- This topic has 4 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Topic
-
Hi all,
I am currently in a difficult situation, we are stuck in a 3 year contract with a strata managing agent who is not performing up to standard in a number of ways. However, my main concern is how they were appointed. Without going into specifics, the key points can be summarised as follows:
- Previous strata members were associated with the developer/builder, which was undisclosed.
- Strata manager pushed through a 3 year extension that was voted for by the previous (compromised) members of strata.
- One of the compromised members of strata (secretary) signed the 3 year extension (the contract was also signed by another strata member (chairperson) who was unaware of the connection)
- Both of the compromised members of strata were behind on their levies during the AGM as well.
We believe that the strata agent failed to ensure that all members were up to date on their levies and did not check for conflict of interest. Do we have grounds to take this further (to NCAT) to seek a dismissal (or even a re-vote?) due to this meeting being invalid?
-
Replies
-
OK, it’s not up to the strata manager to make sure owners are up to date with their levies – his or her only statutory duty is to make sure they are charged the obligatory 10 per cent penalty interest for late payment.
But, as to your central question, the answer is, yes, this could be worth running through Fair Trading and NCAT. It may be that when the strata manager is taken to Fair Trading for mediation, they might just quit.
But NCAT will be more swayed by evidence of incompetence or fraud than a yarn about the dubious circumstances under which the strata manager was appointed.
So get your ducks lined up and your evidence gathered before you make a move.
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.
Even if a few owners who voted were in arrears, would it have made any difference to the outcome of the vote? As JT says, the Tribunal is less likely to be fussed about whether the meeting was conducted with perfect observation of all proprieties, than whether the managing agent is doing an adequate job now.
Despite several notices throughout this website urging posters not to name companies with whom they are in dispute (or at all) you posted a link (now removed) to a strata management company which seemed to imply they were acting corruptly. It seems your neighbours aren’t the only ones who play fast and loose with the rules.
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.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.