- This topic has 7 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 1 month, 1 week ago by .
Our strata scheme in Sydney has 24 lots and a committee of 5. All of the 5 have been on the committee for 3 years. I am not on the committee and have had no interaction (positive or negative) with them recently.
3 of the 5 travel a lot for work and are hardly ever in Sydney and as a consequence rarely if ever reply to letters and emails from owners and tenants. This is a problem, as those 3 hold the more responsible positions on the committee. All 5 of the committee members want to vaccinate themselves from
* “too much correspondence” they allegedly receive;
* complaints and follow ups by owners and tenants who have not had their correspondence acknowledged, addressed or resolved; and
* from “trivial correspondence” they allegedly receive
Their plan is to formalise and legalise (I suppose at a general meeting) their practice of ignoring any correspondence which any of the committee members considers offensive, repetitive, irrelevant or similar. A by law has been suggested to allow them to do this. As an alternative to a by law, a “code of conduct” has been floated to limit the number of times per year an owner or resident may correspond with the managing agent or committee members, (presumably regardless of the seriousness of the issue). So far the committee has not imposed a word limit on correspondence by owners or residents .
1. Is the suggested by law “harsh, unconscionable or oppressive”? And presumably, “illegal”.
2. Is the suggested “code of conduct” a violation of a person’s rights and presumably, “illegal”?
- The topic ‘Talk to the hand, not the committee.’ is closed to new replies.