Portfolio Profile
Lot Types
Residential 3,699 (93%)
Commercial 278 (7%)
Utility 15 (0%)
Scheme Size Distribution
Distribution of schemes by total lot count. Average scheme size: 9.8 lots. The portfolio is dominated by small schemes (10 lots or fewer), typical of townhouse and villa complexes.
Portfolio Age
Schemes by registration decade. Oldest scheme registered 1964, newest 2024.
Suburb Coverage
| Suburb | Schemes | Lots | % of Portfolio | Market Share | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Merewether 2291 | 50 | 333 | 12% | 12.3% | |
| The Hill 2300 | 23 | 165 | 6% | 21.7% | |
| Adamstown 2289 | 15 | 112 | 4% | 9.4% | |
| Newcastle 2300 | 14 | 208 | 3% | 8.5% | |
| Jesmond 2299 | 14 | 171 | 3% | 18.9% | |
| Hawks Nest 2324 | 14 | 88 | 3% | 11.7% | |
| Charlestown 2290 | 13 | 103 | 3% | 4.5% | |
| New Lambton 2305 | 12 | 80 | 3% | 8.0% | |
| Wallsend 2287 | 12 | 57 | 3% | 2.8% | |
| Forster 2428 | 11 | 96 | 3% | 1.9% |
| Mayfield 2304 | 11 | 54 | 3% | 5.4% | |
| Warners Bay 2282 | 9 | 31 | 2% | 3.7% | |
| Elermore Vale 2287 | 8 | 896 | 2% | 10.5% | |
| Hamilton 2303 | 8 | 52 | 2% | 11.6% | |
| Rutherford 2320 | 8 | 72 | 2% | 6.3% | |
| Lambton 2299 | 8 | 36 | 2% | 9.4% | |
| Swansea 2281 | 8 | 40 | 2% | 11.6% | |
| Kahibah 2290 | 8 | 41 | 2% | 12.3% | |
| Lorn 2320 | 7 | 161 | 2% | 58.3% | |
| Tuncurry 2428 | 6 | 64 | 1% | 1.6% | |
| Thornton 2322 | 6 | 89 | 1% | 3.9% | |
| Edgeworth 2285 | 6 | 32 | 1% | 18.2% | |
| Warabrook 2304 | 6 | 22 | 1% | 11.8% | |
| Cardiff South 2285 | 5 | 49 | 1% | 20.0% | |
| Cooks Hill 2300 | 5 | 41 | 1% | 5.7% | |
| Cardiff 2285 | 5 | 21 | 1% | 5.0% | |
| Mayfield East 2304 | 4 | 90 | 1% | 17.4% | |
| Raymond Terrace 2324 | 4 | 21 | 1% | 2.5% | |
| Toronto 2283 | 4 | 31 | 1% | 4.6% | |
| Kotara 2289 | 4 | 17 | 1% | 10.0% | |
| Marks Point 2280 | 3 | 50 | 1% | 13.6% | |
| The Junction 2291 | 3 | 29 | 1% | 6.5% | |
| Bar Beach 2300 | 3 | 33 | 1% | 8.3% | |
| Georgetown 2298 | 3 | 24 | 1% | 15.0% | |
| East Maitland 2323 | 3 | 26 | 1% | 1.6% | |
| Stockton 2295 | 3 | 32 | 1% | 14.3% | |
| Waratah 2298 | 3 | 17 | 1% | 4.2% | |
| Birmingham Gardens 2287 | 3 | 15 | 1% | 9.7% | |
| Blackalls Park 2283 | 3 | 16 | 1% | 8.1% | |
| Belmont North 2280 | 3 | 14 | 1% | 14.3% | |
| Kurri Kurri 2327 | 3 | 13 | 1% | 4.1% | |
| Belmont 2280 | 3 | 13 | 1% | 3.8% | |
| Hamilton South 2303 | 3 | 10 | 1% | 11.1% | |
| Mayfield West 2304 | 3 | 9 | 1% | 5.8% | |
| Tea Gardens 2324 | 3 | 9 | 1% | 6.2% | |
| Mount Hutton 2290 | 2 | 41 | 0% | 3.0% | |
| Metford 2323 | 2 | 17 | 0% | 3.0% | |
| Newcastle East 2300 | 2 | 24 | 0% | 7.4% | |
| Speers Point 2284 | 2 | 17 | 0% | 5.6% | |
| Belmont South 2280 | 2 | 13 | 0% | 22.2% | |
| Teralba 2284 | 2 | 12 | 0% | 25.0% | |
| Shortland 2307 | 2 | 12 | 0% | 4.9% | |
| Gateshead 2290 | 2 | 10 | 0% | 10.5% | |
| Maryland 2287 | 2 | 7 | 0% | 3.6% | |
