Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Actually, I think it would be worth asking our sponsors Strata Answers to step in (for a fee) and explain the facts of life to the strata manager before we unleash the dogs of war.
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.
Write to them and tell them that you have had advice that you are legally entitled to all the contact details on the strata roll, including email addresses and other relevant records that they may have. There is no privacy issue here.
Becasue you have asked for and paid for them some time ago, failure to provide them again could lead to action at NCAT to have the strata manager and/or committee removed and replaced by a statutory manager under Section 237 of the Strata Schemes Management Act (2015).
Failure to provide the information immediately will also result in a complaint to Fair Trading about the strata manager, seeking disciplinary action under Section 191(c) of the Property and Stock Agents Act in that they have “in the course of carrying on business acted unlawfully, improperly, unfairly or incompetently.”
You can do this online using the Fair Trading online complaint form: https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/help-centre/online-tools/make-a-complaint.
Be polite but firm. Don’t engage in wild accusations or conspiracy theories. They have duties and responsibilites and they have simply failed to comply. The next move is up to them.
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.
There is zero logic for saying on the one hand that you can’t have meetings in person than on the other saying owners must travel to their office to get material that could just as easily be sent by email.
This is quite clearly a case of the strata manager trying to be obstructive.
You could threaten them with a complaint to fair trading or even an application to Fair Trading and NCAT to have them removed if they don’t stop wielding the covid threat as and when it suits them.
You bother should tell them to add the inspection fee ($31) to his levies and that will cover the cost of their tea-boy sending an email.
Your brother has a legal right to see the records, they have a legal obligation to keep their clients and employees safe. And that adds up to no in-person meeting, no inspection at their office.
And maybe he could suggest that they take a day off from being asses.
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.
Thanks a lot for all your comments! I want to ask another question RE the AGM itself. Usually it is conducted late in the year, but this year, under such circumstances (lockdown, etc), it was scheduled way ahead of time, in less than 10 days’ time.
AGMs can be conducted at any time provided there is one every financial year. I wouldn’t read too much into the timing.
Today the owners received an email from the strata manager asking us to update our contact details according to The Public Health (COVID-19 Self-Isolation) Order (No 3) 2021, commenced on 28/09:
https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/information/covid19-legislation/self-isolation
That order applies to strata schemes that have been identified as high risk or at risk from covid infection. Your strata manager was entitled to ask for contact details but under the Strata Act Section 178 – which applies at any time.
The confusion may arise from a letter sent out by Chief Medical Officer Kerry Chant a couple of weeks ago, telling strata managers to update their records and close down strata gyms. This was well-intentioned but a bit off the beam. The idea was so that the authorities would know who was in any building that had a covid break-out … but then didn’t really address the buildings that don’t have strata managers.
The simple fact is that you are supposed to keep your strata roll up to date anyway, and if asked to do so by the committee, the strata manager is entitled to ask for the details. There’s nothing sinister in any of this (apart from your strata manager citing an irrelevant Public Health Order instead of the strata Act).
Currently there are only 2 members in the committee. We are a small scheme, fewer than 15 owners. Most owners are investors and usually don’t attend AGM. So basically they decide everything. I tried to join the committee last year, but the committee and the strata manager used some excuse to exclude out of it, since I was new to the strata and strata rules. I want to talk to other owners, but it was nearly impossible to obtain other owners’ contact details.
You are entitled to see all documents held by the strata manager on behalf of the scheme, this includes the names, addresses and email addresses of the other owners. They will try to cite privacy which is utter BS. Privacy laws don’t apply to small strata schemes (even fairly big ones).
I would also be very interested in who nominated the incumbent members to the committee. If they are co-owners they can’t self-nominate.
According to the above Public Health (COVID-19 Self-Isolation) Order (No 3) 2021, it seems that every owner should have each other’s contact details during the pandemic. Am I right?
No. You’re wrong. This has nothing to do with that PHO. However owners have the right to ask for and receive each other’s contact details if they want them at nay time, covid or not.
But we haven’t been told to update contact details during the worst time of the pandemic. Now we were asked to do so, and in such a short notice to have our AGM.
I live by the maxim that you should never ascribe to malice anything that can just as easily be explained by incompetence.
The government has dragged its feet in dealing with strata as a special (and highly vulnerable) case. They are just playing catch-up. I would guess this may be no more than your strata manager trying to get the small schemes out of the way before the big ones start rolling in and everyone is able to attend them.
