#54727
Jimmy-T
Keymaster

    You may have misread my post.

    So what you are saying is the in the past the Chairman tried to convince the other owners that two people from the same lot can both be on the committee but you managed to thwart that efffort.  Nevertheless, the owners still voted to have only two people on the committee and you were not one of them.

    To be honest, I don’t think this battle of wills or clash of personalities is going to further your case one iota.  The seniors in your block will be more alarmed by agitation and dissent (regardless of how justified it is) than any hypothetical claims, however valid, that the block isn’t being run properly.

    In my experience, the one way to convince older owners – who are often on fixed incomes – to change their minds is to tell them that their money is being wasted. Telling them that someone they trust shouldn’t be trusted is a much harder sell.

    Thus, your original approach that the “hidden” subscription to a strata law web service was suspicious, may have worked against you, whereas questions about money being spent on things the scheme doesn’t need would probably  have more effect.

    So your initial thrust in getting more tranparency on the finances was right, but your tactic may have been wrong.  Presenting the owners with a simple approach along the lines of  “here’s how we can save  money” rather than “you are being swindled” might just get you that extra vote that you need to get on the committee.

    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.