A couple of stories have drawn your interest more than others in the past week. The issue of waterproofing on roofs attracted more than 1400 pairs of eyeballs on Linken-in last week – confirmation that people are worried about this hidden problem, especially since it may turn out not be a problem at all.

For instance, there’s a question in the Forum about a roof being re-waterproofed when it was later discovered to be a completely separate issue with a balcony.

There seems to be a too-easy option for waterproofing firms to come along, announce that your roof’s waterproofing is past its use-by date, and then charge like wounded bulls to fix it.

Confusing the issue is the possibility that the waterproofing really has failed, especially in older buildings. But who’s going to give you an independent assessment of where the problem really lies?

This question has all the hallmarks of a scam-susceptible issue, on an even bigger scale than the dubious dealings of some fire safety inspectors who demand high-end solutions for low-risk problems… and turn out to be the same contractors who expect to be hired do the work.

Strata Manager Rating

On an entirely different subject, it’s worth repeating that there’s a new platform where owners and committee members can give free rein to their feelings about their strata managers.

It’s early days but you only have to consider the growth of Tripadvisor from a quaint and often flawed travel guide to a powerhouse of travel destination reviews to see the potential.

You wouldn’t book a holiday hotel without at least checking to see what others thought – even if you don’t follow their advice.

When it comes to StrataAnswers’ strata manager rating website, all it will take is for enough people to post their opinions for all the kinks and quirks to be ironed out.

What quirks and kinks? How about the self-serving all-five-star reviews posted by dutiful employees using their personal email addresses.

This will surely be balanced out by disappointed clients of those firms who will know from lived experience that the glowing reviews are fake and will doubtless respond by posting their own no-star reviews to redress that balance.

Conversely, reviews by one disgruntled owner seeking revenge for being thwarted in their efforts to breach by-laws with impunity, will be outweighed by their neighbours who know the strata manager was doing their job. 

The reviews are anonymous, but other residents will probably have a pretty good idea who the idiot neighbour is, if only from the content and tone of their complaint.

It will take decent numbers for this to work, so we all need to pitch in.  Think of it as a public service rather than a means of revenge or doing a favour for a friend. 

If you do have a strata manager who’s not working out for you, don’t you wish you’d found a warning from one of their previous clients before you signed up?

Similarly, wouldn’t it have been great if you’d found a glowing recommendation of a better choice.  Only, not an all-five-star review. That’s just stupid.

At the last count there were about 70 reviews – a terrific start. You’ll find a link to the website and an explanation of how it works in this story.

A version of this column appeared in the Flat Chat Newletter.