From the Forum: Confronting unfinancial committee candidates

shutterstock_1192945549-1-e1562068113653.jpg

Finances and, specifically, who’s behind in their levies are always sensitive topics at AGMs.

You don’t want to embarrass your neighbours if they are doing it tough or maybe just having a temporary cash flow problem.

But then, they shouldn’t really be putting their hands up to be elected on to the committee if they are “unfinancial”.

To be fair, they shouldn’t be nominating other owners either or even voting on issues except for those that require a unanimous vote (which almost never appear on an agenda).

But what about people who are technically “unfinancial” because there was an extra charge that came in after they paid their levies?

Wise and sympathetic strata managers and treasurers would have a quiet word and let it slide – but the bush lawyers and pedants would be on it in a flash.

Note to Fair Trading and their interstate equivalents:  Next time you revise the strata laws, put a $50 leeway on late levies to avoid owners being disenfranchised by debts they didn’t even know they had.

Meanwhile, if you want to cause chaos at your next AGM, demand to see evidence that everyone voting or nominating people for the strata committee is actually entitled to do so.

Then point out that (in NSW) co-owners can’t self-nominate and people can’t nominate anyone else if they are running for election themselves. Oh, and two co-owners from the same lot can’t both be on the committee.

That’ll put the strata cat among the committee pigeons!

All of the above was inspired by a post to the Forum in which a Flatchatter asked if it was reasonable to see proof of the financial status of other owners who were self nominating for election to the committee, to check that they were entitled to do so.  That’s HERE.

On a similar theme, another Flatchatter wants to know if, when the form says a proxy is only valid for two AGMs, does that mean just those meetings or all the non-AGM  meetings in between. Also, we think we’ve discovered a discrepancy between what it says in the Act and what it says on the official proxy form. That’s HERE.

A tenant wants to know what their options to extend their stay would be, having been served with four weeks notice to quit because their rental home has been sold.  That’s HERE.

And finally, a safety minded committee member says her block wants to appoint fire wardens … but wants to know who would train them. That’s HERE.

Needless to say, there are other discussions that have been running for weeks and there will be more questions and answers … unless, by some miracle we have dealt with them all … coming into the Forum.

Leave a Reply

scroll to top