Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
Hey villageidiot,
Speaking as someone who took a do-nothing committee to NCAT seeking a compulsory manager, I offer the following observations:
1. Jimmy is right about NCAT focusing on OCs doing their job ie s. 106 SSMA;
2. Jimmy is right about interested owners applying to NCAT for a compulsory manager, when the OC is inattentive to its obligations, s. 237 SSMA:
3. In my experience, NCAT’s ordering via s. 237 is rare and not common. I failed to get a compulsory manager and I had a list of failures. Common is for NCAT to direct the OC to do certain works (from the list the applicant provides in his/her statement of claim). The problem here is that there may be quite a lengthy period of time from when your statement of claim hits NCAT’s inbox and NCAT hears your allegations;
4. To me, you have two options, given you’re on the strata committee and the “numbers” in the strata are stifling you doing your job:
(a) You (in your own right as an owner or a strata committee member) can apply to NCAT (or ask the strata manager to apply in the name of the strata committee) listing what needs to be done; the fact that all members of the strata committee agree they need to be done and that (if it is the case) that you value your strata manager’s contribution to managing these works. If NCAT agrees with your application then it will order the OC do certain tasks, from the list you provide of what needs to be done. The strata committee can then go ahead and do the works in the knowledge that the go-ahead for these matters is in the bag; or
(b) If you believe the above matter will require repeated appearances at NCAT over time AND you don’t have the time, stamina or interest for such AND if you believe that your strata manager is on board with your views such as what needs to be done and ideally by whom, ask him/her for a quote to compulsory manage your strata via a s. 237 order. Ask for a quote for managing the strata for 1 year. Negotiate if you can with him/her as often agents fleece OCs in such cases. Once you’re happy with the price offered, add the quote to your application to NCAT indicating the many merits of not only compulsory management, by compulsory management by the current strata manager.
Hello again Steady Sam,
Two more things come to mind:
1. You say that you
believed that the appointment of a new Strata Manager was a two step process. 1) EGM to appoint the Agent and 2) an AGM / EGM to agree the Agency agreement terms itself.
This is my experience. Furthermore, another EGM if you want to modify the terms of the agreement (subject to the strata mgr’s consent).
2. You mention
as the Strata Secretary we believe had not extended the term of the agreement
This MAY be explained by the functions of the strata mgr as listed in the agreement. In many cases, a committee will palm off most if not all of its functions to the strata mgr, with the committee members’ title eg Treasurer, Chair etc, is in name only. In such cases the strata mgr is delegated (in B&W in the contract) most if not all the committee’s functions. This delegation you may find offensive but if it was included in the text of the contract and the contract was executed via a EGM or AGM, then it is set in stone I believe.
So the strata mgr can wear two hats simultaneously: a committee member and a strata mgr.
I am no fan of strata mgrs but cannot fault them if one or more committee members assent to such delegations and then persuade other owners to approve those terms OR if one or more committee members keep owners in the dark and get their approval at a meeting without revealing the significant change in how the scheme operates. I was an owner at such a meeting where there was no Q & A session.
If this is the situation then your beef I believe is with the committee or the OC and not the strata mgr.
When I am more alert I will read your post again, but one thing sticks out: you wrote:
Can anyone advise if they consider the termination was done correctly per the Act
I recall asking Fair Trading a related question (in regional NSW) and was told that a strata mgt agreement b/w the owners and the manager is a contract and the terms stated in the contact (regarding everything eg termination, insurance commission etc) are “iron clad” if agreed to by the owners (or their representative) and the manager. Should either the owners or manager wish to modify one or more of the terms or extinguish them altogether, this can be done but ONLY by mutual agreement. The contract not the Strata Management Act is the basis for any change.
In short, read your agreement carefully, cover to cover. Especially the listing on fees, to know if what’s taken place breaches the contract or is in accordance with the contract, but not fair (in your or another person’s estimation).
Swinging the rules in favour of renters by Labor is little more than an extension of the Bereklijian-Perrottet days.
Take a landlord WITH a reason to terminate a lease. She finds her renters have gone on holiday and are pocketing dough from having listed the property on Air B&B and the premises, she is told by neighbours, is occupied unlawfully. Travelers are living the high life without the landlord’s knowledge let alone consent.
Under the 90 days rule, even if adhered to by the renters, exposes the landlord and the OC to possibly countless insurance claims because the insurance policies in place in most cases do not allow for such short term holiday rentals. Not to mention that leasing via STHL is a breach of the standard lease agreement.
Overhauling regulations that are considered “bad” is always welcome, but both (not one) side(s) of the transaction must be protected from “bad” behaviour.
Landlords do not have a monopoly on acting in their self interest.
I am involved in several stratas and not once was impressed by what an auditor found.
He/she may be in the pocket of the strata manager or the pocket of the committee or may truly be “independent”,
but ALL auditors that I encountered did little more than sample a few invoices and follow them up in the strata’s books. They then penned an “opinion” that a first year accounting student could do.
I suggest a cheaper and more effective means to sniff out “accounting irregularities”:
Ask the strata mgr for a provide you with ALL invoices, say for the 2023-24 financial year, sorted out by payee in date order and ensuring the following details are listed on (or attached to) each invoice:
Name of Payee:
Payee’s ABN:
Payee’s contact details:
Reason for pmt:
Pmt made (date):
Quality of work performed (as determined by a committee member or strata mgr):
Pmt approved by:
Your job: to ensure that every invoice includes at least the above details. List those that fall short.
What I found in the past were that some strata managers had to be instructed to ensure financial documents made sense, were detailed and were unambiguous. Of course, whether the scant details offered owners were decided by the strata mgr or the committee is hard to tell.
Before you did any work for the strata, did you seek approval in writing from the strata committee or managing agent for payment? Was an hourly rate mentioned? Were the number of hours you expected to work listed?
1) Get your strata committee to organise a strata committee meeting asap.
2) List the history of the leak in the agenda of a meeting.
3) Publish the minutes of the meeting ASAP.
4) Add a copy of the documents to the strata record which any owner will come across when doing a strata search.
5) Assuming you have contents insurance, call your insurer and ask for guidance. Maybe they will repair
your damage and they will go after the unit that caused the leak. If so, that’ll be a great solution.
6) Your idea of advising the agent is not, I feel, the best way to handle this. Agents will often follow the paperwork, ie minutes of meetings; letters of demand etc. Not so much comments from a neighbour.
Just my 2c
As already mentioned, the issue may turn on whether the OP is an owner or possibly tenant, in the strata for which the decision was made. If he is neither, he should get an owner to request the document for him.
As to the comment that ‘NCAT publish a digest every month with case decisions’, as I understand it, NCAT publishes a selection of cases, not all cases.
Was your case a situation where the SM or OC initiated proceedings? In my case the OC defended an action and the strata policy covers defense, subject to the insurer’s belief that the OC has a “reasonable chance of success”.
A year ago in NSW I asked one owner if he’ll pony up the additional premium if we renew the strata insurance noting he is engaged in STHL.
My inquiries with several insurers revealed that (a) STHL, for any period of time, will increase the premium charged and (b) the quantum of the increase is directly related to the number of lots engaging in STHL.