[steven strata]

Thanks Jimmy-T and others for your comments.. On poking arround in Flat Chat under Strata Facts I fould this solocitors advise as the most informative…https://www.flatchat.com.au/what-exactly-is-common-property-and-what-isnt/
I agree with the Solicitors advise that The Fair Trading.. so called ” Common Property Memorandum” may not be very clear.

[steven strata]

Hello Kaindub
Frankly the comments to date in the shower leak thread , do not answer my question.
My understanding is that water proofing attached to a common property wall or floor is OC responsibility. But water proofing attached to a wall or floor that is not part ofcommonn property is the responsibility of the lot owner. The question which is had to get a definitive answer on is when is a wall or floor lot owner property and not common property. For example in a two storey town house with no lots above or below, is the upper floor within the town house owners responsibility or Body Corporate.
PS. Have you read any strata insurance policy documents? I think you will find that water damage by a burst pipe may be covered, depending on if its in a common property wall or lot owners wall. But a leaking shower recess is highly likely not to be covered by insurance.

[steven strata]

Thanks Jimmy

So the proxy Form and its notes are offical and I now note they are as specified in the Strata Schemes Regulations 2016.

So I see the notes on the form ( and in the Regulations) say  (my underlines added )

4   

If a person holds more than the total number of proxies permissible, the person cannot vote using any additional proxies. The total number of proxies that may be held by a person (other than proxies held by the person as the co-owner of a lot) voting on a resolution are as follows:

(a)  if the strata scheme has 20 lots or less, one,

(b)  if the strata scheme has more than 20 lots, a number that is equal to not more than 5% of the total number of lots.

 

Hence I take this as reinforcing for me my reading that the Act and the Regulations state that the limit on proxies relates to voting on each resolution … not the overall meeting.

Probably little difference in most instances, put could be relevant where the proxies held relate to only voting on some resolutions of the meeting.

I think nothing to lose any sleep about, but may be relevant in some circumstances.

Regards

Steven Strata

[steven strata]

Thankyou Jimmy -T for your response and link to the Department of Fair Trading Proxy form.

“Re 2.    A proxy is not authorised to vote on a matter…. If the right to vote on any such matter is limited by this form.”

I think this is a reference to that the proxy giver may state that the proxy has been given in relation to only certain motions.  ( hence limiting right to vote on some motions)

 

 I note the form also states 1.  (c)   if appointed as a proxy for more than one person, may vote separately as a proxy in each case.         So this seems to support my position

 

As for the “official Form”  I note this only someones interpretation of the ACT,  I think not a copy of a form prescribed by the act.

So, I will persist with my reading of the act.

Another question which the act does not seem to address is,  How many proxies can the strata manager cast? … I assume it’s the same as for any other person .. ie only one for schemes with 20 or less lots.

 

Again Thank you for your Time Regards Steven Strata

[steven strata]

Thanks to all contributors, but it seems to be the basic question remains unanswered, how many proxy votes can the strata manager hold/ apply at a meeting?

[Author]

Replies