[Ziggy]

I could probably pay to find out who voted for and against to each motion, if the new strata manager has them.

But there are other issues i.e. the minutes have only been tabled for approval four months after the meeting was held. And the minutes were never placed on the noticeboard.

In addition, the minutes to be resolved as “true and accurate” on the December meeting agenda were actually wrong. They were minutes from the AGM, not the previous general meeting that followed. There were also fierce arguments about proxy votes. Two people in attendance, had two separate proxies each.

The bottom line is, it was a complete debacle.

[Ziggy]

Our former strata manager didn’t hand over voting forms to the new SM. Obviously, a simple voting form is “approve, disapprove, or abstain”. This doesn’t allow for discussion and transparency amongst owners. Those who were there emailed the SM what they think was said.

By February this year, the minutes still hadn’t been finalised by those in attendance.

The “minutes” have finally been placed on our upcoming GM and are a mishmash of what might have been said 3 months ago.

How can this be a true and accurate record of the proceedings of that meeting? In addition, shouldn’t minutes be posted on the Noticeboard and sent to all owners 14 working days after a meeting?

[Ziggy]

I totally agree with Chesswood. Our strata complex consists of two buildings, one small and one large. The large building’s roof is  double the size of the small building.

In 2022, using a company very familiar with our buildings, we replaced all the ducting, vents etc with new ones as well as the waterproof membrane of the large building . Cost: $38,500.

The quote for the small building, has just come in: around $200,000. Those extra costs are purely caused by the DBPA. It’s a system designed for new buildings but not older, established ones. It’s a scandal.

3 users thanked author for this post.

ruben, BMC Rep, Vermont

[Ziggy]

I can assure everyone that the emails sent to me, owners, the strata committee, and the strata manager were not “an issue that was relevant to the management of the strata scheme”. They were malicious in their intent and designed to cause me great harm.”

“Truth, though powerless and always defeated in a head on clash with the powers that be, possesses a strength of its own; whatever those in power may contrive, they are unable to discover or invent a viable substitute for it. Persuasion and violence can destroy truth, but they cannot replace it.”

Hannah Arendt, historian, philosopher, and author. Also a “hero” to Donald Trump.

 

[Ziggy]

Thanks very much Jimmy for your response but according to Stonegate Legal Litigation Lawyers, qualified privilege can be defeated. They say on their website the following:

“Malice is a crucial element in Australian defamation law, as it can defeat key legal defences such as qualified privilege and honest opinion.

Unlike general hostility or recklessness, malice requires proof that the dominant purpose behind a defamatory statement was improper, dishonest, or intended to cause harm.

If malice is established, it removes legal protections, increases the severity of damages, and holds defendants fully accountable for reputational harm.”

So I wouldn’t be rushing to “forget” defamation if one can prove the above. If a defamer had knowledge that their comments were false or they showed reckless disregard of whether it was false or not, and you can prove there was no legitimate reason to publish these defamatory comments, I would go for it. But perhaps with legal counsel by your side.

 

[Ziggy]

Thanks Jimmy. I might be able to sleep tonight.

[Ziggy]

My strata manager refused to consider the sliding doors as a minor renovation. They said I had to get a bylaw, which I have done. But the strata committee doesn’t like the bylaw that was drafted by a highly reputable strata legal firm. Nor do they think it appropriate that I am having the doors installed through a NSW government initiative.

The reason I can’t get the works done is the company that is installing the doors needs the SP seal affix to the deed.

I have engaged the same lawyers who wrote the bylaw to assist me. By the time all this is resolved, I will have spent $10,000. That’s before going to NCAT.

[Ziggy]

Just an update on the sliding doors. Our Strata Committee has sent an email to all owners telling them they will not approve my motion for the sliding doors at our AGM despite my providing a legally written bylaw.

They have also provided misleading information regarding the motion along with other statements about how owners should vote on all matters.

is this legal?

[Ziggy]

It’s a bit simpler than that uberduber. It’s because every time I write to the strata committee I get hammered. Out go the emails to owners naming and shaming me. So I email the SM for two reasons, one, they don’t abuse me and two, I hopefully have this type of abusive behaviour on record.

[Ziggy]

Jimmy you say: The secretary only has to ensure that anyone who is entitled to vote can do so.

So who is entitled to vote other than owners? For instance, can a non-owner vote, even if on a strata committee?

And Crispy, you are spot on regarding the power that an SC can have. They have the strata roll, after all. Not only can they email every owner suggesting how to vote, they can also send out emails and newsletters to owners supporting/not supporting a motion or even something as simple as maintaining and repairing common property.

I think strata is a national scandal that needs to have a royal commission.

And here’s a curved ball question Jimmy, when does the strata committee not become an SC? At the beginning or end of an Annual General Meeting? That is, can they still act as committee members when voting on motions takes place?

[Ziggy]

Thanks UberOwner. Yep, that sounds good too. But one, the suppliers have been contracted by the NSW government (long story) and two, the NSW government is paying for the works. No rule breaking there. And I’m OK with that but not when a current owner got the seal affixed via, shall we say, very nefarious means.

[Ziggy]

All sounds good but the works need to have the strata seal affixed to their paper work. The Strata Manager has refused to do this saying I need a common property by-law. How come the previous SM didn’t say that?

So off to lawyers and thousands of dollars later I suppose.

[Ziggy]

You say Jimmy the following: : In NSW changes to common property that involve sustainability measures can be approved by a special by-law requiring only a 51 per cent majority… Also, applications for common property by-laws that involve sustainability measures can’t be refused on the grounds that they would change the appearance of the building.

Is there such a thing as a sustainability infrastructure common property by-law?

Is it the same as a common property by-law or does it have to include mention of sustainability measures? Has anyone ever presented one to the owners corporation?

[Ziggy]

Thanks Jimmy. I’m still not sure why I have to do anything since the double glazing of the doors was approved at a General Meeting of the Owners Corporation over two years ago.

[Ziggy]

Thanks Jimmy. You say on the matter of double glazing the following:

It strikes me that a Special Sustainability Resolution is the easiest way to get an agreement that obliges the installer to agree to maintain and repair the windows and doors as need be. (That was agreed to at a General meeting two years ago.)

Just go to the meeting and ask that it be amended to a Special Sustainability Resolution – which only requires a 51 per cent vote in favour (like any other).

There is no mention of by-laws in your comments .

You also say the SC, if they have the power, can approve the installation of new doors and windows.

In addition, you mention Section 132B of the SSMA. That states an owner can make “changes to part of the common property (which includes the installation, removal, modification or replacement of anything on or forming part of that property”.

So, where do you reckon I stand on the matter?

[Author]

Replies