JimmyT said:
FlatChatFan – I don't think BB is saying this member adjudicates on actions brought against him; just that the fact that he is a member of the CTTT means that he can't lose (BB will correct me if I'm wrong)…………….
We have to balance the right to a fair result with all strata owners' rights to choose how imperfect their world is …….
Jimmy is right, the member (M) in question does not sit on his own cases but it has been said that the member (M) talks to other members (including the member, or adjudicator, hearing the cases that the member (M) is respondent in). It is also said the member (M) has convinced other members there is no problem in “his” SP except a serial complainer but from what some of the residents say that is not the case.
I have a little trouble with the idea that the owners have a right to choose how imperfect their world is. It creates a great deal of diversity in how well Strata Plans (SPs) are run depending on how lay-back the “majority” allow it to be. It also makes it hard to know what someone is buying into.
I know a buyer can do strata searches and get pre-pruchase reports, and the like, but these enquiries do not always reveal the underlying culture in an SP.
I prefer the idea the Strata Act is applicable to every SP; i.e if the Act says something is required it should be the case that every SP that that rule is applicable to does follow the rule — and CTTT enforce the rule.
Giving SP's a choice of how imperfect they want to be is not what CTTT says in some cases;
“The legislation has always envisaged that generally, strata schemes would be managed by ordinary lot owners for their own benefit. Even with the involvement of professional strata managers, achieving managerial perfection is not easy. Mistakes are made. The important thing is that they are recognised and not repeated. “
J Bordon: Nulama Village P/L v Owners Strata Plan 61788 (Strata & Community Schemes) [2006] NSWCTTT 550 (25 September 2006)
To me the above says that the same rules apply to everyone and everyone should at least be trying to meet with them.
“More commonly than otherwise, members of Owners Corporations are laypeople. They, just as the very few who would be lawyers, must provide proper management of a strata scheme.”
G Durie; Senior Member CTTT. Bushby v Owners Corporation SP 64939 (Strata & Community Schemes) [2009] NSWCTTT 70 (25 February 2009)
Again it seems that the same “standard” is applicable to all SP's and it is not for SP's to choose how imperfect they want to be. I could cut and paste CTTT quotes all day. I could revisit 2005 when the legislation regarding sinking funds was changed primarily to stop SP's choosing not to plan for the future. Historically it can be seen that owners do not regularly make good choices for financial reasons, for friendship reasons, for power reasons …. and so on.
The idea of giving laypeople and the ignorant the option to choose their level of imperfection is not a good idea. If owners have the right to choose how imperfect their SP is then there is no real framework for the whole concept of strata; there are just a whole bunch of little kingdoms in which the subjects set their own level.
I think most SP give compliance to the Strata Act a good go and do a half decent job. An effort that keeps the owners out of potential trouble. I think if one looks at these SP's there is a genral pattern of doing the same thing; i.e. they are not all doing their own thing, not setting their own level, not choosing their own level of imperfection. They are all shooting for the same thing – responsible, compliant, managment.
There is the need for some autonomy in SP's but choosing how imperfect they want to be should not be within the power of SP's. I believe the power to make by-laws applicable to the particular type of SP is power enough for owners corporations.
Just how much an SP should be allowed to get away with is a very debatable subject.