How to Handle a Dispute Between Owners Before It Escalates

Sooner or later, two owners in your scheme are going to fall out — over noise, a dog, a parking spot, a renovation, a shared wall, or something that started as none of those and grew. And because you're on the committee, one or both of them will come to you expecting you to fix it. The instinct to help is right, but the instinct to take sides or to take over is where committees get into trouble: intervene in the wrong dispute and you turn a two-person disagreement into a scheme-wide one, with the owners corporation's money and credibility now in the fight. The skill isn't conflict resolution in the abstract — it's knowing which disputes are yours to handle, which are the owners' own to sort out, and how to defuse the ones you do touch before they harden into a tribunal case that costs everyone money and a year of ill will. This guide sets out that judgement, a simple early-resolution approach that works, and the escalation path for when it doesn't.

First, work out whose dispute it actually is

Before you do anything, sort the dispute into one of three buckets. This single decision determines your whole role, and getting it wrong is the most common committee mistake in this area.

• A private dispute between neighbours. Two owners disagree about something that is their business, not the scheme's — a personal falling-out, a boundary-fence issue on freestanding lots, a debt one owes the other, who was rude at the barbecue. The owners corporation has no legal standing here. Your job is to not get drawn in, however much both sides want you to referee.

• A by-law or common-property dispute the scheme owns. One owner is breaching the scheme's by-laws (a persistent noise breach, an unapproved renovation, a pet kept against the rules, a car blocking common driveways) or the fight is about common property one of them has affected. Here the owners corporation is a proper party — enforcing by-laws and protecting common property is literally the committee's job.

• A hybrid that looks private but crosses the line. It starts as "my upstairs neighbour's floors are too loud" and becomes a by-law question the moment you realise the neighbour re-floored without approval and there's a noise by-law. Or a personality clash between two owners that spills into abusive emails to the whole committee. These need the most careful handling — you engage on the part the scheme owns and stay out of the part it doesn't.

The test: does this involve a breach of the scheme's by-laws, or damage to / interference with common property? If yes, it's the scheme's to act on. If it's purely personal or purely between two lots with no by-law or common-property angle, it isn't — and saying so plainly, early, is doing your job, not dodging it.

Why getting this right matters

• It protects the scheme's neutrality. The committee acts for all owners. The moment you take one owner's side in a private fight, you've spent the committee's neutrality — and the other owner, who also pays levies, now sees the committee as against them.
• It protects the scheme's money. Owners corporation funds are for common purposes. Bankrolling one owner's private quarrel with legal costs or officer time is a misuse of levies that other owners can rightly object to.
• It keeps small things small. Most disputes are perfectly resolvable between adults if nobody pours petrol on them. A committee that intervenes heavily in a minor spat often raises the stakes and formalises a conflict that would have blown over.

The committee's actual role

For the disputes that are the scheme's, your role is narrower and more procedural than people assume. You are not a judge, a mediator by profession, or an enforcer with police powers. You are the body that:

1. Applies the by-laws even-handedly — the same rule, the same way, to whoever breaches it, with no favourites.
2. Communicates clearly and in writing about what the rule is and what needs to change.
3. Follows a fair process before taking any formal step — hear the other side, give reasonable time to fix it, keep records.
4. Escalates through the proper channel when informal steps fail, rather than freelancing.

Everything else — the emotions, the history, who's "right" as a person — is not your remit and not a good use of your time. Stick to the by-law and the common property, and you stay on solid ground.

Before you engage, get your footing

• Read the actual by-law. Don't act on a rule you think exists. Pull up the registered by-laws and confirm the exact wording and whether the alleged breach really is one.
• Check it's genuinely a scheme matter. Re-run the three-bucket test above. If it's private, your answer is a polite redirection, not an investigation.
• Confirm there's evidence, not just a complaint. A single annoyed email isn't a breach. What's the pattern, the dates, the impact on common property or other lots?
• Check your own conduct is clean. If you or a committee member has a personal stake in the dispute, declare it and step back from the decision. A conflicted committee handling a dispute is a tribunal case waiting to happen.