| Cessnock 2325 | 2 | 6 | 0% | 1.3% | |
| Whitebridge 2290 | 2 | 7 | 0% | 5.4% | |
| North Lambton 2299 | 2 | 7 | 0% | 6.2% | |
| Islington 2296 | 2 | 8 | 0% | 6.9% | |
| Beresfield 2322 | 2 | 5 | 0% | 3.0% | |
| Windale 2306 | 1 | 38 | 0% | 25.0% | |
| Wickham 2293 | 1 | 30 | 0% | 2.0% | |
| Hamilton East 2303 | 1 | 16 | 0% | 50.0% | |
| Nelson Bay 2315 | 1 | 14 | 0% | 0.3% | |
| Fennell Bay 2283 | 1 | 13 | 0% | 10.0% | |
| Argenton 2284 | 1 | 11 | 0% | 10.0% | |
| Cameron Park 2285 | 1 | 10 | 0% | 2.1% | |
| New Lambton Heights 2305 | 1 | 10 | 0% | 16.7% | |
| Cardiff Heights 2285 | 1 | 8 | 0% | 12.5% | |
| Morisset 2264 | 1 | 8 | 0% | 1.4% | |
| Soldiers Point 2317 | 1 | 7 | 0% | 1.4% | |
| Tarro 2322 | 1 | 6 | 0% | 10.0% | |
| Wangi Wangi 2267 | 1 | 5 | 0% | 9.1% | |
| Gillieston Heights 2321 | 1 | 5 | 0% | 2.0% | |
| Harrington 2427 | 1 | 5 | 0% | 1.8% | |
| Caves Beach 2281 | 1 | 5 | 0% | 3.8% | |
| Broadmeadow 2292 | 1 | 4 | 0% | 2.7% | |
| Bennetts Green 2290 | 1 | 4 | 0% | 4.8% | |
| Adamstown Heights 2289 | 1 | 4 | 0% | 8.3% | |
| Glendale 2285 | 1 | 4 | 0% | 8.3% | |
| Booragul 2284 | 1 | 4 | 0% | 100.0% | |
| Waratah West 2298 | 1 | 3 | 0% | 6.2% | |
| Floraville 2280 | 1 | 3 | 0% | 4.0% | |
| Aberdare 2325 | 1 | 2 | 0% | 1.7% | |
| Morpeth 2321 | 1 | 2 | 0% | 5.6% | |
| Boomerang Beach 2428 | 1 | 2 | 0% | 1.4% |
Tribunal & Court History
4
Total Cases
3
Supreme Court
0.2
Adverse per 100 Schemes
1.0
Total per 100 Schemes
4 cases since 2023. Of these, 1 resulted in substantive orders. The remaining 3 were dismissed, withdrawn, settled, or involved the OC as applicant.
Orders Made 4
The Owners sought compensation for building damages and loss of value. The court found in favor of the Owners for the physical damage but not the loss of value and awarded costs accordingly, along with interest.
COSTS — Party/Party — General rule that costs follow the event — Application of the rule and discretion — Whether success or failure on separate claims should affect costs orders
Before
Elkaim AJ
Hearing
On the Papers
File Numbers
2020/77341
Matched Strata Plans
SP16460
Parties
Owners Corporation v Third Party
Representation
Counsel: M J Dawson (Plaintiff) V Chan (Plaintiff) M T McCulloch SC (Defendant) S J Maybury SC (Defendant) Solicitors: Mills Oakley (Plaintiff) Makinson d'Apice Lawyers (Defendant)
Orders
1. Order 2 of the orders made on 10 September 2025 is varied so as to read: (a) Subject to sub paragraph (b), the defendant is to pay the plaintiffs’ costs of the proceedings. (b) The plaintiffs are to pay the defendant’s costs equivalent to one half of a hearing day. 2. The defendant is to pay interest pursuant to s 100 of the Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW) in the amount of $541,914.95. 3. The defendant is to pay interest on the plaintiff’s costs as assessed or agreed.
