Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Are you getting confused.
If a company owns a lot, the company must nominate a nominee to represent them. The nominee is required to be listed on the strata roll.
The notice of a company nominee usually requires a company seal, so it’s not possible for the committee to move the nominees around.The nominee does not need to be a company director. Companies who own multiple properties can nominate one nominee for each property. Thst nominee then has as many votes as there is properties.
The other situation is proxy votes. A proxy is appointed to represent the owner for a defined period. Under the new legislation, an owner with multiple properties can appoint one person as a proxy for all the properties. The proxy holder then has as many votes as properties he represents. (The old rules limited then to no more than 5% proxies).
The owner of the property must notify the OC in writing prior to the meeting nominating by name the proxy holder. So it’s not legal for the committee to just pass blank proxies around.
I would be scrutinising either the company nomination (it requires a company seal but there are exceptions to this)
Scrutinise the proxies as well thst they are correctly signed – either a signature of the owner/company nominee or an email to that effect.
It bears to remember that unLess a company nominee has been nominated (a person) on the strata roll ,it’s only the company secretary who can nominate proxies,and then only after a company meeting authorised such.
JT
you say that you believe that Cctv footage is a record of the OC and then suggest hurdles to access the footage. Thst is indirect contravention ofthe many posts you have put up saying owners have unfettered rights to OC records.
To answer the posters question, the installation of the pool camera perhaps should be put to a meeting of the OC. There may be valid reasons to install it. The owners can hear the arguments and then make a decision. Majority gets the nod.
What the poster does not say, is who suggested the installation of the camera. Remember that it’s only the committee or the owners who can decide to install it, not the strata or building manager.
In Australia, any person or entity is permitted to make video recordings, but not to record the sound, in a public place. Public meaning not in another persons private space.
Also let’s not assume the worst. It’s likely that the installation of the camera is to improve security, not to provide jollies for some pervert.
There is no provision in the act for a recount.
At the meeting, an owner can ask for a poll vote, which is a form of recount. But if it was not asked at the meeting, then it can’t be invoked after the meeting.
In any case the vote declared at the meeting is the one that stands.
The idea is sound but in practice I believe you will run into issues.
And it all revolves around human nature .
Who gets to set the rate? The people not doing the bin moving will say the bin movers are paid too much.
What happens if someone doesn’t do their duty. Do you sack them, and who sacks them .
In my opinion it’s better to keep it at a long arms length and use independent contractors. If you want to reduce the cost, cast around for alternate contractors. There are plenty available at different prices.
what about maybe a local pensioner or school kid?
It’s usual to have a debt recovery procedure thst has been passed as a motion.
The usual wording is that any and all fees to recover the debt are covered by the debtor.
If you have this debt recovery motion, then set the lawyers onto them.
As in all cases of debt recovery, it’s difficult when the debtor is in another jurisdiction. However, your lawyer and the courts have probably encountered this situation before and should be able to find a resolution.Past a certain amount, the debtor can be made bankrupt. In that case the court will order the sale of any assets, ie their unit, in order to repay the debt .
Just to clarify one statement. Some insurance companies will not pay the cost of investigating where the leak is coming from. It will be stated in the policy document.
So someone is out of pocket this amount.
My experience falls both ways
1) The leak was in the pipe in a common property slab. The OC paid the investigation costs.
2) The water leak was from a lot owners fish tank. Clearly not common property. Lot owner paid the investigation.
Water leaks can occur from all sorts of pipes and fittings. I don’t believe that it’s altogether clear, by way of the legislation, nor the guides provided by a fair trading, where the delineation is in all cases.
I think in these types of cases the OC has the lot owner over a barrel. If the lot owner has paid the bill, the lot owner may have to take the OC to court to recover the cost, and the chance of success is not guaranteed.
If the OC has paid the bill but requests reimbursement from the lot owner, the lot owner will become unfinancial till the bill is paid or resolved.
There is a difference in voting between general meetings and committee meetings.
Motions at committee meeting are decided by a simple vote. The majority vote passes the motion.
At general meetings one can have a simple majority, a special resolution (more than 25% did not vote against) and unanimous resolution. For the first two cases, a poll vote ( votes in proportion to unit entitlements) can be called.
Works affecting common property ( unless repairs and maintenance) require a special resolution at a general meeting.
So from the facts you stated it’s unlikely thst the resolution was legally passed.
You can take this to NCAT and have the motion annulled. The owners will then need to withdraw their DA from council as the affixed common seal is now invalid.
An approach to the council by yourself will be fruitless as the council accepts documents in good faith.
The approval of the council is only supportive in thst the building works meet their planning requirements. The DA does not support that the application was lodged legally.
The three month extension is only allowed at the end of the contract and it’s a one-off. It can’t be rolled over every three months.
