- This topic has 0 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 12 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Topic
-
In a recent post on a different topic Jimmy T commented that in annualised average terms the Strata Division of the NSW Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal’ (CTTT) holds only three (3) Hearings per week, and that the Fair Trading Minister (Roberts) observed that the Tribunal is therefore “a seriously under-utilised option”.
Those of us who, like me, have experienced the CTTT’s operations on more than one occasion can understand why it’s under-utilised, and that’s simply because it does everything bureaucratically possible via Conciliation Sessions and Consent Agreements to avoid Hearings involving disputes between Owners Corporations and Residents (which is the limit of my experience).
A quick perusal of the CTTT’s most recent Annual Report for 2011/12 reveals a few more pertinent if not interesting facts with regard to the Strata & Community Titles Division of the CTTT, like:
- Only 1,500 Applications (a mere 6% of the total received by the CTTT) were lodged, of which almost 1,000 (⅔) were resolved by Conciliation or by Consent Agreements and around 300 were withdrawn.
- Only 109 (7%) of those Applications were for Breaches of By-Laws
- The majority of those Applications (1,014) were lodged by Lot Owners
- Only 420 (30%) of those Applications were lodged by Owners Corporations
- Of all Applications that proceeded to a Hearing, which in the 2011/12 fiscal year must have been around 200, more than half had no penalty imposed.
- 30% of all Applications Heard were adjourned (to another day)
- Almost 90% of all Applications were “finalised” one way or another (tick).
- Only 7 matters were appealed to the Local / District Courts
- The Tribunal (all Divisions) has 9 Senior Members, 10 full-time Members and 56 part-time Members, whose suitability for the role is determined by the Minister having regard to whether the person has:
(a) the ability to exercise sound and fair judgment and to make objective and independent decisions based on the merits of the case,
(b) the ability to command the respect of the parties in proceedings,
(c) the relevant expertise in one or more of the areas of the jurisdiction of the Tribunal,
(d) the ability or experience in alternative dispute resolution procedures.
What …. no formal qualifications and/or judicial experience!!
- The Tribunal’s total expenditure (all Divisions) was $28M which was off-set by $27.4M in “income” from Application Fees & the resultant Interest ($9.4M), Contributions from Consolidated Revenue [i.e. us] ($3M), and from other State Government Qangos including the Rental Bond Board ($15M) [us again].
Hmmmmmmm – which all goes to prove that what the Minister said was correct, that the CTTT costs us a lot of money and does comparatively little with it, and that I think I’ve got too much time on my hands at this time of year!!
(PS – forgive the pagination as I did this on my new “smart phone” that is obviously smarter that its owner)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.