It's a picnic bench, what's the worst that can happen?
Presently, probably nothing.
However, if the structure becomes defective - for whatever reason - and someone is injured there is going to be a problem arising from failure to maintain and or repair. Fault would have to be proven on the particular facts.
On first principles, how would a judge look at a case arising from the above scenario ?
There are 4 basic tests ;
Q1. Is there a duty of care owed to users of the [now] defective bench ?
This is a question of law decided by reference to the evidence.
Following the "neighbour" principle set out in Donoghue -v- Stevenson (1932) I would answer that in the affirmative. i.e. is the injured party someone whom you ought reasonably to have in contemplation as being so affected when you are directing your mind to the acts or omissions now being called in to question.
BTW if a judge decided that no duty of care was owed the case dies at that point.
Q2. Has there been a breach of that duty of care on the facts ?.
Q3. Has the plaintiff suffered loss and damage ?
Q4. Is the defendant's negligence the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injuries ?
Qs 2,3 and 4 are issues of fact answered on the basis of the specific evidence in the case.
Sorry if this sounds like a simple short story converted to "War and Peace" ! However, I hope that you might see how convoluted things can become if there is an accident and why people run for legal cover these days even before there is an accident i.e. hyper-neurotic risk averseness !
BTW, if the ownership of the bench was assigned to the residents' association that might help but could actually create other potential problems that we need not bother about today !!!