Current Page

[Jimmy-T]

This week a user asked me to take down his post about his strata manager issuing a notice that all emails to the committee should now go to them, the SMs, and asked if this was legal.

I removed the original post but unfortunately that also meant I killed all the responses from other users (won’t be doing that again!). This is an important issue for strata schemes as sometimes committees may want to isolate themselves from direct communication with individal owners, for reasons ranging from personal abuse to not having the time or desire to communicate adequately.

Having failed to recover them by any other means, I have delved into my emails and found the original responses and I’m reconstructing the key elements of the discussion below by repeating some of the points made to the original post without using the original post word for word,  so that the responses make sense without revealing the details of the dispute.

The OP claimed the committee had made his emails addresses available to all committee members which he felt was a breach if privacy:

My Response:

How is that a breach of privacy?  Any owner is entitled to see any corresponce sent to or from the owners corporation or strata committee except where it is subject to legal privilege (e.g. they are communicating with their lawyers about you). There is almost no legally protected privacy in strata.
I would say at a guess that the committee is protecting itself against any potential legal claims by you for what you call breach of privacy.  Or maybe they are just sticking their fingers up at you to say, “hey, if that’s how you want to play it … we won’t even read your emails.”

He then asked what is options were to overturn this decision, such as using the New South Wales Fair Trading Mediation mechanism to request the decision be overturned.

Fair Trading can only mediate an attempt at a resolution.  You would have to find a by-law or strata law that has been breached and then take it all the way to NCAT to force their hand.

How about seeking legal intervention based upon a breaking of some legislative control contained with various legislation?

On what grounds.  No law has been broken, especially since the strata manager can be delegated to act as, and on behalf of the strata committee. Accept the decision and communicate through the Strata Manager, would be my call.  Back off, let things cool down and then try again to communicate in a less aggressive fashion.

If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.

Topic

[The Hood]

I love these people who call breach of privacy.
There is no common law right to privacy so if you are going to call breach of privacy then rather than possibly looking like the fool at least cite the section of legislation that you allege gives you some right and explain how you believe the events have breached that right.

Use FT mediation to seek to have the decision overturned.
That is either poorly worded or shows a poor understanding of what FT do.

A point JT overlooks is the agent would be the delegate secretary and so your situation seems to be you are now writing to the delegate and not the elected secretary.

You could ask the delegate secretary why you are now getting “special treatment” if other owners can write to the elected secretary and you can’t.

If it was a SC decision then there should be something on an agenda and something in minutes somewhere.

Just on responding to correspondence:
The Act says in s 43 it is a function of the secretary to
(e) to answer communications addressed to the owners corporation,

There is case law that says the functions of the office bearers are taken to be the functions of the OC (2EBR) so it is a function of the OC to answer correspondence. Whether this is the elected or delegated secretary doesn’t really matter as there is case law that implies the delegated secretary is taken to be the secretary (Tilburn).

Let it go through the agent, who cares who answers as long as you get an answer.
A lot of owners never get an answer.
Welcome to strata.

Quote

[Jimmy-T]

The Hood Wrote:

A point JT overlooks is the agent would be the delegate secretary and so your situation seems to be you are now writing to the delegate and not the elected secretary.

Didn’t overlook it , I just didn’t think it was hugely relevant.  Having had to deal with Netstrata managers who assumed all the functions of the strata committee, to the point where they wouldn’t even give the elected secretary the strata roll on the grounds that the delegated secretary (i.e. them) already had it, I can see how a strata manager would feel the law was being observed if they dealt with the correspondence, as per Section 43.  BTW, they cited BS privacy claims too – but that was before the Four Corners sky fell in on them.

But it is a point worth considering. The delegated roles of a strata manager purportedly exist to fulfil the functions of a strata committee or OC that they are not fulfilling themselves. An actionable problem would arise if the secretary refused to read or respond to communications and the committee instructed the strata manager to do likewise.

If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.

Quote

[Author]

Replies