Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorReplies
-
@SAM said:
Are there any circumstances when permission can be given by Executive Committees or Strata Managers for any part of Common Property to be used exclusively by an Owner or Occupier? Eg sections of Garden or Visitors’ car space.Basically, yes. You need a by-law (which has to be approved by 75 percent of those voting at a General Meeting) and the by-law has to state who has ongoing responsibility for the care of the common property. There should also be a consideration for payment of compensation to the owners corp on the basis of how much this adds to the value of the property minus the cost of creating the new garden or, in the case of a parking space, the legal fees. The cost of writing the by-law should be borne by the person who is benefitting from the exclusive use, although they can subtract that from the compensation they are paying the owners corp.
If the person benefitting from the exclusive use declines any of these elements: the by-law, the ongoing responsibility, the legal costs or the compensation, they should be told to take a hike. This should happen at zero cost to the owners corp with some compensation for the effective loss of common property, regardless of whether or not they use it in its present state.
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.
@Welly said:
Thanks. Could you please advise if matter can be raise in General Business or wether it needs to be on this notice of motion on the AGM.There is no such thing as “general business” at a General Meeting – you can only vote on things that are on the agenda and each agenda item has to be specified in a motion. So your Strata Manager is absolutely right.
However, this is something that could be handled in an EC meeting and doesn’t really require a general meeting to make a decision. If the EC is acting against the wishes of the majority of owners, an Extraordinary General Meeting can be called to instruct the strata manager to undertake the required action.
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.
If their vote had changed the outcome of the vote in any way, you would challenge it either at a reconvened General meeting or via the CTTT. You would also seriously look at the roles of your office-bearers and/or strata managers for allowing this to happen.
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.
@bette said:
If a financial owner gives their proxy vote to a non-financial owner, will that proxy vote count at the AGM? this is in NSW.I believe the critical factor in this is whether or not any proxy holder needs to be a permitted voter. In the case of proxy holders this is clearly not the case as non-owners are allowed to vote as proxies on behalf of owners. So yes, the non-financial owner can vote with the financial owner’s proxy.
In fact, I’ve heard it mooted that a non-financial owner’s vote can be counted if it is delivered by someone else as a proxy rather than a direct vote. Haven’t heard of any instances of that, though.
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.
@bette said:
If someone pays all their unpaid levies on the day of the AGM, can they cast a vote at the AGM? If they pay by bank transfer on the day, does the money have to be in the strata’s account before the meeting starts? This is in NSW. thanksI believe the current ruling is that the money isn’t paid until it’s in the bank so people paying cash or by cheque just before the meeting are too late. Technically they have to pay at least the day before.
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.
@SMO said:
I do not like that the moderator purports something as fact when there are some very good experts who are happy to say it is not fact.
I have been writing about strata for about 10 years now and from Day One I made it my mission to cut through the claptrap of legalese and find a way through the minefield of misinformation and misconceptions so that the majority of readers could properly understand most of what is going on.
This has involved a certain amount of fudging and paraphrasing but I can tell you that a hell of a lot more people have a better idea of how strata works that they did a decade ago, and my weekly Flat Chat column in the Sydney Morning Herald has had a small part to play in that.
In the course of this “journey” I have witnessed far too many discussions on what is right and what is wrong in strata get bogged down in the balderdash of semantics and specifics.
I have many lawyer friends who frequently tell me that on this issue I should not be saying at least 75 percent in favour but instead “no more than 25 percent against”.
However, as long as more people understand the difficulties of passing by-laws, I don’t care if the wording isn’t exactly right.
As for this particular argument, here’s the definition of a Special Resolution in the current Act:
special resolution means a resolution which is passed at a duly convened general meeting of an owners corporation and against which not more than one-quarter in value, ascertained in accordance with clause 18 (2) and (3) of Part 2 of Schedule 2, of votes is cast.
