• Creator
    Topic
  • #11541
    Topsheila
    Flatchatter

      I have been searching for a post of mine from April 2017 called “Bully Chairman” but I can’t find it.  This post is a follow up to that story and I need further advice.

      After I took the Chair and the strata manager to mediation and found it to be very unsatisfactory and accomplished nothing, things continued as usual until the long-time Chairman suddenly sold his unit in June 2017, which came as a surprise to everyone.  The SC continued with the same members until late October when the Treasurer, probably burdened with a dual role, asked me to take on the Chairmanship.  We had an SC meeting and I was elected, also hoping to take the load off the other members, who all work, while I do not.

      Unfortunately, the strata manager has made it clear she does not like me being Chairman at all and has been very unpleasant, eg, copying all SC members in on all of my correspondence to her, typing my name last on emails to the SC, refusing to take my complaints seriously (recently, a very serious one) without “logs” with times/dates and because her assistant sees all of these exchanges, she has started taking liberties with the way she responds to me.  It has become extremely difficult for me to continue and I think she is just waiting for me to resign.  And I might, because she has undermined me to the point where it has become just too stressful.

      About a week ago, I sent the SC an email saying that I wanted to hold an EGM and replace this strata manager, who we engaged for one year in September 2016. I also asked if anyone had a copy of the Agency Agreement with this strata manager because I had not seen it.  The Treasurer immediately replied and said he would not support such a move because the strata manager was very good at her job (I believe he knows her from other buildings and was instrumental in getting her on board with our building). However, when he sent me a copy of the Agency Agreement, it is for a three-year agreement that was signed on 27 March 2017 (I would say following the AGM, for which I did not receive notice), and it was signed by the previous Chair, a current committee member and the “secretary”, also a current committee member, but who was unfinancial at the time of the last AGM (and often is).  My question now is, why was another three-year agreement signed six months into a one-year term and, because it was signed by an unfinancial member as “secretary”, is it valid?  And I would add here that I have no animosity toward any of the Committee members.

    Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
    • Author
      Replies
    • #29042
      Lady Penelope
      Strataguru

        If the SM contract was extended via a Motion at the last AGM, and the majority of those who voted were in favour of the Motion then the Motion was valid.

        The Secretary being unfinancial probably would not have impacted the outcome of the vote on the Motion at the AGM unless the vote tally was very close. It doesn’t appear that the vote tally was close.

        Do you have proof that the Secretary was unfinancial at the date of signing the contract? I don’t know much about Contract Law so can’t comment on the validity of the SM contract and the Secretary’s signature. My “gut’ feeling is that it probably wouldn’t make much difference under the circumstances.

        You could take the matter to the Tribunal, but Tribunals are generally relatively lenient towards ‘innocent’ and unintentional mistakes. 

        If the Secretary is frequently unfinancial then they cannot vote at a committee meeting under the following circumstance: if they are an unfinancial owner of a lot in the strata scheme when the notice of meeting was given and the amounts owed by them were not paid before the meeting.

        It appears to me that you are stuck with the SM until their contract expires or unless they breach their contract.

        If you don’t believe that you can work with the SM then you can resign your position as chairperson and revert to being an ordinary member with no executive duties. Or you could ask the Secretary to swap positions with you and you become the Secretary …. that way you should always have an input into Agendas etc.

        Incidentally, the Secretary is generally the only committee member with the authority to call a committee meeting. Calling a meeting is not the Chairperson’s role. The situation changes when at least one third of the committee wants to call a meeting.

        https://www.fairtrading.nsw.gov.au/ftw/Tenants_and_home_owners/Strata_schemes/The_owners_corporation/Strata_managing_agents.page

        #29050
        g-g
        Flatchatter

          Just confirming Lady Penelope’s comments – In NSW, the Chairperson is not responsible for the day to day activities of a strata scheme – eg. calling meetings, engaging with the SM – that is the role of the Secretary.

          It may be that your SM is upset with you for seeming to take charge. But having said that, SM should have the ability to discuss and explain to you without causing offence.

          If more than one committee member (usually the Secretary) conducts email exchanges with SM they can be overwhelmed. After all, if a committee has 9 members they cannot all do their own thing.

          It seems to me that your committee should meet to review the roles of office-bearers and clear up any confusion. That may also go so me way to fostering a team approach.

          Sounds like you are a proactive person, so swapping your role to Secretary may work better for everyone.

          #29055
          Topsheila
          Flatchatter
          Chat-starter

            Thank you both for your responses. I am astonished to learn that the Secretary is supposed to be doing everything I am doing. As long as I have lived in our strata building, the previous long-time Chairman (a man who worked) was the person we complained to, who communicated with the SM, who instigated all repairs and new works and chaired all meetings, including the AGM.  So, I am just following in his footsteps and everyone is going along.  As I mentioned in my first post, all the other SC members work, whereas I do not and am available in the building to let in tradesmen, attend to immediate problems, like someone’s power going off. (Amazing how many people don’t know there are electricity cupboards in the building.)

            There are five members on our committee, two of whom rent out their properties and do not live in the building. The woman who is supposedly the Secretary and who does live in the building, is the one who is always unfinancial and has been since I have lived here. She just pays off her levies over time and every year she is elected to the SC (which I think suited the previous Chairman).  I raised her financial status with the SM and the previous Chairman last year, only to be fluffed off, and nobody else seems to care. I don’t want to press the issue, because I don’t want to embarrass her.  I just feel she shouldn’t be on the SC.

            I also don’t think she is capable of dealing with the issues I am dealing with at the moment, eg, the window audit, internal painting quotes and works and major works coming up within the next few years.

            Is it feasible that I just say I will become Secretary and she can be Chairman?  The other people on the SC are professionals and I think would not be interested in so much work – and, with so little co-operation from the SM, I am fast losing interest.

          Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
          • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.