garden that benefits everyone while ensuring fair access to common areas.

Anchoring Approach

The anchoring technique in negotiation involves setting a reference point around which negotiations will revolve. This initial offer or demand sets the stage for the rest of the negotiation, significantly influencing the final outcome. The initial anchor can have a powerful impact on the perceptions and decisions of the other party, often shaping the range of possible agreements.

Let’s discuss the key aspects of this approach using our previous example: 

1. Setting the Anchor: The first number or offer presented in a negotiation acts as the anchor. This number sets the baseline for discussions, and subsequent counteroffers and concessions typically revolve around it. The party that sets the anchor can often steer the negotiation in a direction favorable to them. In our illustrative dispute:
   • Resident’s Anchor: The resident sets an anchor by proposing a large garden space, hoping to establish a high initial demand. For example, the resident might suggest using 50% of the common area for their garden.
   • Committee’s Anchor: The strata committee sets a low anchor by proposing that no personal use of common areas will be allowed.
2. Psychological Impact: Anchoring leverages cognitive biases. Humans tend to rely heavily on the first piece of information they receive (the anchor) and make adjustments based on this starting point, even if it is arbitrary or extreme. 
3. Strategic Considerations:

• High Anchors: Setting a high initial anchor can establish a perception of value or seriousness. In our example, the resident’s high anchor aims to set the expectation that a substantial portion of the common area is negotiable.
• Low Anchors: Setting a low anchor can sometimes be used to signal a strong stance or create pressure. Applying this to the current scenario:
  1. Resident: The resident’s high anchor might lead to a compromise where a smaller but still significant portion of the common area is granted for gardening.
  2. Committee: The committee’s low anchor aims to reinforce the rules and set the expectation that personal use is not favored. This might push the resident to reduce their demand significantly, possibly accepting a very small garden area or a shared community garden.
• Counter-Anchoring: When faced with an anchor, it’s essential to recognise its influence and not let it unduly shape your expectations or offers. Counter-anchoring involves:
  • Rejecting the Anchor: Explicitly stating that the initial offer is unreasonable.
  • Reframing the Negotiation: Introducing a new anchor or shifting the focus to different criteria or values.
  • Preparation: Entering the negotiation with a clear understanding of your goals, limits, and alternatives to resist the pull of the anchor. In our example, this step would include:
    • Resident: If the committee sets a low anchor, the resident can counter-anchor by proposing an alternative solution, such as a smaller garden space or shared gardening plots, emphasising community benefits.
    • Committee: If the resident sets a high anchor, the committee can counter-anchor by highlighting the need for fair access and proposing objective criteria for garden space allocation, such as resident surveys or usage studies.

By using the anchoring technique, both the resident and the strata committee can resolve the issue with a more favorable outcome. The resident knows how to set a high initial demand to establish room for negotiation, while the committee understands how to counter-anchor to protect the interests of all residents. This strategic approach helps in reaching a balanced and mutually beneficial agreement, such as establishing a community garden that benefits everyone while ensuring fair access to common areas.

Concessions Approach

The concessions approach in negotiation involves the deliberate giving up of certain demands or lowering of initial requests to reach an agreement. Concessions are often seen as necessary compromises that allow negotiations to progress toward a mutually acceptable resolution. This approach is based on the principle of reciprocity, where one party’s concession encourages the other party to make a concession in return, facilitating a collaborative negotiation process. Continuing with the same illustration, the key aspects of the concessions approach are explained below:

1. Strategic Concessions: Making concessions strategically involves understanding which demands are most critical and which can be compromised. This helps in maintaining a strong position while also showing flexibility. In our illustrative dispute:

• Resident’s Concessions: The resident might start with a request for a large garden space but could be prepared to reduce the size of the garden or propose using a less central location in the common area.
• Committee’s Concessions: The committee might initially reject any personal use of common areas but could later agree to a smaller, well-defined garden space that doesn’t impede access for other residents.

By using the concessions approach, both the resident and the strata committee can move the negotiation toward a mutually beneficial resolution. The resident’s willingness to reduce their demands can be met with the committee’s willingness to allow some personal use of the common area under defined conditions. This back-and-forth of concessions helps build a collaborative environment, ultimately leading to an agreement that respects both the resident’s desire for a garden and the committee’s need to maintain fair access to common areas.

