#18899
Jimmy-T
Keymaster
Chat-starter

    @SMO said:
    It is a general misconception that you require 75% of all voters present (either personally or by proxy) to vote in favour of a proposed motion. In fact a special resolution is passed only after a poll is taken at the meeting and not more than 25% in value of the votes, by persons present (either personally or by proxy) and entitled to vote, are against the motion. 

    The only misconception is in the phrase ‘of those voting’. Perhaps some poeople think you have to have 75 percent of the owners in favour, or not more than 25 percent against – rather than just those proportions of valid votes but it’s still a mountain to climb.

    The reality is that many Owners Corps are dominated by EC members holding large numbers of proxies so it can be very hard to get those numbers required to change a by-law if the EC doesn’t want it.

    I could list numerous SCS matter where the Adjudicator or Member allowed an animal after the OC refused to allow the animal.

    What is SCS? And why not list some of these matters?

    The reform does not address the issue expressed in the submissions. 
    Feel free to explain how it does.

    If you are talking about the default pets by-law, it places the onus on the developer or Owners Corporation to at least think about how they want to manage pets in their strata scheme, with the default position being that they are allowed.

    Right now, developers are locking their owners into a standard set of by-laws that strata newbies don’t even read before the approve them (by a simple majority).  After than, they require a 75 percent vote to change them. Thye most significant effect of this change is that it will make people stop and think about having pets in their building.

     

     

    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.