› Flat Chat Strata Forum › Finance, budgeting and loans › Strata’s financial statements withheld from OC › Current Page
Hi Jimmy,
Sorry about my delayed response but I had some family matters to attend to.
Thanks for the advice. I will look into it.
One more thing. When I asked the SC and agent for details of monies paid to date and still owed on large projects (which required special levies to be struck), I was told by the agent: “this goes beyond standard reporting and a charge will be levied on your lot for the work gathering this information”. Having to pay for such data would encourage most owners from not following up such a request. It seems to me that either the SC/agent are willfully concealing data or more likely, their record keeping is at best incompetent. We are talking tens of thousands of dollars, which is a big deal for a small strata.
My questions are:
A) Can an owner be charged to acquaint himself with the true finances of the strata? The financial statements given to owners at the AGM are so poor they would embarrass a first semester accounting student. When I was Treasurer at a different, much larger strata, I offered chapter and verse gratis when such requests were made. I refused to shunt owners to the managing agent. But then, I had nothing to hide; and
B) Given the 2 person SC never meets officially (ie no agendas are sent and no minutes are prepared), should I ask for a General Meeting and list my questions for the above as motions? I would also list a demand that the Sec refund $900 he received from the OC (on the mere ‘OK’ of the Chair) when he presented a one page “invoice” for articles he claims to have purchased to effect maintenance at the strata. Note, not a single original invoice was attached to his one page dozen line “invoice”. There are no before and after photos. There is no evidence that the works claimed to have been done, needed to be done or were done (no independent verification was offered). Also I understand that ANY pmt to a SC member must go to the OC and be paid only after approval by the OC. (Notwithstanding the Sec’s unsubstantiated claim that the items claimed at ‘at cost’). Not only was this pmt hidden from the OC, but the elderly Chair who ok’d the pmt took as Gospel the Sec’s alleged 60 visits to the strata for repairs, for which he billed the OC the bridge toll, when there is not one SPECIFIC incidence report about why he visited on OC’s dime and what he did at that visit, let alone 60 reports.