Netstrata wants some report findings scrapped

iStock-1949336313.jpg

Netstrata wants some of the findings in the report on its dealings removed.

Strata management giant Netstrata is reportedly trying to have some damaging findings removed from the latest draft of an independent report into allegations of misleading business practices.

Netstrata has been accused of failing to fully inform clients about lucrative insurance commissions and broking fees while failing to obtain competing quotes for strata insurance policies in favour of its preferred insurers and taking kickbacks from suppliers.

The inquiry by independent experts McGrathNicol was launched last year by NSW Fair Trading following reports on ABC TV’s 7.30 and Four Corners.

The latest news comes as NSW Fair Trading’s new regulations requiring greater transparency by strata managers about potential conflicts of interest come into force.

This week the ABC reported that Netstrata is demanding “a raft of changes “to the draft findings of an independent review into its business practices, before the final report is made public.

“A source with knowledge of the investigation said lawyers acting for Netstrata had sent NSW Fair Trading a 70-page document that refuted the adverse findings contained in a report by independent,” writes investigative reporter Amy Greenbank.

She adds that draft report contains findings of a range of breaches, including that Netstrata had not disclosed broking fees to clients, or obtained three insurance quotes as required.

A review of Netstrata’s practices was launched in May 2024, after an ABC 7.30 investigation found Netstrata had been using its wholly-owned insurance arm to charge apartment owners inflated insurance brokerage fees, while taking kickbacks from its contractors and suppliers.

Now, anonymous sources have said, Netstrata has handed a 70-page submission to the regulator which includes new documents which had not previously been handed to McGrathNicol investigators, and which the strata firm hoped would result in at least some of the findings being dropped before the final report was delivered.

This comes as increasing numbers of the company’s clients are asking what has happened to the reports.  Netstrata will doubtless be concerned that if their existing strata communities can link reported misdeeds to their own contracts, they will be able to sack them and find new strata management companies.

You can read the full ABC report on this link. Netstrata did not respond to the ABC’s questions.

Newsletter

To subscribe (for free) to our weekly Flat Chat newsletter, bringing you links to our  latest posts, just click HERE.

Flat Chat Strata Forum Current Page

  • This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 9 minutes ago by .
  • Creator
    Topic
  • #77684
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

      Insiders have told the ABC that Netstrata has submitted a 70-page document countering some of the findings in the draft report into its “Strata Trap” allegations.

      [See the full post at: Netstrata wants some report findings scrapped]

      The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
    Viewing 5 replies - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #77718
      Mailbox
      Flatchatter
        I have just read your update on Netstrata, how disgusting and disappointing that the investigating Company were not permitted access to their building and the cover up!
        What did they have to hide?? Everything!
        Only accessing records from 2022… my building and many others it commenced in 2020 and prior.
        This lame Labor gov have blood on their hands and if the findings are revoked we should all be extremely concerned.I have no faith any longer in Fair Trading and this pathetic Government.

        I will never purchase in a strata scheme ever again.

        #77778
        optusJo
        Flatchatter

          Maybe they (Fair Trading?) could publish the 70 page Netstrata report and interested people could make comments – that way Fair Trading and Netstrata could demonstrate “full transparency” as opposed to “semi transparency”.

          #77858
          FeeGee
          Flatchatter

            I am on the committee of a very new (completed late 2023) building and we were doomed from the beginning with Netstrata being our managers. We’ve recently appointed a new strata manager and the handover should have been done by 1 Feb (we gave Netstrata the required 3 months notice). I got a call today from the new manager to say nothing had been handed over yet.

            i called Netstrata to ask why – turns out they kept the account open so they could pay their own final invoice despite us having multiple outstanding invoices (including our poor cleaner who hasn’t been paid since October). They used the last of our money to pay themselves!

            Needless to say, we can’t wait for this nightmare with them to be over. As a former employee of the government department responsible for this area, I knew too much and that didnt sit well with Netstrata who became very defensive with me on numerous occasions. They couldn’t bully me or pull the wool over my eyes and I hope they don’t try to deceive anyone else they way they have with us and I’ll be following closely to watch their fall.

            #77881
            Jimmy-T
            Keymaster
            Chat-starter

              Some day I’m going to publish the highly defamatory email that the CEO of Netstrata sent to the committee of my investment property demanding that I resign because I was “gas-lighting” the committee and generally causing trouble in pursuit of a personal agenda.

              My crime?  I pointed out that they were in breach of strata law by refusing to give our secretary the strata roll, as well as asking why they had included a 15-year maintenance contract with an option to increase fees by 10 per cent per year in our first AGM package (among other dubious deals).

              They were very cozy with our developer who was most upset when they said they were going to jump before they were pushed.

              The above example of Netstrata dragging their feet, even when the sp[otlight is so fully on them, makes you wonder if the “independent” report which they have apparently contested in a 70-page document, will make an iota of difference to them or their similarly self-interested fellow travellers in the SCA.

              Netstrata needs to be put under strict supervision by Fair Trading until all the shonky practices are eradicated and the SCA’s much-vaunted professional status should be suspended until its senior management proves beyond any doubt  that they have the integrity that it implies. Neither of these thing will happen.

              The opinions offered in these Forum posts and replies are not intended to be taken as legal advice. Readers with serious issues should consult experienced strata lawyers.
              #77973
              FeeGee
              Flatchatter

                It certainly is a disgrace that Fair Trading allowed Netstrata to pay for the review. Giving them full control of what’s released is just plain stupid.

                The lack of transparency is astounding and no one but those living in Strata buildings will suffer.

              Viewing 5 replies - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
              • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

              Flat Chat Strata Forum Current Page

              Flat Chat Strata Forum Current Page

              scroll to top