Here is my strategy
Get you own quotes and proposals for a strata manager. You do not need committee approval to do this.
Prior to the next meeting to renew the old strata manager, place a motion on the agenda proposing the strata manager you chose.
Schedule 2, clause 4 allows any owner to submit a motion, so don’t let the committee or strata manager tell you otherwise.
Its likely thst the strata manager will include a motion to renew their contract. Let that go for now.
When the motion to renew the old strata manager comes up, call up Schedule 2 clause 4(1). Ask the strata manager who submitted this motion. If it was not a lot owner,then the motion is out of order. Ask to see the WRITTEN request as the act states how it has to be submitted It’s usual for strata managers to submit a motion for their contract renewal, but the act does not allow it.
They may try to adjourn the meeting in order to “fix” this oversight, but once a meeting is called, the rules have been set.
Hopefully you have sufficient support from other owners so that your motion passes. If not then you have no strata manager, and the elected secretary will need to call another general meeting in order to elect a strata manager.
The agrrement is between the OC and the strata manager. Notwithstanding any other argument, it’s the responsibility of the OC to pay. There is no mechanism in the act to pass on any fees charged to the OC to an owner.
Potential recovery only applies if the court orders the lot owner to pay costs, which requires a hearing in NCAT.
There was no needs for you to abstain from voting. There was no conflict of interest, even if they were voting against your lot.
If your strata manager and committee are behaving as you describe,you should consider getting both dismissed at NCAT. Even though they may not be happy with the situation with council, their duty is to act in a lawful manner, and in the best interests of the OC.
The fact thst the committee got to a situation where the OC was fined could also expose them to having to compensate the OC.
Gardening contracts are often let on the basis that the contractor will maintain the gardens, rather than on an hourly basis.
The price is a yearly figure, paid every month. Some months they spend a lot of time,some months little.
An alternative is to pay the contractor by the hour. You can be sure that they will maximise the hours to maximise the pay.
There is no right or wrong contract to have. Each form has its pros and cons for the vendor and the purchaser.
I understand it’s hard to see someone paid for work you did for free previously. But perhaps it’s better to enjoy the time that has been freed up for you.
Like JT I’m not sure of the full context of your question.
In regards to your motion.
The motion to approve levies is a motion thst is mandated to be on the agenda of the AGM. Whilst the secretary is obliged to put your motion on the agenda, the committee could decide not to do so if they propose a different quantum of levies ( to your proposal).
If you want to not have any levy increase, at the AGM propose an amendment to the levy motion. Youcan then debate the amendment with the other owners, and if enough agree with you, your amendment is passed.I see it so often (I’m on three strata committees) where owners become disgruntled with the levies they are charged.
In my experience, there is no malicious intent by either the strata committee or the strata manager. They generally try to maintain levies at reasonable levies.
Remember that owners of the committee also pay levies.
When disgruntled owners have it explained how the administrative fund levies are calculated, and how the capital fund levies are calculated, they get a better understanding of why the money is raised.
Rather than agitating and getting off side with the committee, take the time to ask questions of the strata manager or the committee. Do your Enquiries prior to the AGM and then be prepared to offer constructive input when the motion of levies comes around.
Additionally I find that where the committees leave maintenance to the strata manager, the strata manager tends to overservice the property.Try and get on the committee and then PARTICIPATE. That means being pro active in looking at everything the OC is paying for, and finding ways to get it at less cost.
And if you don’t get on the committee, remember that you will get a notice of every committee meeting held. Committee meetings are the only way that decisions are formally reached between general meetings. You are perfectly entitled to attend these meetings. You may be able to speak at them though you can’t vote . That will give you a ring side seat of how decisions are made.
This is just another example of how the tax rules favour investors and discriminate against genuine live in occupiers.
These deductions, along with interest and other outgoings are just not available to the genuine homebuyer.
Either of the two main parties need to bite the bullet and invoke tax reform as has been recommended by several tax reviews.Otherwise we all will be living in rental accomodation.
Nice try JT.
We all know that to enforce a bylaw , it takes time and a visit to NCAT.
The issue of regulating access to facilities by residents needs a more immediate solution that’s immediately enforceable.SWs article makes some good points.
Perhaps if parliament has the time they could legislate these issues and remove a lot of the grey area.The whole issue of getting compliance with COVID health directions ,both for strata and businesses, is sketchy.
Whilst the laws in relation to the health directives are enacted by parliament, it’s only the police who have the right to enforce these laws (as is the case with any law).
One can beg and plead with other parties to comply, but you can’t take any action save reporting them to the police.
I am wondering how going ahead businesses are going to prevent unvaccinated people from entering their premises. Physically restraining people is assault even if you are in the right.