Forum Replies Created
-
Replies
-
taps – I don’t know why the replacement of the leaking tap cost $100s when they typically cost $20, or why Lot Owners’ garden taps are supplied by the common supply (unless Lots are not separately metered), or why a former Owner of the affected Lot was permitted to extend the common supply, but it’s all water under the bridge now (sorry!) as it’s the Owners Corporation that’s responsible for the maintenance and repair of its common water supply, so it pays.
Justsaying said…. So I’m clear, expenditure <30k needs to meet compliance of the act. Over 30> has to go to GM? Will this stop consultants fees without approval?
I think there’s some confusion about mathematical symbols, so to make it clearer, as your Plan has more than 100 Lots it’s classified as a “large strata scheme” under the Act and therefore, except for defined emergencies such as water/electrical supply failures and glass breakages, your Executive Committee (E/C):
- is prevented from spending any more than 10% over the amount allowed against any item shown in the budget; and..
- is required to obtain 2 quotations for any expenditure that’s proposed and is expected to exceed $30,000 on any item shown in the budget; and further..
- under the terms of a Motion that must be included on the Agenda of every AGM, the Owners Corporation can itself decide by a simple majority vote to further limit the E/C’s spending by requiring that expenditure on specific item/s can only be approved by all Owners at a General Meeting. (Just be careful with the use of this provision lest you end up with multiple Meetings each year instead of the usual one).
Examples:
– If the approved budget for “lawns and gardening” is $5,000 then the E/C can spend up to $5,500 on that item, and if it wants to spend more, then it has to call a General Meeting so that the Owners can make a decision on that additional expenditure one way or the other.
– If the approved budget for “structural rectification” is $50,000 and the likely expenditure on something that comes under that item is estimated at $35,000 then the E/C must obtain 2 quotations before then authorising the expenditure.
– Even though the approved budget for “consultants’ fees” may be $10,000, the Owners can vote to have all proposed expenditure on that item referred to a General Meeting.
justsaying said.… It seems owners are uncertain about general expenditure if a budget is submitted, it’s the lack of specific items that appear to come in under the radar!
Your Strata Manager will have a list of every type and item of expenditure that’s even remotely possible at a Strata Plan; that’s called a “chart of accounts”. So you and like-minded Owners should ask for a copy of that list, and then select the types and items of expenditure that you want to be shown, budgeted, and tracked for your Plan at and from the next AGM.
As always, as Strata Management should be democratic, you’re allowed to do some lobbying with like-minded Owners so as to explain the need for the style of management that you favour, so that they’re on-side when it come to a vote.
Congratulations Andos – I’ve posted to this Forum almost 1400 times you’re the very first person to give me the bum’s rush, but as apparently you’re both a physic and a statistician that gives you some privileges I guess.
Unlike you, I can’t judge other peoples’ attitudes without meeting and speaking with them personally, but I’ll have at a guess that you don’t want to pay your E/C Chairman; right – genius aren’t I?
Don’t worry though, just boost your confidence by asking others what they think, or about what their Owners Corporations do, until such time as sufficient numbers of those agree with your point of view, even if they’re in the minority overall.
At least in that way, when the subject of paying the the Chairman comes up for discussion at your Plan’s next General Meeting you’ll be able to confidently respond by saying “NO, and what’s more a whole lot of people on FlatChat agree with me!”.
Anyhow, I’ll hand you over to the rest of my fellow FlatChatters (just make sure that you all refrain from giving Andos objective advice, and instead just say that E/C Members take on their roles on a voluntary basis and that they shouldn’t be paid; ever).
What part of the Act states that the role of Executive Committee Members has to be voluntary?
Answer… none, and that’s precisely why it provides a mechanism for Owners Corporations to consider, authorise, and permit such payments, which are particularly but not exclusively relevant where Plans are self-managed and Members are often doing the work that a Strata Manager would at a charge-rate of $160/hour.
Andos, at the end of the day, whether or not your Owners Corporation decides to pay it’s Chairman doesn’t depend upon how common or otherwise that practice is, but rather upon how much if any value those voting at the General Meeting place upon his “time and effort”.
If you read my suggested letter carefully, you’ll see that in the absence of a positive response by your neighbour and the Owners Corporation you’re only making arrangements to have the air conditioner removed and to make an Application to the NCAT.
