- This topic has 9 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 3 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
I asked the Executive Committee where I live and own in a block of 38, to trim a couple of trees which haven’t been trimmed for a few years and need a lopping badly for several reasons.
Weeks have gone by and when I asked an EC member I was told the matter has been ‘discussed’ but won’t be done ‘for now’. That’s all.
They don’t have meetings or minutes. The committee of four just run it with the strata manager. Am I entitled to see emails between the EC and or strata manager about my request and the decision? Can I compel them to have a meeting and minute decisions like this explaining the reasons?
I won’t even mention other pet projects done which benefit the members themselves or their cronies.
-
Replies
-
Costa – Schedule 3 of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act prescribes how Executive Committees must function, and Clauses 6 & 12 set-out the requirements for Meeting Agendas and Minutes.
So there’s no need for you to compel your Committee to provide evidence of the above because neither is discretionary, and as you would know from responses to your previous posts Sect 108 enables you to inspect Agendas, Minutes, and indeed any other records of the Owners Corporation.
On a more general note, whilst I can appreciate why Committees may choose not to formally meet to consider every single matter that’s been raised by an Owner and to instead group those together for periodical consideration at properly convened Meetings, I must say that the longer I read and respond to posts on this Forum the more accustomed, but not accepting, I’ve become to the fact that many, many Plans are managed on the basis of a wink and a nod, and too often with little adherence to the provisions of the Act.
In my experience that always works well until the wheels fall off!
@Costa said:
The reply I usually receive … from both the Executive Committee and Strata Manager, is that the emails and conversations between them are private emails and conversations between individuals.This is, of course, nonsense. But a politely worded letter to them saying that, as their correspondence is all “private” you don’t expect to see any items on the annual accounts for payments for correspondence, stationery or telephone calls. And if there are any such items on previous accounts, query them and say you want to exercise your rights to view the correspondence.
If the strata manager is a member of Strata Community Australia, you might contact them for advice about how to deal with this breach of duties in the long term.
If the strata manager isn’t a member of SCA, you need to ask why the hell not.
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.
@Whale said:
Costa – Schedule 3 of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act prescribes how Executive Committees must function, and Clauses 6 & 12 set-out the requirements for Meeting Agendas and Minutes.So there’s no need for you to compel your Committee to provide evidence of the above because neither is discretionary, and as you would know from responses to your previous posts Sect 108 enables you to inspect Agendas, Minutes, and indeed any other records of the Owners Corporation.
On a more general note, whilst I can appreciate why Committees may choose not to formally meet to consider every single matter that’s been raised by an Owner and to instead group those together for periodical consideration at properly convened Meetings, I must say that the longer I read and respond to posts on this Forum the more accustomed, but not accepting, I’ve become to the fact that many, many Plans are managed on the basis of a wink and a nod, and too often with little adherence to the provisions of the Act.
In my experience that always works well until the wheels fall off!
Hi Whale,
I just wanted to get some clarification from you regarding your comment that “neither is discretionary”… if say an owner has not received notices or agendas, as well minutes or motions passed at a meeting and the Executive Committee go ahead and instruct the strata / building managers to do something without the knowledge of the other owners… are you saying that they are not valid?I ask because of the issues with my balcony, it seems there is nothing ‘written’ down on the schemes records (s108) or the costs disclosure from the lawyer who had ‘allegedly’ been engaged at the time (almost 5 years ago)! There was a claim that s65a allowed them to change my balcony (which is privately owned, not common property) and they done this when no one was home (my EC knew we would be at work) which is even more disturbing! Is that what you mean about the wheels falling off?
I understand clause 6 & 12 are both mandatory, but is the onus on my EC to prove it was complied with… which would be impossible without a flex capacitor and a delorean?
Also, thanks for all your advice. I hope you’re well (and Jimmy et al) and selling down for the holidays. Have a great Xmas and New Year too.
Thom
Thom – thanks for the Christmas Greetings, and right back at ya!
What I meant by the use of the phrase “neither is discretionary” is that compliance by the Executive Committee (E/C) with Sch. 3 Cls 6 & 12 and indeed every other provision of the NSW Strata Schemes Management Act (SCMA) is as you have observed, mandatory.
So it follows that if an E/C doesn’t comply with the SCMA by issuing Meeting Agendas and Minutes or indeed anything else, then YES the Meeting would be invalid.
Make sure that the Agenda and Minutes weren’t posted on the Owners Corporation’s Notice Board instead of being provided to all Owners, but in any case it’s up to the E/C to prove it did produce those documents.
Regarding that change to your balcony, I recall your original post about a neighbour’s airconditioner being installed there and the sound advice that Flatchatters then provided; so at the risk of opening a can-of-worms what was the outcome of that?
Hi Whale,
Its in the local court (we skipped the Tribunal) as the lawyers believe the EC didn’t have authority to install on someone else’s property but it looks like it will transfer to the Supreme Court ‘Real Property’ list and the OCs insurer won’t cover them as they are claiming it was done negligently!
I will let you know when it’s done, but it will be a while yet. We have 3 other court cases against our scheme now ao it seems no one trusts the Tribunal. They are to do with theft, someone using their apt to make drugs (breaking bad style) and personal injury (security guard attacked out building manager)! Seems I’ll be paying for those matters in my levies too!
Thanks for that feedback; best of luck with proceedings.
Regarding your comment about you and other Owners collectively paying via your levies for the Owners Corporation’s legal costs, it’s worth noting that acceptance of any quote for legal services that exceeds the lesser of an amount equivalent to $1,000 per Lot or $12,500 must be approved in advance at a General Meeting.
Thanks Whale,
The insurers looks to want to settle with me but the other issues don’t appear to be insurable events… We are expecting to have to raise special levies to cover those damages. Our EC have gotten us into this pickle but so far no general meetings have been called for either of them, including my case.
Its like watching a car crash in slow motion but I am very greatful no one was phsyically hurt in my case… even though my building manager was assaulted he is ok now. Personally, he walks around our building like a demon bossing everyone around and I wouldn’t be surprised if they argue aggravated assault!
The new laws can’t come into effect quickly enough… I just hope the regulations reign in strata / building managers and also be a wake up call for selfish EC members as well.
How great would it be to remove NCAT from the dispute resolution process… just strata disputes, they need to be dealt with according to the law.
Happy Xmas and New Year Whale 🙂
Isydowner – all the very best for the festive season to you also!
Re your comments on the NCAT, Jimmy T recently posted the following, so perhaps take him up on his offer……..
I too am becoming discouraged by some of the decisions coming out of NCAT which seems to be even more anti-individual than its unlamented predecessor, the CTTT, in its “Send In The Clowns” days.
As soon as I get back to Australia, I plan to start asking the Attorney General’s office how they can justify some of the stupid, unfair and ignorant decisions that have been coming out of this department that now comes under their aegis.
If any of you have any examples that you think are beyond reasonable explanation, please drop me a line, either online or via mail@flatchat.com.au and I will get back to doing what we started in Flat Chat 11 years ago – kicking ass and taking names.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.