Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
I was going to suggest looking at reviews but one prominent and notorious strata manager has been soliciting reviews from their happy customers, asking unhappy customers to take their reviews down, threatening the owners behind negative reviews with defamation action (not possible) and flooding the review pages with remarkably similar five-star reviews. It’s easy to spot the fakes because they almost always reflect whatever the company’s main selling points are in their advertising. E.g. if the company promises “prompt and personal service” and that phrase turns up in a review, you can lay odds that the review was generated by an office junior on their tea break or AI.
On the other hand, people are more likely to post reviews when they are annoyed or disappointed, which tilts the balance to the negative side. If an indication of a strata manager’s success is that their clients are happy and contented, then they are less likely to get any reviews.
In your situation, I would call the companies you’re looking at, ask them if they manage many or any properties like yours and then ask if they can put you in touch with an existing client for a reference.
One other consideration is that the strata management company is only as good as the strata manager that they appoint to your property. You can have good manager working for bad companies and vice versa. What you need to be wary of are companies with a permanently toxic culture or who will offer you bargain basement rates that they will then more than compensate for with inflated Schedule B charges.
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.
You could use section 18 of the standard by-laws as leverage, at least.18 Appearance of lot(1) The owner or occupier of a lot must not, without the prior written approval of the owners corporation, maintain within the lot anything visible from outside the lot that, viewed from outside the lot, is not in keeping with the rest of the building.
Than you can offer to organise someone to do the work at the owner’s expense and, if they refuse, have a look at Section 120 (2) and (3) of the Act.
120 Owners corporation may carry out work required to be carried out by others(2) Work required to be carried out under term or condition of by-law
If a person who is the owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession, tenant or occupier of a lot in the strata scheme fails to carry out work that is required to be carried out by the person under a term or condition of a by-law of the scheme, the owners corporation may carry out the work and recover the cost of carrying out the work from that person, the owner of the lot (if the person is not the owner) or any person who, after the work is carried out, becomes the owner of that lot.
(3) Work that is duty of owner or occupier to carry out
If a person who is the owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession, tenant or occupier of a lot in the strata scheme fails to carry out work in order to remedy a breach of a duty imposed by Part 8, the owners corporation may carry out the work and recover the cost of the work from that person.
Part 8 of the Act includes this:
153 Owners, occupiers and other persons not to create nuisance(1) An owner, mortgagee or covenant chargee in possession, tenant or occupier of a lot in a strata scheme must not—
(a) use or enjoy the lot, or permit the lot to be used or enjoyed, in a manner or for a purpose that causes a nuisance or hazard to the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not), or
(b) use or enjoy the common property in a manner or for a purpose that interferes unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of the common property by the occupier of any other lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the common property, or
(c) use or enjoy the common property in a manner or for a purpose that interferes unreasonably with the use or enjoyment of any other lot by the occupier of the lot (whether that person is an owner or not) or by any other person entitled to the use and enjoyment of the lot.
If you can’t reach an amicable agreement with the owner, then talk to a strata lawyer about the potential for invoking the above sections of the Act.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 feel your pain. What I have learned over the years is that trying to fix everything that may be wrong with a strata committee, all at once, is too big an ask. If you approach the issues one at a time your chances of success are greatly improved. You can start with the biggest issue, or the easiest to resolve. Either way, you will be taken more seriously than someone who may well have legitimate concerns but comes across as an owner who is never happy with anything. Not saying that was an issue for you – just a general observation.
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.
Blueman wrote:
Is the actual email message (including headers, body, and attachments) typically retained as the record of correspondence? Or is it more common for strata managers to retain only a PDF copy of the notice/agenda?
This will depend greatly on how well the committee is organised and run and how professional the strata management operation is.
Bearing in mind that there are no Stratakops patrolling our schemes to make sure that we are doing the right thing, and we have yet to hear of any strata managers or committee members being punished for not keeping accurate records, then this question is verging on the hypothetical, although perfectly valid.
