Strata records – said to have gone missing

A key reason why records are “unavailable” is that there are no penalties imposed on SC members for:

1. Not storing documents securely; or for

2. “Misplacing” or “losing” documents over time when the SSM Act requires (at least) 7 years of paperwork be kept. Surely the onus is on the SC as they prepare agendas, host meetings and prepare minutes with or without the aid of a strata manager (who in my experience always say they are mere “agents” of the SC/OC and deny liability). It is reasonable to assume even if SC members past or present do not have hard copies of documents – a long bow I agree – surely they have electronic copies which they should be compelled to share.

I recall one scheme I was involved with that required me to go to NCAT in order to be allowed to inspect the books at the strata manager’s office.

When I got to the office I was given the books and was appalled that many pages were ripped out of the Minute book. Naturally when I confronted the agent and the SC, each pointed the finger at the other.

If memory serves me well, I even photographed the partially denuded minute book.

As to digital records – the problem with that is that a cunning committee member or members will not hold properly constituted meetings for as long as he, she or they can. That means that decisions of the SC and possibly OC will be informal and w/out an agenda or minutes and hence w/out a record.

Update – email 2 of 2

Sorry for the late posting, but I had hoped for replies to questions in “Update – email 1 of 2” as those replies would impact my questions in this “Update – email 2 of 2”.

Mr X raised the possibility of something that I think is way out of line and ask for Flatchatters’ views.

He says, “assuming the SM has few records and (current and former) SC members claim they have none, I will ask every owner in the building to pass to me any record they find in their possession”.

* He said that he’ll give owners say half a year to search for any documentation relating to the strata, from any time. Whatever is found and passed to him will be aggregated into a “library”. He will charge the OC for his work in aggregating;


Q3: Can he ask for payment? I think doing so breaches the recent reforms and s. 46 SSM Act.

* At our fortnightly tennis match I told him that I (an owner) have some papers but am not sure how relevant they are they are. They may be in one of 3 locations. Traveling to the storage sites, accessing them and sorting them out (so they make sense to Mr X) before handing them over, will take a time. Many hours. I don’t know how many. Maybe 6 hrs?


Q4: Can Mr X expect uninvolved folk like me to spend time and money searching in different places for historic paperwork? And do it for free? Or for payment we consider insufficient? Most of us work full time and have not the time, energy or inclination for this.

Q5: Can other members of the SC be expected to spend their time searching their files for OC documents, so Mr X will have a better picture of the scheme? They claim they doubt they have any records (odd given they’ve been on the SC for 5 years or so), but they will search, but not for free;

Here is the kicker.

Can Mr X insist that by a certain date (say 6 mths from now), he will draw a line. Whatever was found and handed in to him by that date will constitute the scheme’s library. Anything found by anyone after that date, even if it’s indisputably a true record, will not be considered in any decision making of the SC or OC.

He gave an example: “Mr Z, a senior citizen passes 25 records (all he could find) to Mr X within the 6-month window. They are a jumble of papers spanning 10 years that do not tell the full story about any matter. They may well add to understanding of an issue if read in tandem with documents unearthed by other owners and passed on to Mr X. Who knows”?

Mr X continues: “suppose the senior citizen passes away in a year. His daughter, two years from now, wants to renovate and suddenly finds historic OC documents backing up her view on a certain matter”. According to Mr X, “the document found by the daughter will be ignored by the SC and OC”.

Q6: Can the SC or OC choose to ignore that recently found (and indisputably genuine) document?

All perspectives are welcome.

Jimmy thanks for the feedback. I was thinking along the same line, but wanted someone on the forum to come out and read my mind. I too thought, “what substance is someone smoking to imagine that NCAT or a court would refuse to acknowledge a record, whose authenticity is unchallenged by anyone,  just because one or two or even the majority of an SC voted to exclude those records not deposited with the SC by a certain date”.

I am also pleased that you view the many moving parts of Mr X’s suggestion, are, all things considered…one big bad idea.

@nugalbags, thanks for the response. In the scheme involved, there have been several strata managers in a few years. And I agree that some records may have disappeared in the handover.

The problem however is that before the first SM was hired, one committee member ran the scheme mostly on his own (with 2 others who did very little) and it seems that he did not pass all the records to the first SM. This I know because I visited the offices of the first SM, soon after he was hired and most bank statements and some invoices were missing. While I have never been a fan of SM, I could not blame the first SM for the missing documents. I can only blame the trio on the SC who ran the scheme and chose either to keep or trash key records.

I actually visited the 2nd SM just before the handover to the 3rd SM.

All the files were in a large sac and I had access to them. The same missing papers listed above were still missing.