Step 1: Resolve it informally — this is where most disputes end

The overwhelming majority of owner disputes should be settled here, and never go further. Informal doesn't mean casual — it means proportionate.

The quiet-word stage

For a first, minor issue, the cheapest and most effective step is a direct, friendly conversation — often better done by the affected owner themselves than by the committee. Many owners have simply never been told their music carries, their visitor parks across a driveway, or their renovation needs approval. A calm heads-up resolves it far more often than a formal notice, and without the defensiveness a letter provokes.

The committee's role at this stage is often just to coach the complaining owner to raise it directly and reasonably first: "Have you spoken to them? Here's how I'd put it." That alone closes out a large share of complaints without the scheme ever formally engaging.

When the committee writes

If a direct approach has failed or isn't appropriate, the committee can send a factual, neutral letter — not an accusation, but a plain statement: here's the by-law, here's what's been reported, here's what we're asking, please get in touch if we've misunderstood. Keep it:

• Factual — dates and specifics, not adjectives.
• Even-handed — you're informing, not condemning; leave room that you might not have the full picture.
• Actionable — say clearly what needs to happen and by when.
• On the record — in writing, dated, and filed, because if this does escalate you'll need to show you gave fair warning.

Offer or suggest mediation

When two owners are dug in but the matter isn't clear-cut, mediation — a neutral third party helping them reach their own agreement — resolves a huge proportion of strata disputes and is far cheaper and faster than a tribunal. Every state offers a low-cost or free strata/community mediation service (see the callouts below), and most tribunals expect you to have tried it before they'll hear a case. Suggesting mediation early, and being willing to take part where the scheme is a party, is one of the highest-leverage things a committee can do.

Step 2: If it's a by-law breach, follow the formal notice process

When informal resolution and mediation don't land a genuine by-law breach, most states provide a formal notice procedure — issuing a notice to comply (sometimes a committee decision, sometimes requiring a general meeting resolution first) that puts the owner on notice that continued breach can be taken to the tribunal, which can order compliance and, in some states, penalties.

Do this properly or not at all:

Checklist for a formal breach notice

1. Confirm the by-law and the breach in writing, with evidence and dates.
2. Check your state's prerequisites — some require the committee to first resolve to issue the notice, or a general meeting vote, before a formal notice is valid.
3. Use the correct notice — states prescribe forms or minimum content; a home-made letter may not count as the formal step.
4. Give the required time to remedy the breach.
5. Keep serving fairly — same standard for every owner; selective enforcement undermines you at the tribunal.
6. Record everything — the decision, the notice, service, and any response.

Only after a valid notice is ignored do you have a clean run at the tribunal. Skipping steps here is the single most common reason committees lose enforcement cases they were otherwise right about.

Step 3: Escalate to the tribunal — as a last resort

Tribunal or adjudication is where you go when the scheme is a proper party, informal resolution and mediation have failed, and (for a by-law matter) a valid notice has been ignored. It's binding, relatively low-cost, and usually doesn't require lawyers — but it costs time, goodwill, and committee energy, so treat it as the end of the road, not an early move. Bring:

• The by-law and evidence of the breach.
• Your record of informal steps, the mediation attempt, and the notice.
• A clear statement of the order you're asking for.

For a private dispute the scheme isn't party to, the escalation isn't yours to make — the owners take their own matter to the relevant body themselves, and your role remains to stay neutral.

When to step back entirely

Knowing when not to act is as important as knowing when to. Step back — politely, and in writing if needed — when:

• The dispute is genuinely private and involves no by-law or common property. "This is a matter between the two of you; the owners corporation isn't a party to it and can't take sides" is a complete and correct answer.
• You or a fellow committee member is personally involved. Recuse from the decision; a conflicted committee acting is worse than no action.
• One owner is trying to weaponise the committee against a neighbour — using complaints to the committee as ammunition in a personal war. Don't be the weapon.
• The matter needs a professional — allegations of harassment, threats, or violence belong with the police, not the committee; serious legal questions belong with a strata lawyer.

Stepping back isn't ducking the job. For the disputes that aren't the scheme's, staying out is the job.