Whether you actually do that depends upon the response that you receive and how comfortable you are with taking the next step if it comes to that, because as I’ve said already it’s YOUR letter so don’t write and issue anything that you’re not happy with!
YES – and if you’re in NSW then THIS section of the Strata Schemes Management Act applies, where you’ll note that any amount to be paid has to be approved in advance by those present at a General Meeting and it’s paid 12 months in arrears – so it’s for what the Executive Committee Chairman has done for the Owners Corporation, not what they may promise, propose, or offer to do.
Additionally, if the Chairman’s offering any ancillary services in addition to those directly applicable to their position on the E/C, such as any form of property maintenance, then they need to have an ABN, liability insurance, and to submit invoices for payment that detail those services in the terms approved at the General Meeting.
Thanks for all that additional information, which by the way further substantiates Jimmy T’s comment that the whole situation from the Owners Corporation paying for a split-system air conditioner to benefit just one Owner, to it installing that on your balcony is just plain ludicrous!
As you did earlier obtain a legal opinion, you should strengthen your letter to read something like:
Please be advised that on the on basis of legal advice, I advise both you and the Owners Corporation that the Executive Committee’s decision to purchase and install a split system air conditioner to service Lot X and to install the outdoor component of that on my balcony was incorrectly made, and not in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act (1996), and particularly with the provisions of its Section 65(A).
Therefore, as an alternative to me applying to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal to have the Adjudicator’s ruling set aside and also to seek Orders to have the Owner of Lot X, and in default the Owners Corporation, restore the Common Property to its original state by removing the aforementioned air conditioning system and its ancillary pipework (the “works”), I am allowing seven (7) days from the date of this letter for the Owner of Lot X and/or the Owners Corporation to make suitable arrangements with me to enter my property for the purpose of undertaking those works.
If those arrangements are not made within the timeframe prescribed, then I shall concurrently make arrangements for the works to be undertaken and for all items once removed to be properly secured and made available for collection by the Owner of Lot X or by a member of the Executive Committee, and make the necessary Applications to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal as indicated and including a ruling that a reimbursement of my costs to have the works undertaken be made in equal portions by the Owner of Lot X and the current Members of the Executive Committee.
Remember though, as the above is what I would include in a letter, just make sure that you are totally comfortable with whatever you may yourself write.
No bother, but I understood your question and my opinion is the same as I expressed earlier, in that the Secretary (not the Chair) is only obliged to minute the outcome of the vote taken on each Motion and not any discussions that may occur about it, unless of course if those discussions led to an amended Motion being put.
So in my opinion, if the question that you put to someone at the CTTT is the same as you’ve asked of this Forum, then the advice you were then given was incorrect.
As I advised before (in post #2) if you ever again want those present at an AGM to consider a correction to the Minutes of the previous Meeting and you want the nature of that correction and the resultant vote to be minuted, then submit the detail of your specific correction as an Item to placed on the Agenda, and call for a poll vote.
Note also that I’ve stated here what the Secretary is obliged to minute as opposed to what they may choose to minute, at the risk of those becoming an epistle.
alinka – strictly speaking the Secretary doesn’t have to minute the discussions around each Motion on the Agenda for the Meeting, only the outcome of the vote, which is why you should have at least submitted your concerns in advance of the Meeting as a Motion, or at least called for a “poll vote” on the day, where the Minutes would record the unit entitlements of those voting in favour and of those against, thereby indicating the extent of any dissent.
In the absence of a Motion for the Owners Corporation to permit the use of recording devices at a particular Meeting, it’s a matter for the Executive Committee (E/C) to decide upon. However, if such a request was spontaneously made (i.e. at a Meeting), then as the Chair can only rule upon procedural matters, their only options would be to defer a decision and to refer the matter to the next E/C Meeting, or if that displeases the the person making the request, to adjourn the Meeting altogether until such time as the E/C meets and makes a decision.
So your best option would be to put a Motion about the use of recording devices on the Agenda for the next E/C or General Meeting – depending upon whichever of those forums you believe will make the decision that you want.
No they’re not, but perhaps they’re concerned that you’re sub-letting the premises and want proof of that possible breach of your Lease.
isydowner – Jimmy T is right by describing this whole situation as ludicrous!
There are a few things that still intrigue me about all this, so could you please clarify the following for me:
- Did all Units in your Plan have an air conditioner installed as part of the building’s construction, or were some installed afterwards?
- We’re talking about a split-system air conditioner, right?
