Not financial

JimmyT said:

By ‘biting the bullet” I meant get on with it and take action against defaulters – and deal with the pain that arises from that.  Had someone done that in your complex all those years ago, you wouldn’t be looking at time limits at all.

There have been efforts to “bite the bullet” for about 8 years. No one has had a real good go and there is always pain every time something is attempted.

Last year the AGM passed a motion, unopposed, to place the matter in the hands of an external agent to depersonalize the whole affair and have it dealt with by professionals. It seemed the bullet has been bitten.

Unfortunately the executive committee decided to not go down that path — and I am aware of s 21(4) of the Act relating to the pecking order of decisions. After the EC ignored the AGM motion that matter went to CTTT and the Owners Corporation (the EC who passed on the motion) convinced the adjudicator it had reduced the debt considerably without implementing the AGM motion. The adjudicator thus said there was no need for management to be put in place.

When the 2011 AGM was held, after the adjudication, the real picture was revealed. Levy defaulters were up, the debt had been reduced by less than $2k, there was an $18K deficit in the admin fund and a $8k+ loss of equity.

The financial management of the SP is dubious at best. The biggest disappointment is not the financial management, because these people don’t know what they are supposed to be doing and they do not care to know; the people are predictable. The big disappointment is that CTTT are no help with a long term problem that is not about to miraculously disappear.

JimmyT said:

At your next AGM there will be a standard motion intructing the EC not to discuss matters that the Owners Corporation don't want to have discussed.  This would be an opportunity to shut down the EC's option to decide not to follow the instructions of the OC.  But it does seem like your EC is making up the rules as they go along and, yet again, the CTTT decides to  enforce neither strata law nor the strata plan's by-laws. 

Unfortunately we do not have that particular motion even though it appears to be a compulsory motion (required by Sch 2 34(g)).

FLOWERPOT MAN said:

Defaulters up but debts reduced? This is incompetence? Is it possible the most prolific poster does not have a grip and 'these people' do, especially as the CTTT seems to be convinced?

You are from my SP, yes?

The adjudicator said

“Events have proven the executive committee right. The above mentioned procedures have been adopted with the result that the arrears situation is much improved and it is likely to fully resolve itself in due course by the approach adopted”

Page 6, paragraph 32, of SCS11/19312 by Adj J Smith.

The debt, levies in arrears, when the SCS matter was lodged was $55850 in the most recent audit (2010). The OC convinced the adjudicator  that debt situation had been, to quote Adj. Smith, “much improved”. After the decision the 2011 audit showed the debt was down to $54422.

The so called “much improved” debt was a $1428 reduction and hardly due to anything the EC had done. The adjudicator looks like a goose because he says the debt “is likely to resolve itself in due course….”. It will take 38 years to reduce the debt to zero at the rate of $1428 per year.

The Adj says “events have proven the EC right” – how so?

The EC disregarded a consensus passed AGM motion. The SCS case referred to above was not a question of was it the right thing for the EC to do. It was a question of preserving the meaning of s21(4) of the Act. The EC had instructions from the OC and ignored them. What use is the Act if Adjudicators take the liberty of not worrying about it?

A 2.5% debt reduction, which is nothing more than a normal fluctuation, is not a “much improved” situation and a 38 year time frame to resolve the problem is hardly in “due course”. The EC has only been proven to be able to hoodwink CTTT.

Looking at recent EC minutes and the state of the bank balance it seems very likely the debt level will, again, not be much improved this year and in fact it looks possible it might increase, to a record high.

Is the self-management of the SP incompetent; without question it is.  Just look at my last levy notice and how i am not charged interest for late payment. The SP is embarrassing enough without people trying to find ways to make the poor management appear competent.

I think there is a lesson here for all Flat-chatters:

Standing up for your friends poor management, when the poor management is to the detriment of the SP as a whole, will not lead to good outcomes.