As for the provenance of emails – who sent them and who received them – those details are usually included in the messages and any efforts to remove them would rightly be viewed with great suspicion and potentially lead to penalties.
Here, according to our sponsors Bannerman Lawyers, are the key requirements for keeping records:
Strata Roll: A list of all owners in the scheme, including their details and unit entitlements. It must be kept for the entire life of the scheme.
Financial Records: This includes receipts, invoices, bank statements, and annual financial statements. These records must be kept for seven years.
Meeting Minutes: These should be kept for five years but are often kept indefinitely for historical reference.
Correspondence: All communication sent and received by the owners corporation and strata committee must be kept for seven years.
Signed Contracts: Contracts with strata agents and building managers must be kept for seven years.
These records are essential for transparency, accountability, and effective management of the strata scheme. Failure to maintain these records can lead to penalties and internal disputes. They can also lead to a lack of confidence among potential purchasers who would reasonably be concerned by the absence of any paper trails.
You’ll find a detailed summary of the legal requirements for retaining records HERE
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 user thanked author for this post.
Gloucester 19: I have sent you a direct message (possibly – i may have sent it to myself unwittingly
For anyone else’s info, you can communicate directly with other Flatchatters provided you are logged in. Then just click on their name at the top left of their post and scroll down to “send message”. Probably a good idea to post something (with their name on it) in the forum to let them know to expect a message.
It should go without saying but I’m going to say it anyway, while we understand that people might want to contact each other directly without postimg their personal email addresses for everyone to see, we’d rather you held discussions on the Forum for everyone’s benefit.
Also, anyone using the direct message system to abuse or troll other users will be bumped off this website faster than a Washinton computer can redact Donald Trump’s name from the Epstein files.
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 user thanked author for this post.
Rachael Dexter has published a number of articles on the Victorian strata sector in The Age.
I stand corrected. Good to see someone is paying attention. Getting things right is a long slow process as evinced by strata managers complaining that they have been “dumped on” but not mentioning that the expert panel found only 11 per cent of strata resident in Victoria thought they could be trusted. By the way, “dumped on” means having to be licensed and maybe, but only maybe, being scrutinised over things like commissions and other kickbacks.
It’s a simple fact of political life – when there is any course correction, those furthest from the right track will feel it most.
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 user thanked author for this post.
Congratulations! That’s a big step forward. Interested and logged-in Taswegians should probably use the “send a message” facility which you’ll find by clicking on the username (in this case, Lovetheview) in the top left corner of the post. That way you’re not advertising your email address to the world.
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.
Questions. Is there anything in the Act or Regulations that permit levies to be issued other than Sections 79, 81-83? If not, are our levy notices legal?
The sections to which you refer establish the principle that levies estimates and the contributions required should be agreed upon at an annual general meeting and can only be altered at another general meeting. There would be a concern if your new strata manager had said, “Okay, inflation is running at X per cent so we are bumping the levies up by that amount until the next AGM.”
Your AGM is only one month later than it would have been if it was held on the same date every year. Currently the legislation only requires AGMs to be held in each financial year, so your AGM could have been legally delayed until June next year.
Slippage of one month is neither here not there, and you are probably paying a little less in your latest levies than you will almost certainly have to do in the next tranche.
This would only be an issue if your scheme was running out of money and services were in danger of being cut off, in which case you could petition for an EGM to correct the financial situation.
Section 81 (4): If the owners corporation is subsequently faced with other expenses it cannot at once meet from either fund, it must levy on each owner of a lot in the strata scheme a contribution to the administrative fund or capital works fund, determined at a general meeting of the owners corporation, in order to meet the expenses.
There’s nothing in the legislation that says that levies authorisation expires on the anniversary of the AGM that set them. In other words, if there’s no problem, then it’s not a problem.
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.
Strictly speaking, my guess is that the tenant is responsible as their actions caused the damage. If they fail to pay, then it’s down to you as the landlord, since you are responsible for their actions. Assuming you don’t have landlord insurance, strata insurance might pay if you refuse and the tenant can’t or won’t pay.
