Sacked SM given total power over new scheme

iStock-1425984048.jpg

Silence is golden when dodgy deals are afoot.

COMMENT:

With the announcement of the appointment of Rentals Commissioner Trina Jones, we await the anointing of the proposed new Strata Commissioner, whoever that might be.

And the recipient of that poisoned chalice has at least one Herculean task ahead of them – making sense of and untangling the whole mediation and tribunal strata dispute fluster-cluck which is hamstrung by having two key bodies that won’t communicate with each other or, it seems in one case, internally.

Overstating the issue?  How about a strata manager who’s been kicked out of two buildings over serious mismanagement being handed total control over another scheme?  Yes, TOTAL control; the owners have no say in the running of their own building.

For years we have bemoaned the lack of communication between Fair Trading, which comes under the Customer Service ministry, and the Civil Administration Tribunal (NCAT) which falls under the aegis of the Attorney-General’s office.

Right now, if you go to Fair Trading with an issue and ask what your chances of success at the tribunal are, they can’t or won’t tell you.  Instead you get steered into a mediation – compulsory if you want to take the next step to the tribunal – often with respondents who don’t even turn up.

The intention is to resolve issues before they get to the Tribunal; a laudable ambition, except it doesn’t take into account the fact that many disputes are based on right and wrong, that there is pretty much only one side to many stories and – proof of the pudding – the Tribunal is clogged with a logjam of unresolved cases.

Getting back to the lack of communication between these symbiotically linked bodies, if we in the media had a question about a case at NCAT, Fair Trading would tell us to ask the A-G’s people. When you did call them, they’d say “oh, that’s strata – ask Fair Trading, not us.”

However, as if that wasn’t bad enough. It seems NCAT doesn’t even communicate within its own walls.

Take the case of a small strata management firm which we will call “Toxic” for defamation insurance purposes.  If there really is a company out there called Toxic Strata Management, let us know and we’ll change the name pronto (although I might suggest you change yours).

Toxic was strata manager of a couple of buildings that had a large number of overseas investors. Toxic exploited this by using a popular social media app to spread misinformation about the building, the resident owners, other investors and – significantly – to hide clear evidence of serious building defects, so as to stay in the developers’ good books.

Why would they do that?  Because assisting developers with setting up their strata schemes is a big part of strata management business. Get your company on that gravy train and your business is on solid ground.

Toxic also allegedly used favoured contractors who charged inflated fees (kickbacks, anyone?) and misused strata funds, not least when they charged back to the strata scheme tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees spent in defending their position against owners who were trying to get them removed at NCAT.

Eventually, NCAT believed the owners and replaced Toxic with compulsorily appointed strata managers at two buildings which they managed.

This is standard practice. When a scheme wants rid of a poorly performing strata manager, rather than removing the strata manager and allowing the owners to chose a new one, NCAT usually recognises that the owners may be at least part of the problem, so it terminates the contract and appoints a compulsory manager who’s given a year or two to sort things out.

So far, so routine. Except the appointment of a compulsory manager can have a profound effect on a community, especially one that’s only just emerged from under bad management.

For a start, the strata committee and the Owners Corporation has zero powers.  The compulsory manager has total control.

In most cases, this is precisely what’s required and the strata manager acts responsibly and diligently within two parameters – strata law and the strata scheme’s by-laws. 

That can have a downside as many strata managers and committees will allow each other a little wriggle room in the running of their blocks. Compulsory managers may feel they have to follow the letter of the law rigidly, regardless of local concerns.

Now, we hear, the resident owners at the first two blocks are happy with the replacement strata managers; how Toxic performs at their new block remains to be seen.  Maybe they have seen the error of their ways and cleaned up their act. Or perhaps they can’t believe their luck and are lining up the kickbacks and favours right now.

In any case, someone in power need to be asking how things like this can happen. How can a strata manager who is found to be incompetent in two buildings be appointed to a third? And where was Fair Trading in all? So much for its disciplinary system (if such a thing even exists).

We also need someone with the power to change things to ask why the strata dispute system continues to be in such disarray and what can be done to fix it once and for all.

It’s easy to criticise – all too easy – but is there a solution. Well, we’ve come up with a plan that is at least worth a trial run. As mentioned in this week’s podcast what about this idea?

Oh, wait a minute, it would require Fair Trading and the A-G’s office to talk to each other and for each to cede a little power. Hmmm.  Ain’t gonna happen.

Newsletter

To subscribe (for free) to our weekly Flat Chat newsletter, bringing you links to our  latest posts, just click HERE.

Flat Chat Strata Forum Current Page

  • Creator
    Topic
  • #69467
    Jimmy-T
    Keymaster

      COMMENT: With the announcement of the appointment of Rentals Commissioner Trina Jones, we await the anointing of the proposed new Strata Commissioner,
      [See the full post at: Sacked SM given total power over new scheme]

      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.
    Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #69507
      Quirky
      Flatchatter

        As the secretary of a strata committee, I attended a mediation session at Fair Trading a number of years ago, in relation to an owner who had not paid their levies for a considerable period. During the mediation the owner made a number of promises and undertaking to pay their levies. But that did not happen, and the owner’s continued not paying their levies.
        So I contacted Fair Trading to request copy of the mediation determination; I assumed a transcript of the mediation meeting had been kept, or at least a summary of the outcome. It was shocking to be told that Fair Trading did not keep any record at all of the mediation session, or its outcome. They could not even tell me the mediator involved to get his recollection of the outcome. So what was the purpose? Keeping no records means we had to rely on memory, which has no legal validity. So mediation is actually worthless, or less that worthless, since it wastes everyone’s time and money, and any result evaporates into the ether the moment the session finishes.

        #69518
        Jimmy-T
        Keymaster
        Chat-starter

          UPDATE:

          I have just been informed that “Toxic” strata managers were appointed because the strata scheme seeking to get rid of their previous strata managers requested their appointment.  As alluded to in our podcast this week, that’s standard practice; when you want a statutory appointment, you have to go along with a strata manager who is prepared to take on the job.

          Why did the scheme choose Toxic? That’s a whole other question – obviously somebody loves them.

          As for the apparent lack of communication within NCAT, it seems it is even crazier than we thought.  The Member who removed Toxic from their previous contract was the same one who appointed them to the new building.

          Yeah … I know (sigh).

          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.
          #69627
          StrataChair
          Flatchatter

            My guess is that ‘Toxic’ has a really effective business development unit. They probably also lowball the price, planning to make their actual profit from lots of hours, insurance ‘commissions’ and other kickbacks from suppliers.

            The worst strata manager I’ve dealt with worked for a big, supposedly reputable firm – who’d given us a good tapdance at one point. What made him ‘worst’? Literally no communication with the committee – didn’t reply to emails or respond to phone messages; sacked our cleaners to appoint his mate; didn’t pay any of our bills (we found out when we got the ‘notice to disconnect’ from the electricity supplier).

            Talking to ‘management’ got nowhere until I phoned the CEO’s office and made it clear this had to be sorted out. But even then, they wouldn’t own the screwups, offered pathetic compensation (waiving their fee for a month…after months of frustration and inaction).

            Sadly, that’s the business model: sign ’em up and give ’em rubbish.

          Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
          • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

          Flat Chat Strata Forum Current Page

          Flat Chat Strata Forum Current Page

          scroll to top