Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
1. I have been to NCAT a few times (not all strata matters) and often my application and the parties I was up against prepared “amateur” applications. Never was an application knocked back by NCAT. NCAT assumes the parties are often lay folk and not QCs, so don’t despair that your application will be tossed back at you;
2. In my experience, some very recent, the menu of available orders that NCAT can hand down are those listed on the 11 page fact sheet.T here are no other possible orders that NCAT can hand down unilaterally or “by consent”.
3. In your application, when outlining your case, list ALL the orders and the relevant sections of the SSM Act. Some orders you can see directly relate to your issue and some orders may only touch on your issue (and may even do so in a manner that is not your preferred option eg s. 147);
4. You may at the hearing find that not all the orders you listed are relevant. If that’s the case, then as Americans say: “no biggie”. You will not be penalised by listing more orders you seek than you actually raise in a hearing;
5. As to your point on s. 147 (monetary penalty), you write that you want the owner to fix the issue and not penalise him financially. Well, that’s what you want. Whether in time you get that is another matter. By adding this order to your claim, in the event that you are successful at NCAT but the owner either refuses to comply with the order or hints that he allows you to fix the problem at his cost, this order will formalise the OC’s righr to do the works and make the owner pay the OC’s costs.
One thing comes to mind: why was the subject of sacking the strata manager listed for the AGM?
It could have and should have been dealt with at a general meeting, without the presence of the strata manager, as many simple general meetings are.
Some years ago, one strata I am involved with (not as closely as I am with others) had a committee member agitating to sack the strata manager. I really was not too intimate with that strata scheme, so I went with the flow. Maybe it was a personality issue or fraud. I don’t know and I do not recall chapter and verse being given to the committee.
The committee arranged a general meeting 2 months prior to the AGM, the latter was always run by the strata mgr. At the in person general meeting (it was some years ago before ZOOM etc), the only motion was to sack the strata manager and the procedure ie what sections of the SSM Act applied was listed verbatim.
The motion was carried.
At the AGM the chairman reminded the strata mgr of the general meeting’s resolution and formally dismissed the strata mgr at the AGM, notwithstanding the strata mgr still acted for several more months as per his contract.
I agree with the earlier two replies, in particular that
* Compulsory Strata Management (CSM) is to be actively considered. But seeking CSM would not be my first choice;
* Jimmy’s point of informing owners of exactly how life would change if a CSM appointed; and
* Jimmy’s point on getting a third party such as StrataAnswers to give owners the facts of life. In my experience, owners (many of which are unthinking drones) often defer to the existing committee on most issues, but are often nevertheless curious to hear what outside third parties have to say. Their interest heightens even more when they are not footing the bill of the third party.
Also I would urge you to rely on a flyer rather than a meeting or webinar or similar for various reasons:
1. Folk may be unable to attend a meeting or not be tech savvy enough to log into a webinar and
2. Many elderly folks when confronted with the possibility of higher levies will want to run the matter by family or friends, so the earlier you send out a DETAILED flyer covering ALL the relevant points, the better for you.
I suggest you do NOT ask the committee’s permission nor give them a heads up about your flyer as they will only discourage you (politely or impolitely) from sending one out. They may deceive you by stating that they will hold a meetings where all views will be aired, only for you to find out on the day that while all views are aired, you are limited to 2 minutes of air time! Where their views, their experts etc will have all the time they need.
When writing your flyer give your name and contact details and present the case in all its history. Don’t assume readers in the complex are au fait with the issue. Focus not only on how the committee may be or is breaching the SSM Act, but also on the pockets of owners: make clear that the committee’s solution will cost more over time than your proposal.
As someone who has recently been to NCAT (against a strata committee/OC) and won, I suggest if you make your way there you must have bucket loads of evidence. I did and that’s why I won. In your case, in addition to listing the breaches of the Act, you must back up your position with:
* A costing of recent repairs and maintenance (R&M) costs, say over the last 3 or 5 years;
* Duration the lift was out of commission for R&M;
* Likely costs over the next 10 or so years to R&M, if the current lift is not replaced (the quotes should help with this);
* Duration the lift will be out of commission in the future for anticipated and unanticipated R&M;
* Quotes (plural) for lift replacement (total) and estimated life;
* Estimate of upgrade cost per unit; and
* Estimate of increase in the value per residences in the complex that such an upgrade will result.
In fact, the more that I think of this, the more I am convinced that your flyer should be a summary of the NCAT application .
I agree with Jimmy about going to FT.
As someone who has recently been to FT (a free service), twice and then at NCAT ($216 to apply from memory), may I suggest you prepare for Mediation at FT as though you were preparing for NCAT: list your grievance(s); point out to what sections of the SSMA you are focusing on; aggregate your evidence and spell out what outcome you seek.
Doing this will endear yourself to the Mediator who no doubt sees her or his share of unprepared or under-prepared owners who no doubt have legitimate concerns but are unfocused in their submission. The lack of focus I believe hurts their chances both at FT and NCAT.
Best of luck!
If a by-law allows a full time tenant to do something that is not available to an absentee investor, is such a by law “harsh” as per s. 139(1) that provides that a by-law must not be “harsh, unconscionable or oppressive” and hence ripe for a challenge?
Sir Humphy and Jimmy gave good advice.
Regardless of what you do, here is what you must not do: do not allow what to me smells like a dodgy practice of allowing strata fees to be offset by payments/honororia to committee members.
I write from experience.
One strata I am involved with, for many years allowed a committee member to offset his levies with work claimed to be done (but not always verified by others that it was done) and this caused many problems:
- How many hours did he really work? Nobody kept count;
- What should have been a reasonable hourly fee? Nobody offered a figure;
- Often, in small stratas, the budgeted amount of levies receivable significantly exceeded what was actually received (given the practice of “offsets”); and
- Once you allow this practice to seed in your OC, even if over time you grow unhappy with it, it’s like an errant weed: very hard to extinguish.