So now I want to request the AGM to be scheduled at a later date, since the notice is very short as I mentioned above. I want to ask how to deal with this urgent issue. I will email to request rescheduling, but my guess is they will ignore my request and just go ahead.
Ask for the AGM to be delayed until such times as owners can attend – which will be reasonably soon – or, failing that, repeat your request for the email addresses of the other owners as a matter of urgency. If they cite privacy, tell them this is nonsense. The Privacy Act doesn’t apply to corproations with a turnover of less the $3 million a year. You are entitles to the name, addresses and email addrss of anyone and everyone on the strata roll.
Since this is planned as a virtual AGM, there is no cost attached to postponing it as there is no requirement to hire a room.
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.
Say you pay $2,000 p.q. being $8,000 p.a. and you think, with evidence, that $1,500 p.q or $6,000 p.a. is reasonable given your reasons. As I don’t know your strata’s levy contributions in aggregate, taking your levy situation as my focus, rather than push for say your $2,000 p.q. be replaced with $1,500 p.q, you should, when communicating with the exec committee, agent and the rest of the owners
I have a major problem with the notion that you can arbitrarily cut a budget by 25 percent
We all have to accept that our buildings need a certain amount to run. If you want to cut the levies, you have to cut the spending. So where do you find the cuts?
You can’t cut spending without cutting services or spending less on the services you have (except in discretionary areas like sinking fund contributions – and that is poor short-term thinking).
To find out where you might cut spending, you have to know what is being spent. Then you have to decide whether you want to cut the services or find cheaper providers (good luck with that!)
I honestly think the best that fruitzebra can do is stand up at the AGM and ask if there are any areas where savings can be made and, if the notice of the meeting hasn’t been issued yet, propose that before next year the strata committee goes through every item of expenditure and finds potential savings for the future.
FYI, you can ask for an agenda item to that effect to be included up until the official notice of the meeting is issued. That’s the law. Get an agenda item in now and ask for it to be included.
You probably won’t be able to effect change this year unless there are significant areas of optional expenditure that are easily identifiable and which could be removed without harming the building or its residents.
If you spot them and bring them to the other owners’ attention then you have a chance of having them knocked off the budget.
But at this stage the strata manager is likely to resist any changes as they will then have to go away and recalculate everyone’s levies.
One other thing, the coronavirus has had an effect on strata levies. Increasing numbers of owners – especially investors – have been having trouble paying them.
But the strata scheme’s bills still need to be paid so this is probably the worst possible time to be asking for a levies reduction as your scheme may have lost the financial buffer it needs to ensure it can keep paying its bills at a time when its income has been reduced.
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.
in my experience, owners who may agree with the fundamental point of a lower levy that fruitzebra makes, are unlikely to support it at an AGM without having enough time to consider it before the AGM.
But they may never have time to consider it before an AGM if that’s when the budget is first sighted. So what do you do? Joint the committee, would be an answer – good luck with that.
And as for “they could scare owners into falsely concluding that future capital works will be in jeopardy if the funds are not in the kitty, even if they will not be used for a while,” that’s a bit fanciful.
Speak up at the AGM, fruitzebra, and don’t be put off by all this stuff about what people might think, what they might be scared of and how they might react.
You are entitled to ask questions and expect answers – that’s what AGMs are for. You might not win the argument but at least you and your neighbours will be better informed.
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.
I wasn’t aware of that. In which case, the OP should look at last year’s financial figures and see what discrepancies they can find there. Otherwise, be prepared for a quick read of the finances on the night.
Either way, it doesn’t exactly help in the good financial management and transparency of strata schemes, does it?
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.
As to raising the matter before the AGM in a timely manner, the horse has well and truly bolted. Certainly in the case of large stratas.
Fruitzebra doesn’t need to raise an item on the agenda – it’s already there, in the discussion about and approval (or otherwise) of the budget.
What they really need to do is examine the budget in detail before the meeting and then propose amendments at the meeting, as they are perfectly entitled to do.
If they feel too much is being spent on one service or item, or even that too much is going into the sinking fund, for instance, they can raise it at the meeting. If they require details about individual items of expenditure they can ask questions at the meeting.
If their challenge to the budget is well-founded, they won’t lack support from other owners who will be just as keen to pay less in levies. But it has to be a detailed argument – not just saying that they feel they should be paying less then trying to back the budget into that.
