- This topic has 4 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 6 months ago by .
Attending a recent talk by a Strata Manager on “Strata Committees”, the advice was that the responsibility / function of the Strata Manager is as per the Strata Management Agreement, and if the Powers of the Committee were delegated, then those functions which are specified in the Act.
However the S’Mgr expects to be given specific instructions by the Strata Committee on matters to deal with (save routine matters they have the expertise to handle like Accts, Changes in Lot ownership, Necessary repairs, etc).
They expect that after the SC has met (ie at a “formal” SC Meeting OR “in writing”) all decision must be minuted to validate what the S’Mgr is instructed to do. The presenter was quite firm on this.
A different Strata Manager has categorically stated to Lot owners (for the second time at consecutive AGM’s) that “It is not necessary for the SC to hold formal meetings”, and for this Strata none have been held for over 2 years.
The current SC has no intention of holding SC meetings based on what was stated, as they say they rely on the S/Mgr for guidance to comply with the Act.
I am told there has been & is a lot happening, which to me means decisions of more than maintenance are likely being made but no one (except the C’tee) is informed about them. (Lots <100)
I made contact with the NSW Fair Trading Strata Hotline and was told that there is “no legislative requirement to hold Strata Committee meetings unless 1/3 of SC Members request one” and was quoted s39 (2).
While the statement may be technically correct, I am still not convinced, as the advice appears to be ignoring the (likely) intent of the legislation, and transparency of action to Lot Owners.
Does anyone know a case(s) that has been to NCAT where the Strata / Executive Committee has been taken to task for not holding Formal Meetings with Minutes?
I have looked on NSW “Caselaw” but cannot locate any, and would like to present verifiable information to Ctee members, OR ELSE accept that their position is correct (which I doubt).
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.