- This topic has 1 reply, 2 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Jimmy-T, I read an excellent article by you in the Fin Review about the Opal catastrophe and in it, I believe you took a sideswipe at ‘self-certification’, if I understand properly.
We have an issue in our 60s Sydney block of 40 home units where an owner is planning to change the configuration of a three bedroom unit, turning it into a four bedroom unit and adding a tiny ensuite. They have already tried unsuccessfully to have an ‘electronic’ General Meeting vote on this where the plans and information were completely inadequate.
Now, they’re trying to have another General Meeting held even though the AGM is only bout 12 weeks away. A cynic might suggest this is to avoid having the full light of transparency shone on it at the AGM, whereas they might get lucky at another electronic EGM if they play their cards right.
Other trickiness includes, under the heading of ‘self-certification’, the owner says they either work or have worked (not clear) in town planing at the local council; the architect and engineer’s credentials are scant with just mobile numbers and post office box numbers, not even ABNs; the plans did not include anything about drainage or plumbing or incursions into common property walls. With respect to plumbing / drainage, the owner has been quoted as saying “Oh we’ll probably just run pipes round the edges or something” – unbelievable!
The Strata Manager, to whom all authority has been given by the Committee, simply says only ‘self-certification’ is required these days. A small band of concerned owners and residents are planing to insist on proper checking by an arm’s length, independent entity upfront, rather than wait to see what goes wrong, down the line.
We’re surely right, aren’t we? Any Flat Chatter suggestions, please, on how this could be handled?