KP, I’m trying to offer practical advice based on considerable experience with the CTTT. You seem to be saying it is worth Jeff’s friends risking getting to adjudication only to find that should have gone for mediation first. I can only say in the strongest possible terms that I disagree.
I have seen too many cases fail at adjudications – which are done on paper without personal representations – because the correct paperwork wasn’t provided.
Jeff’s friend will not be there when the adjudicator looks through the pile of papers for evidence of mediation, as the form clearly demands. So there will be no one there to argue the subtleties of strata law and what the wording of the legislation means.
If mediation is not required for this, you would hope that someone for Fair Trading would say so in writing so that can be added to the documents provided.
Mediation is not necessarily geared towards compromise. What is more likely is that the law will be explained to both parties and then, hopefully, they will reach an agreement that is mutually acceptable and involves both financial compensation for those who have paid too much, an added impost on those who have paid too little and agreement on the correct procedures to be followed in the future.
This is not about my interpretation of the law being better or worse than yours – it’s about presenting a watertight case to the CTTT Adjudicator. If the legislation and the forms suggest mediation might be required, it would be cavalier of us to suggest that Jeff’s friend doesn’t bother with it.