As for the increased cost, it may be due to the fact that this is a one-off, or because the company replacing the door thinks it will be an insurance job and therefore bump up the price. It’s certainly worth questioning.
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.
Any rule changes would have to have been made by a special resolution, requiring a super-majority at an AGM.
At the moment, an alternative rule made by the owners corporation under section 108 only takes effect on registration under the Land Titles (Unit Titles) Act 1970, section 27 or section 27A; or from any later date stated in the special resolution making the rule. Maybe you can search Land Titles records.
If the alternative rule was not lodged within 3 months after the day it was passed, the resolution is taken to have never been made.
In NSW, changing the external appearance of a unit requires the approval of a general meeting. The only reference I can find in ACT strata law is that a ‘rule’ can be made covering the external appearance.
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.
And yet, when I tell Victorians that their strata system is stuffed, they get very uptight and parochial, pointing out that there are a lot fewer disputes in Vic. But maybe that’s because the odds are stacked against anyone who raises one.
The media in Victoria has long put strata issues in the too-hard basket, which is the main reason your state is about 10 years behind NSW and even Queensland in protecting strata owners and residents. Your politicians don’t care because nobody makes them care.
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 user thanked author for this post.
Having recently sold out of a unit block in NSW (at a considerable loss) where the chair and secretary refused to accept that the three representatives of the developers on the strata committee had a conflict of interest when it came to discussions about defects, I can safely say there are no StrataKops even in NSW,
I have also just learned that the committee has quietly withdrawn a defects claim without even telling owners it was doing so.
What it will take – and ALL it would take – is one owner to go to Fair Trading and NCAT and ask for a motion to be overturned or even for the committee to be replaced by a compulsorily appointed strata manager for clear breaches of the Act.
In this case, if anyone feels strongly enough, they should run a test case at ACAT where a decision has been potentially influenced by perceived conflict of interest – i.e. the conflicted members’ votes were the deciding factor – and see what the Tribunal members say.
It doesn’t have to be done in a combative way – just seeking a clarification through the only valid means available.
Meanwhile, I have turned again to AI (with all its flaws) to dig a little deeper and it came up with this:
There is at least one significant ACAT case directly on point, and it’s become something of a landmark for ACT strata governance.
Gracie v The Owners – Units Plan No 3411 & Ors [2016] ACAT 3
The catchwords for this case explicitly identify “conflict of interest” as a central issue, alongside annual general meeting procedure, merits review, and whether an administrator should be appointed. Casenote
The owners corporation involved two stages developed by Statehay Pty Ltd. Stage 1 (Lakeside) had 112 units completed around 2009, while Stage 2 (Central Park) had 128 units completed in April 2014 — all of which remained owned by Statehay, giving the developer a majority of votes at OC meetings. At the 2015 AGM, Statehay used that majority to block motions supported by the Stage 1 owners, and to pass motions the Stage 1 owners opposed. Kerinbensonlawyers
The applicant, a Lakeside unit owner, sought the appointment of an administrator under the Unit Titles (Management) Act.
The OCN ACT has described the key principle that came out of the case: it is not enough to merely confess to a conflict of interest — conflicts have to be actively addressed and managed. “The elephant cannot be silent in the room.” Ocnact
The OCN ACT has noted this case had significant implications for OC decision making in the ACT, with other owners now able to challenge decisions on the grounds that the continued participation of highly conflicted individuals led to “unreasonable influence” on decisions. Ocnact
There are also related cases worth knowing about. In Executive Committee Units Plan 930 v Capital Strata Management and Miliano and Others, ACAT affirmed that if an OC member owes any money to the OC, they are not entitled to vote on any resolution at an AGM or special general meeting — which touches on a related form of conflict (financial interest in the outcome). Ocnact
For Flat Chat purposes, Gracie v Units Plan 3411 is the key ACT authority: it establishes that a majority unithodler with an obvious conflict of interest (developer controlling the scheme) cannot simply acknowledge the conflict and then vote as they please — there must be active management of that conflict, or decisions can be challenged and overturned.