- Does your balcony adjoin your neighbour’s balcony?
- Is the balcony shown as part of your Unit on the Strata Title Plan?
- Your neighbour’s original air conditioner failed, right?
- If there was room for the original air conditioner on your neighbour’s balcony, why was there insufficient room for its replacement?
- You mention that the works were approved “by paper”, and I assume you meant by the Executive Committee. Are there any minutes of that Meeting?
- Has there been an AGM since the installation of the replacement air conditioner, and if so, where was the expenditure on that purchase and installation shown?
- Your argument at the CTTT seems to have been about people accessing your property without permission, but did you not argue about the Owners Corporation locating the air conditioner on your balcony?
- What if anything did the adjudicator say about your neighbour’s air conditioner being located on your balcony?
Re the likely reaction to the suggested letter by your Owners Corporation (O/C) and your neighbour – the O/C purchased and installed the air conditioner (albeit improperly) but it services your neighbour’s Unit, and that’s why I suggested that you first give both of them the opportunity to remove the component/s that are located on your balcony, and that if neither does, you do so and return those components to, or at least make them available for collection by, your neighbour as the person who’s Unit it currently services.
Arnie – It’s worth noting that in order for the Police, Local Council, or even your Committee to take any action about a noise complaint, it needs to be reasonably satisfied that a Breach of a relevant Law (incl. a By-Law) is occurring, and in the absence of any of the above actually hearing it, it’s incumbent upon the complainant to substantiate or otherwise prove their claims with recordings or even a log of dates and times.
The above is in place to prevent frivolous and vexatious complaints.
So your Committee should perhaps do nothing until such time as the Owner concerned substantiates their complaint, or if it wants to be proactive, invest $50 in a digital voice recorder and ask the complainant to set it up in his Unit.
I delayed replying for a couple of days just in case somebody else had some suggested solutions to your problem, because I only have one!
On the basis that the information you’ve provided is correct, and with reference to the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act, the Owners Corporation:
- Should not have entered your property without your prior permission [see Sect 65(4)]
- Should not have replaced an air conditioner that was the private property of an Owner
- Should not have attached that air conditioner to the Common Property (floor & walls) of your balcony without the prior consent of ≥75% of Owners present at a General Meeting [see Sect 65(A)], and…
- As the CTTT made an incorrect ruling in my opinion…..
I suggest that you immediately write to your neighbour (the Owner of the air conditioner) with a copy the Secretary of your Executive Committee stating that the Owners Corporation’s installation of the air conditioner on your balcony was both an inappropriate use of its funds and contrary to the provisions of Sect’s 65(4) and 65(A) of the Act, and to insist that they make proper arrangements with you to enter your property for the purposes of removing that air conditioner, and that if that’s not done within say 7 days, you will make those arrangements yourself and have their air conditioner returned to them (i.e. your neighbour), and seek a reimbursement of your costs to do that from them, and in default, from the Owners Corporation who improperly installed it.
Again, if everything that you’ve advised is correct and that nothing of relevance has been omitted, you should be prepared to take them on by having the air conditioner removed. The worst that could happen is that you’re out-of-pocket!
isydowner – not sure whether to take that Lawyer thing as a compliment or not, although I was once coerced into working over a couple of years with a team of Lawyers who were drafting some state environmental legislation, my role was to merely to ensure that their legalese reflected both the intent of and the science behind the document. Maybe some of their phraseology stuck in my head; anyway, enough of that!
Your problem is really a strange one, but as the Owners Corporation (O/C) argued that the replacement of the air conditioner was done under Sect 62, I assume that it’s Common Property and that your balcony is part of your lot; right?
IF that’s the case, and for the time being ignoring the fact that the O/C placed the air conditioner on your balcony and accessed your lot, I’d have argued that relocating it anywhere comprises a change or alteration to or the erection of a new structure on the Common Property of the Plan, that should have been approved in advance at a General Meeting under the provisions of Sect 65(A).
Before I and others get into your options to address the problem, could you please come back with a little more information, including on the argument that you took to the CTTT, whether my assumptions about the ownership of the air conditioner and your balcony are correct, how and in what forum the works were approved, and (if you know) why the new air conditioner wasn’t positioned where the original one was?
Sorry, I can’t do that as I’m not a Lawyer, but if you can provide some specific information about the situation I’m sure you’ll get some practical solutions to your predicament from FlatChatters who’ve been there before!