The seeking of costs is the standard intimidation for the non strata savvy. All too often disputes go away if the OC, agent or a brief representing them starts talking about costs. It is just cliché intimidation. Costs are rarely awarded at first instance NCAT matters and are hard to get even at Appeal Panel level (the next step after the first try at NCAT). If you ever read about 20 or more NCAT cases relating to costs you will see it is so unpredictable it is embarrassing for NCAT.
Your SP is, prima facie, without question dysfunctional. To be blunt you are wasting your time trying to get FT, I assume the compliance division, do anything beneficial as they are more window dressing except in matters that verge on, or are, criminal.
I can’t see where the forum keymaster got the idea you have initiated mediation but if you haven’t then do that for fun. It’s free and it lets them know you aren’t a push over. There is no financial consequence, or any consequence, to doing mediation. I would mention it is likely to be a few months before you get a date because Fts mediation unit is like most things the State operates; i.e. under resourced.
I would suggest do not agree to anything if you do go to mediation because even though FTs’ mediation unit says these things are in good faith that is rubbish and NCAT will consider and give weight to what is in an agreement if someone uses it at NCAT.
That the agent and OC want to bounce you off the other when it comes to information is something that can be resolve by paying the $34 and requesting a search under s 182. Look up s 182 to see the process. If the agent or OC do not come to the party in the timeframe set by section 182 then cart them off to NCAT, no prior mediation required, where they will be ordered to give you what you seek as long as it is something the Act says you can see (see s 182(3) for that list). NCAT do not like OCs and agent who do not play nice when it comes to s 182.
If you do need to pay the $34 then ask to see everything on the list even if you don’t care for half of it. Agents dislike searches because they only get $34 for it and it takes some of them hours to get everything together. There is no money in being required to get everything out to present for a search.
Section 29 says the OC must appoint a SC. Probably one of those ‘musts’ than really means should because you don’t really have to but not having a SC has consequences. No SC then you either have to hold a gm every time you want to make a decision or you can delegate the functions of the SC to the agent (see s 29).
On assigning all the SCs’ power to the agent. That is either in the agreement or not in the agreement. If it is not in the current agreement then I do not believe the OC can just call a general meeting and delegate that function (see s 10(2) and 11 (b) before looking at Part 4).
In part 4 you will see at 49(2) the appointment is by instrument (an agreement).
Unless your existing agreement has some complex clause relating to changing the terms of the agreement you would need to terminate the current agreement and adopt by resolution a new agreement that did delegate the power of the SC to the agent. I would take it from the OC calling a gm that the existing agreement does not have a clause that already delegates the SC power to the agent. Most likely you are in the later boat; you need to terminate the current agreement and adopt a new one specifying the agents’ new authority.
Yours is a welcome to strata case. Dysfunctional people in positions of power somewhat protected by a broken system that does not help the aggrieved when the States licenced agents and framework for operation fail those who trust in them.