Some day I’m going to publish the highly defamatory email that the CEO of Netstrata sent to the committee of my investment property demanding that I resign because I was “gas-lighting” the committee and generally causing trouble in pursuit of a personal agenda.
My crime? I pointed out that they were in breach of strata law by refusing to give our secretary the strata roll, as well as asking why they had included a 15-year maintenance contract with an option to increase fees by 10 per cent per year in our first AGM package (among other dubious deals).
They were very cozy with our developer who was most upset when they said they were going to jump before they were pushed.
The above example of Netstrata dragging their feet, even when the sp[otlight is so fully on them, makes you wonder if the “independent” report which they have apparently contested in a 70-page document, will make an iota of difference to them or their similarly self-interested fellow travellers in the SCA.
Netstrata needs to be put under strict supervision by Fair Trading until all the shonky practices are eradicated and the SCA’s much-vaunted professional status should be suspended until its senior management proves beyond any doubt that they have the integrity that it implies. Neither of these thing will happen.
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.