- This topic has 4 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 6 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Does anyone know of a NCAT case where a Strata Committee member was removed by NCAT for repeatedly acting in their own interest and not in the interest of the OC? If so, please cite the case(s).
-
Replies
-
No I don’t but there have been cases considering NCAT’s power to remove a Committee member and the relevant considerations including conflict of interest:
If you read the linked case, it refers to a number of other cases including Linney and Lockrey v Rosewall
So disturbing what NCAT reduced s 238 to.
So disturbing the way they treat s 237.
One more time, these are corrective tools.They are not draconian measures or things that need to be used ONLY in the the clearest of near criminal cases.
If a strata plans “democracy”, which NCAT thinks is so important as to tolerate more non compliance than should be tolerated, is such that it can’t address correcting non-compliance, and NCAT will not touch it, then we breed the dysfunction that is a somewhat ubiquitous problem across strata in NSW.
If the level of non compliance in strata was acceptable in other areas of society it would be a body count that nobody was addressing.
NCAT is implicit in the issues in strata by being to soft and finding “rubbish” excuses to not treat the legislation as it was intended.
No one has ever been removed in a reported case yet we had the reform to get this s 238 provision.
You want to tell me the problems that drove the reform magically disappeared or is it more the case that what the Parliament intended and what NCAT delivers are divergent?
The data supports a conclusion of divergence.You want to tell me the problems that drove the reform magically disappeared or is it more the case that what the Parliament intended and what NCAT delivers are divergent?
NCAT is far too often an unaccountable bureaucracy masquerading as a credible judiciary.
If you want to be alerted when anyone replies to your posts or responds to this topic, please register and login, then you will be able to subscribe to the topic. 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. NB: Longer threads may spill over to additional pages - look for the numbers on the bottom right, under the last post.
I read the case quoted above. The applicant was a previous strata committee member. The respondent is a current strata committee member.
The applicant, himself, had done some questionable things. e.g. conduct a strata committee meeting at which he was the only attendee and approve a $20,000 retainer to a consulting firm.
The applicant had a long list of grievances without sufficient explanation for why they were out of order. One of his complaints: that the strata committee decided to terminate the services of abovementioned consulting firm.
The respondent was found to have breached a by-law by viewing some CCTV footage with another strata committee member, without first seeking the approval of the strata committee. Also, a strata lawyer invoiced the owners corp for legal advice given to the respondent.
However, Senior Member did not find a strong enough case to remove the respondent. He went through all of the respondent’s grievances, one by one. There was also a complaint about the respondent’s noisy dog. The applicant did not do himself a favour by piling on complaint after complaint.
It looks to me that we have two neighbours who seriously dislike each other. One of them got angry and went to NCAT to get vindication.