So let’s look at clause 18 (2) [part 3 is irrelevant to this discussion]:
18 Counting of votes on motions
(2) If a poll is demanded by a person present and entitled to vote at the meeting or the motion is for a resolution that, to be effective, must be a special resolution:
(a) the motion is to be decided according to the value of the votes cast for and against the motion, and
(b) the value of a vote cast by a person entitled to vote in respect of a lot is equal to the unit entitlement of that lot.
Note that phrase: “the motion is to be decided according to the value of the votes cast for and against the motion”
It could not be any clearer – only the votes being cast count.
To be honest, I don’t care how many of our “learned friends” think this is suitable topic for debate. Lawyers rarely present facts – only opinions – and if all lawyers agreed on everything then we wouldn’t need judges.
But I challenge anyone to come up with a single instance where the interpretation of these clauses has changed the outcome of a vote.
Otherwise the question of whether the party of the first party went to the second party, and the henceforths and hitherto of legal debate do not belong on this website.
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.
Just to reiterate and clarify, an audit is not required by schemes of under 100 lots but it can be agreed to commission one.
If an audit is commissioned, it has to be conducted by a certified auditor.
A small scheme like yours would only employ an auditor if there was some concern about financial mismanagement.
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’m working on a design for smoking helmet. It’s all enclosed with bluetooth and wifi, head-up computer display on the visor, an alcohol tank with tube and a slot for potato chips and nuts (for those who like to Eat AND smoke).
It will be a bit expensive but it will soon pay for itself because no one gets your passive smoke – more nicotine and carcinogens for you, baby! I mean, have you seen the cost of cigarettes? Why would you let all those second-hand fumes go to someone else?
Maybe I could crowd-source the funding? Time for a smoko!
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.
@SMO said:
It is a general misconception that you require 75% of all voters present (either personally or by proxy) to vote in favour of a proposed motion. In fact a special resolution is passed only after a poll is taken at the meeting and not more than 25% in value of the votes, by persons present (either personally or by proxy) and entitled to vote, are against the motion.The problem is that we tend to conflate two issues – the double negative and the fact that it’s the percentage of actual votes cast that count (rather than voters present).
So here it is in a nutshell.
- Special resolutions require a poll vote based on the value of unit entitlements.
- If more than 25 percent of the value of the votes cast is against the motion it falls.
- If 75 percent or more of the value of the votes cast are in favour, it passes.
The arguments over the correct terminology are so eye-glazingly boring and of so little actual significance (as in, make a difference in the real world) that I will continue to say “75 percent of votes in favour” because that gives people a sense of the size of the task. They can work out the nitty gritty when they sit down to see if they have the numbers.
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.
scotlandx said
A non-financial owner can’t nominate themselves or anyone else to the EC. Making a nomination and being on the EC are two different things. Nomination is like voting, you have to be financial to do it.
Martyn said
Thank you. Can you point out where this is legislated or proscribed? I am happy with the answer if I can be pointed to such.
Here it is, hot from the Act – it doesn’t mention being financial but you can’t vote if you aren’t financial and it says the ability to nominate is restricted to those who can vote.
9 Restriction on moving motion or nominating candidate
(1) A person is not entitled to move a motion at a meeting or to nominate a candidate for election as a member of the executive committee unless the person is entitled to vote on the motion or at the election.
The issue of whether or not you are ‘financial’ is deal with here:
Persons entitled to vote at general meeting
(8) Voting rights may not be exercised if contributions not paid
A vote at a general meeting (other than a vote on a motion requiring a unanimous resolution) by an owner of a lot or a person with a priority vote in respect of the lot does not count unless payment has been made before the meeting of all contributions levied on the owner, and any other amounts recoverable from the owner, in relation to the lot that are owing at the date of the notice for the meeting.
And finally, since the Strata Act finds it easier to say what CAN’T be done, here is the section that effectively allows people who are NOT financial to be nominated by those who are.
Constitution of executive committees for strata schemes with more than 2 lots.