This doesn’t address the issue directly – should a committee member be able to vote on an issue affecting their own lot? But there is a clear advantage that other non-member owners don’t have and that should at least be grounds for raising the issue, asking the committee member to recuse themselves and potentially challenging the decision if their vote decided the issue.
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.
This is what AI gives as the official definitions of conflicts of interest for the ACT (the numbers are links to the official sources):
- Actual (Real) Conflict: A direct conflict exists where a personal interest or competing duty is currently influencing the way an official duty is performed. [1, 2, 3]
- Perceived (Apparent) Conflict: No actual conflict exists, but a fair and reasonable person might perceive that a personal interest or relationship could improperly influence the decision-maker. [1, 2]
- Potential Conflict: An interest or relationship does not currently affect official duties but could reasonably do so in the future. [1, 2, 3]
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.
The set-up you have described is almost begging to be strata-fied so unpicking the knitting on this may not be the best way to go. However, for what it’s worth, here’s a rough outline of the process.
Right, so it’s three lots, not two — and a mix of a freestanding house and a duplex, which adds some wrinkles. and please bear in mind, this isn’t legal advice — just a broad overview of how the process typically works. You’d want a strata-savvy solicitor guiding you through it.
What you’re describing is termination of the strata scheme under the Strata Schemes Development Act 2015, converting three strata lots back into separate Torrens title properties.
The first hurdle is getting all three lot owners to agree. For a scheme this size you effectively need unanimity – it would be impossible to get a 75 percent majority unless one of the lots had less than 25 per cent of the vote. Any mortgagees or other registered interest holders would also need to agree.
A registered surveyor would then prepare a new plan of subdivision showing three separate freehold lots. This goes to council for approval. Even though nothing physical is changing, they need to be satisfied the resulting lots comply with current planning controls (minimum lot sizes, setbacks, access, services, etc). The duplex pair might be better off as a two-lot subdivision of their own, depending on how it’s structured.
Once council issues a subdivision certificate, the new plan is lodged with NSW Land Registry Services, the strata plan is cancelled, and separate titles are issued.
Now, the practical complications in your situation:
The garbage access walkway is the obvious one. Once the strata is dissolved there’s no owners corporation to manage it, so you’d need a formal right of way – an easement registered on the house’s title – giving the duplex owners access to the street for bins. Getting that right is important because it runs with the land, not the current owners.
The duplex common wall will need a party wall easement or covenant so both sides know who’s responsible for what.
You mention bylaws already carve out maintenance responsibilities, which is good, but bylaws disappear with the strata scheme. Anything you want to survive (like maintenance obligations) needs to be captured in easements, covenants, or restrictions on the new titles.
Insurance is worth thinking about too. Right now you presumably have one building insurance policy through the owners corporation. After dissolution, each owner arranges their own – which for the house is simple, but the duplex owners will need to coordinate a shared building policy or arrange a party wall agreement that covers insurance obligations.
Who to approach: start with a solicitor experienced in strata termination, and a registered surveyor. They’ll tell you fairly quickly whether the lots are likely to meet council’s planning requirements, which is usually the make-or-break question.
Costs for a three-lot dissolution, including surveyor, solicitor, council and lodgement fees, could run $20,000 to $40,000 or more, shared between the three owners.
All in all, if there is a problem that’s making you want a divorce from your neighbours, maybe there’s a less expensive and stressful way to approach it.
Has anyone on the forum gone through this process? Please let us know.
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 our old friend Franceso Andreone pointed out a while ago, one of the most common strata management business plans means the less interaction they have with owners, the more profit they make (unless they are boosting their income with schedule B fees for every phone call and email).
That said, and I’m not being sarcastic here, what emergencies do you think might arise that required contact with the strata manager?
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.