Common mistakes

1. Taking sides in a private quarrel

The fastest way to burn the committee's neutrality is to back one owner in a fight the scheme has no standing in. You now have an aggrieved owner who also votes, also pays levies, and now distrusts the committee. Stay neutral or stay out.

2. Jumping to formal enforcement before an informal word

A neutral heads-up resolves most first-time issues. Leading with a solicitor's letter or a formal notice for a minor, fixable breach escalates a dispute that a five-minute conversation would have ended — and makes the committee look heavy-handed.

3. Enforcing selectively

Acting against one owner's dog while ignoring another's is the flaw that sinks enforcement cases. If a by-law is enforced at all, it has to be enforced consistently. Inconsistent enforcement is both unfair and a losing position at the tribunal.

4. Skipping the paper trail

"We asked them to stop" with nothing in writing is worth little when it matters. Every request, notice, and response should be dated and filed. The committee that can show a fair, documented process almost always prevails; the one relying on memory rarely does.

5. Letting a conflicted member run the show

A committee member who is party to the dispute — or close to someone who is — must step out of the decision. A conflicted committee acting on a dispute hands the other side an easy win on process alone.

Frequently asked questions

Two owners are fighting and both want us to take their side. What do we do?

First decide whether it's the scheme's dispute at all (by-law breach or common property) or a private one. If it's private, tell both owners plainly that the owners corporation isn't a party and can't referee, and suggest they talk directly or use the state mediation service. If it involves a by-law or common property, engage on that part only — even-handedly — and leave the personal grievance out of it.

Can the owners corporation pay for legal action in a dispute between two owners?

Not for a purely private dispute — those funds are for common purposes, and other owners can object to their levies bankrolling one owner's personal quarrel. Where the scheme itself is a proper party (enforcing a by-law, protecting common property), reasonable costs of the scheme's action can be a legitimate owners corporation expense, ideally with owner support for anything significant.

Do we have to try mediation before going to the tribunal?

In several states, effectively yes — mediation or conciliation is a required or strongly expected first step, and tribunals may decline or delay a matter that hasn't been through it. Even where it isn't strictly mandatory, it resolves a large share of disputes far more cheaply than a hearing, so it's almost always worth trying first. Check the callout for your state.

An owner keeps breaching a by-law after we've asked them to stop. What's next?

Move from an informal request to your state's formal notice process — confirm the by-law and evidence, satisfy any prerequisite (a committee resolution or general meeting vote in some states), issue the prescribed notice, and give the required time to comply. If the breach continues after a valid notice, you can take it to the tribunal, which can order compliance and, in some states, penalties. Keep every step documented.

What if the dispute involves threats, harassment, or safety?

That's beyond the committee's remit and shouldn't be handled as a by-law matter. Threats or harassment are a police matter; genuine safety risks may need urgent professional or emergency response. The committee can still deal with any separate by-law or common-property angle, but it should not try to adjudicate conduct that belongs with the authorities.

Quick checklist

• [ ] You've sorted the dispute into private, scheme's to act on, or hybrid — and know your role for each
• [ ] For scheme matters, you've read the actual by-law and confirmed a genuine breach with evidence
• [ ] You've checked no committee member is conflicted; anyone who is has stepped back from the decision
• [ ] An informal, neutral approach was tried before anything formal
• [ ] Mediation or conciliation was offered or suggested, and used where the scheme is a party
• [ ] Any formal notice followed your state's prerequisites and prescribed form
• [ ] Every request, notice, response, and decision is dated and filed
• [ ] The committee acted even-handedly — the same rule, the same way, for everyone
• [ ] The tribunal was treated as a last resort, not a first move

Related resources

• Common Property vs Lot Property: Who's Responsible for What?
• Chasing Overdue Strata Levies Fairly
• Committee Meeting vs General Meeting: What's the Difference?

This guide is general information for self-managed strata schemes in Australia. It is not legal advice. Dispute-resolution procedures, notice requirements, and the tribunals or bodies that hear strata disputes are set by each state's strata legislation — always check the rules that apply to your scheme, and seek professional or legal advice for serious disputes or anything involving threats, harassment, or safety.