(4) A person is not eligible for election as a member of an executive committee unless the person is:
(a) an individual who is an owner,
(b) a company nominee of a corporation that is an owner, or
(c) an individual who is not an owner but who is nominated for election by an owner who is not a candidate for election.
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 a re a lot of different issues here but they all seem to come back to an autocratic chairman and a compliant strata manager working in cahoots.
What you can do is either organise a coup at a general meeting – get the chairman voted off the EC, or you can persuade the EC to vote him off or, if he is holding a clutch of proxy votes that would make normal democratic procedures redundant, apply to the CTTT for the statutory appointment of a strata manager to take over the running of the building becasue it isn’t being run democratically or in the best interests of the majority of owners..
Assuming the latter option, I would first tell the members of your EC that if they don’t pull the chairman into line, you will apply to the CTTT for a statutory appointment.
But first we need to know if he holds power by virtue of a stack of proxies because that will make a big difference.
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.
@kiwipaul said:
Your starting point has to be the CTTT web site in NSW.Another useful source is Strata living document produced by NSW gov and their is a link to download it at the bottom of the CTTT web site.
How about the laboriously compiled document that tells readers of this website how to do it and provides links to all the forms they will need. You’ll find it HERE.
Where’s the love, fellas?
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.
Victorian government set to ban short term lets in Docklands residential buildings. Our good friend Tom Bacon of Strata Title Lawyers sent links to this TV report and this report
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.
They have compulsory voting in local elections (except in WA, SA and Tasmania) – why not in strata? It’s not like we are some big club with our own constitutions – strata voting is circumscribed by all sorts of regulations so why not include compulsory voting?
Or how about if you don’t turn up at an AGM you don’t get to make a complaint or raise an issue with the EC for the next year? Hmmm. I guess that would encourage even further disengagement.
So, embracing that idea, how about if you don’t turn up for two AGMs in a row, you are registered as non-involved so your vote isn’t counted in quorums or for special resolutions for the next year?
Nah! That wouldn’t work.
The problem is that there is no clear advantage in getting involved – just lots of disadvantages.
The more I think about it, the better I reckon the “let’s paint the building in rainbow colours” is the way to get those who give a teeny-weeny damn to be more involved.
Just don’t blame me if it passes.
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.
21/07/2013 at 10:34 am in reply to: Would owners support an on line electronic voting system ? #19040Hey, Roo, is that ‘own goals’ or own-goals?
Obviously the electronic voting thing would require a change in legislation and, bear in mind that the section of Queensland strata law relating to secret ballots is bigger than the whole of Victoria’s strata law, that could be a whole other long, drawn-out issue.
I live in a building which has a website; typically hard-to-read – style over substance – and boring as bat shit. Recently EC members’ email addresses have been removed but due to the prevailing view that other people’s ideas are dissent and good ideas are treason, the battle over the tiles on my balcony are there to be read by the world and his blogger.
Now I can’t find the email addresses of the new people on the committee – candidates’ identities are also kept secret “to save the embarrassment of those who fail” – to pass on the facts of the situation rather than the EC’s resident bush lawyer’s opinions.
I suggested at the last AGM that the minutes on the website should be locked by a password but the EC members, building managers and strata manager’s email addresses should be accessible to owners. Now the EC and AGM minutes are available to all and sundry but the EC email addresses are secret.
Seriously, though, I can understand why EC members wouldn’t want their personal addresses to be on the web to be trawled by spammers, but it would take about five minutes to set up generic email addresses like jeff@the stratawebsite.com which could then forward filtered mail to their own addresses.
This is what passes for communication in an autocratic system.
For all its faults, this website would be a great place for little polls to be run – like, what should we do first, buy new gym equipment or paint the lift lobbies (again)? But, like so many buildings in this state, we don’t need people to express their opinions because father knows best.
As was said by a prominent member of our EC only recently, “there is such a thing as too much democracy …”
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.
-
AuthorReplies