If there is one major item that they feel is costing too much or is unnecessary, then they may be able to slip that on to the agenda before it is issued. But until they have seen the budget (which should be issued with the agenda) they won’t have much to go on.
Writing to the committee to ask them to adjust the budget less than 10 days out from the AGM may have little or no effect apart from alerting them to the fact that a challenge is coming. My experience of committees is that they are more likely to batten down the hatches and justify their desisions than undertake a review of their plans at this late stage.
Arguing the point at the AGM isn’t ideal, but in this time frame it may be the best way – provided you have done your homework on the budget.
And one final point – strata budgets are based on a combination of what the owners’ corporation need to spend on services and maintenance, and what they want to spend (on improvements etc). They are rarely if ever based on what owners can afford or want to pay.
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.
Although I can’t find this spelled out anywhere, it’s pretty clear that poll voting is not permitted at executive committee meetings in the ACT (or anywhere else for that matter).
This is what Schedule 2 of the Unit Titles legislation says:
2.10 Voting of executive committee
(1) At meetings of an executive committee, all matters must be decided by a majority of the votes of the executive members present and voting.
(2) If an executive committee has only 2 members, all matters must be decided by unanimous vote.The clue is in the second section. If poll votes were allowed, then they would be the deciding factor in committees with only two members
Also, further on, Schedule 2 refers to the chair having the deciding vote in cases when there is a tied vote. Again, there is no mention of poll voting.
It’s one committee member, one vote – as it should be and is everywhere else in Australia.
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.
I agree with Kaindub. In Queensland, adverse possession can only be claimed after 12 years of continuous unchallenged use of a property but it can’t be claimed for only part of a lot.
It would be worth reading the section on Queensland on pages 4 and 5 of this document
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.
Given the long-term impact of this on your amenity, not to mention the value of your property, I think this may be worth taking to CAV with a view to escalating it to a claim at VCAT.
And while the council may say that S173 doesn’t apply to common property, it would be a valuable standard to use in an argument against the common property being hived off in this way.
Also, your scheme would have been given planning permission based on a certain number of parking spaces. This is a change of use (I think) which may well need planning approval which it might not get. Another call to your council may be in order.
Someone may have a better idea but in your shoes I would immediately send an application to your OC asking that the space immediately be deemed a permanent no-parking area, based on the need for a safe turning area and your loss of amenity due to rogue and random parking.
When they refuse (and they will) you can then take it to CAV and VCAT where, one would hope, common sense, fairness and logic will prevail and orders can be issued to that effect.
Just keep to the forefront of your thoughts that this is a lazy land-grab which benefits one owner and negatively affects only you which is why your neighbours won’t care. And again, don’t hesitate to tell them that all the talk of visitor parking is nonsense – it’s about giving free parking in a turning area to one owner.
Here are the links to CAV and VCAT.
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.
There’s one other (faint) possibility. If you happened to have more than 25 percent of the lot entitlements, you could block the special resolution anyway.
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.
1. There is an Australian Standard, AS 2890.1-2004 Parking Facilities Off-Street Car Parking, that … includes required maneuvering areas. It’s unlikely an OC would be able to propose any changes unless that standard is maintained.
Sounds like a compelling argument for asking the OC to mark the area as “no parking” rather than handing it to your neighbour as a freebie (because that’s what all the BS about visitor and extra resident parking probably really means).
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.
I would think this would require a change of use permit from your local council. And, apart from anything else, it pretty much guarantees a permanent free parking spot for your neighbour who already parks there.
I think your owners corporation is being deceitful here, at your cost. I would put up a counter proposal that the area be clearly marked “no parking” as it may well be that it was intended to be a turning area in the first place.
And I would make it clear that you believe that effectively giving a free additional parking area to one resident – which is what this would do – is an illegal misuse of common property.
I would bet that owners has persuaded the other owners to back them becasue it doesn’t make any difference to them.
But the first thing to do is to call your local council’s planning department.
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.
There is a very interesting principle embedded in Quirky’s post – the power of doing nothing.
If you honestly believe your building’s by-laws are invalid – and perhaps have taken legal advice to confirm that – then it might be worth the risk of maybe having to remove your pet at a later date.
As for costs, the NSW Tribunal has a very narrow range of circumstances under which they will award them, one of them being that the other side knew or should have know that the case had no merit.
But, as Quirky says, it’s not up to you to challenge the invalid laws, it’s up to the committee to prove that they are, in fact, valid when all the evidence is there to suggest otherwise.
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.