The owners corporation and lot owners sued Hunter Water Corporation after a water main burst and caused property damage. The tribunal found Hunter Water Corporation liable for nuisance, and ordered them to pay the agreed amount of physical property damage, but dismissed the claims for stigma and compensation under the Hunter Water Act. The defendant was also ordered to pay the plaintiff's costs.
TORTS — nuisance — private nuisance — plaintiffs’ properties flooded after water main owned and operated by Hunter Water Corporation burst — whether defendant’s interference with enjoyment of plaintiffs’ property was unreasonable — whether unreasonableness is an element of nuisance DAMAGES —...
Before
Elkaim AJ
Hearing
19 – 28 August 2025
File Numbers
2020/77341
Matched Strata Plans
SP16460
Parties
Owners Corporation v Government
Representation
Counsel: M J Dawson (Plaintiff) V Chan (Plaintiff) M T McCulloch SC (Defendant) S J Maybury (Defendant) Solicitors: Mills Oakley (Plaintiff) Makinson d'Apice Lawyers (Defendant)
Orders
1. Judgment for the plaintiffs in the sum of $1,161,841.92. 2. The defendant is to pay the plaintiffs’ costs of the proceedings. 3. I will hear the parties on interest or any alternative costs order. 4. If the matters in Order 3 above are to be agitated the parties are to inform my Associate within 7 days of this judgment. 5. The constituent parts of the judgment sum are noted and set out in the Schedule of Property Damage.
The applicant sought to amend their claim to include a request for compensation under the Hunter Water Act. The tribunal allowed the amendment to proceed, but ordered the applicant to pay the defendant's costs, as well as warned of potential issues in proving the applicant's case.
CIVIL PROCEDURE — Originating process — Amendment — Plaintiffs seek to add a new claim — Where application is late — Where claim may be untenable — Where claim would be heard on evidence already before the Court — Where there is no prejudice to the defendant
Before
Elkaim AJ
Hearing
20 August 2025
File Numbers
2020/77341
Matched Strata Plans
SP16460
Parties
Third Party v Government
Representation
Counsel: M J Dawson (Plaintiff) V Chan (Plaintiff) M T McCulloch SC (Defendant) S J Maybury (Defendant) Solicitors: Mills Oakley (Plaintiff) Makinson d'Apice Lawyers (Defendant)
Orders
1. The plaintiffs have leave to file, serve, and rely upon the amended statement of claim in the form annexed to the affidavit of Ms Lazarou dated 12 August 2025. 2. The plaintiffs are to pay any of the defendant’s costs occasioned by the amendment.
The Owners of Strata Plan 4033 sought an order requiring their neighbor to trim Oleander trees that were obstructing views. The tribunal found that the view obstruction was severe, and ordered the neighbor to prune the trees to a height of 2.8 meters.
TREES (DISPUTES BETWEEN NEIGHBOURS) – high hedges – view obstruction severity – balance between views and privacy
Before
Douglas AC
Hearing
25 October 2022
File Numbers
2022/190340
Matched Strata Plans
SP4033
Parties
Owners Corporation v Lot Owner
Representation
C James (Agent) (Applicant) Non-appearance (Respondent)
Orders
The Court orders are: (1) Within 60 days of the date of these orders, the respondent, at his expense, shall prune the initial fourteen metre section of the common boundary hedge, south of where it commences in the north-west corner of the respondent’s land. The hedge shall be pruned to a height not exceeding 2.8 metres above the respondent’s natural ground level. (2) During April of 2024, and during April of each subsequent year, the respondent, at his expense, shall prune the initial...
Google Reviews
28 Apr 2024
“I would like to thank my assessor Jacqui at the college for her continual support in helping me achieve my course qualification.”
14 Aug 2024
“Christine was amazing so helpful and caring very informative and great communications she got stuff sorted well done”
19 Nov 2023
“Help the community immensely”