Manage Your Emotions During Negotiation

Negotiating can stir up a range of emotions, including anger, hurt, anxiety, or frustration. It’s essential to manage these feelings to negotiate effectively. Consider the following advice:

1. Avoid speaking in anger: Keep your tone calm and collected to prevent escalating the situation.
2. Use calm language: Choose your words carefully to foster a constructive conversation. Avoid using inflammatory or accusatory language.
3. Refrain from criticising the other party: Direct criticisms can create defensiveness and make it harder to reach a resolution. Focus on addressing the problem, not the person.
4. Focus on problem-solving: Keep your attention on finding a solution rather than letting emotions drive the discussion.
5. Be an active listener: Show that you are genuinely interested in understanding the other party’s perspective. This can encourage them to listen to you in return.
6. Ask clarifying questions: If something is unclear, don’t hesitate to ask questions. Ensuring mutual understanding is crucial for a productive negotiation.

If direct conversations feel challenging, consider these alternatives:

1. Negotiate through written communication: If verbal discussions are too stressful, use letters, emails, or texts to convey your points. This method allows you to express your thoughts clearly without immediate emotional responses.
2. Take your time when writing: Composing letters or emails at your own pace can help you articulate your thoughts clearly and thoughtfully.
3. Seek feedback on your communications: Have someone review your letters, emails, or texts before you send them. They can offer objective insights and suggestions for improvement.
4. Prepare notes for meetings: Bringing notes can help you stay focused on key points and avoid getting sidetracked by emotions during the discussion.
5. Bring a support person: Having someone accompany you can provide emotional support and help keep the meeting on track.
6. Request breaks if needed: If you start feeling overwhelmed during a meeting or phone call, ask for a break. Taking a moment to regain your composure can help you approach the negotiation more effectively when you resume.

By employing these strategies, you can better manage emotions and enhance your negotiation process, leading to more productive and amicable outcomes.

Ask Questions to Understand Better

Understanding the interests of the other party in a negotiation is crucial for effective communication and reaching a mutually beneficial agreement. Asking the right types of questions can help clarify these interests. Here is a breakdown of various question types that are effective in negotiation settings, what they mean, and examples of each:

Type of Question	What Does It Mean?	Examples
Open-ended questions	These invite detailed responses rather than simple “yes” or “no” answers, encouraging the other party to elaborate.	“Why do you hold that position in this negotiation?” “What are your main concerns about this proposal?”
Leading questions	These suggest a particular answer or perspective, which can guide the conversation in a specific direction.	“Do you believe our proposal is fair?” “Would you agree that this solution benefits both parties?”
Cool questions	These are phrased to avoid provoking a defensive or heated reaction, helping to maintain a calm and productive discussion.	Ask “What additional fees should we anticipate?” instead of “Don’t you think we’ve paid enough?” Ask “Can you specify which parts of the agreement are problematic for you?” vs “Why do you have problems with everything?”
Treat questions	These combine a compliment with a request for information, building rapport and making the other party feel appreciated.	“Given your expertise, what do you think would solve this issue?” “Considering your experience, what would you suggest as the best course of action?”
Window questions	These seek to understand the other party’s perspective by asking them to explain their reasoning or thought process.	“Can you explain how you reached that conclusion?” “What factors influenced your decision on this matter?”
Directive questions	These focus on obtaining specific information, being clear and direct in their intent.	“What is the rental rate per square foot with these improvements?” “How long will it take to implement these changes?”
Gauging questions	These assess the other party’s feelings and thoughts, providing insights into their emotional and mental state regarding the negotiation.	“What are your thoughts on our proposal?” “How do you feel about the current progress of our negotiation?”

Caught-up in a Strata Dispute? Let’s Discuss the Way Out.

Handling disagreements in strata scheme settings doesn’t have to be daunting. With the right negotiation techniques, you can resolve disputes with solutions that work for everyone, keeping your community peaceful and pleasant within the strata. Remember, negotiating isn’t just about solving problems—it’s about strengthening ties with your neighbors and building a supportive living environment through amicable resolution of disputes. If you ever feel overwhelmed, our law firm is here to help. Don’t hesitate to reach out for advice and support to keep your strata experience positive and conflict-free.