EDITOR’S NOTE: I was so confused by the punctuation in the original of this posting that I stopped reading it. Then it occurred to me that others might have done the same – hence the lack of any replies – so I have gone back in and edited it. The problem, if you are interested was cause by putting a full stop after numbers, meaning the software started another sentence. Here is how I think the posting was intended to read.
@OverIt said:
So now you are all aware I am having some building maintenance issue with let’s say invest 1.
Invest 1 & invest 2 were under the same SM lets say SM 1. Invest 2 is now under SM 2 and what a excellent SM. never seen a SM work this way before, no nonsense and for the first time in over several years invest 2 owners are working together and getting on.
Invest 2 when managed by SM 1 was under compulsory strata management, whilst under compulsory strata management SM 1 undertook illegal building works and the property ended up subjected to council orders and fines.SM 1 did not take any liability and the Owners ended up resolving the issue, paying the fine and negotiating with the council. We would have liked to claim back from SM 1, however no Strata Lawyer would represent us at the time. Common comment from lawyers was “will not seek indemnity from a strata management company as we have a reputation to up hold”.Now SM 1 is employed by the same strata manager person as invest 1. Isn’t this a conflict of interest? Any suggestions on what I should be doing?This situation has no concern to the EC under invest 1, it’s a personal issue so I have not raised it with them but should I?