Welcome to the blog of NSW strata investigative journalism
| From: | SP52948 owner |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Bone BCS Strata Management |
| CC: | Paul Banoob BCS Strata Management, Bruce Copland, Stan Pogorelsky, Moses Levitt, Jeffery Wang, Maureen McDonald |
| Subject: | EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL MEETING 2013: Documents for Motions and General Discussion as submitted in January 2013 |
| Date: | 10/5/13, 9:55 pm |
Hello,
In preparation for the Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM):
a) You are reminded that I submitted 12 Motions on 31 January 2013. Majority of the them were deliberately misconstrued or even excluded from the agenda for the AGM 2012.
None of them were provided to owners with the explanatory notes (whilst, on the other hand, the two projects that the EC was pushing for - Lane Cove gate and the security guard facility were given plenty of space and attention).
This time, you have to provide the Motions in full and without changing them.
The Motions are designed to limit the powers of the Executive Committee and the Strata Manager, ensure better financial planning and management, ensure better financial reporting, ensure all owners enjoying equal rights, prevent unnecessary legal expenses through compulsory mediation at internal meetings, better maintenance and major projects planning in accordance with 10-year schedule, and so on.
b) I also submitted the errata for the minutes of the AGM 2012 on 3 February 2013 (enclosed herewith). The minutes of the last AGM must contain number of corrections for owners to review and adopt now.
c) On 30 January 2013, in accordance with SSMA 1996, Sections 75 and 76, I requested the following quotes to be obtained for the next general meeting (EGM or AGM, whichever comes first):
Two quotes (from different vendors) for painting of the exterior of the four buildings. The project must include repair of drummy render, blow-holes, bubbling areas, scaffolding, insurance, and so on. According to industry standards, painting should be done every 7-8 years and that is NOW for our complex! This was documented by me in pending CTTT Case SCS 12/50460.
Two quotes for major lift overhaul as it is due soon, and most parts are not covered by the 7-year contract with ThyssenKrupp. According to industry standards, major lift maintenance should be done every 15-20 years. Our complex is now 17 years old. This was documented by me in pending CTTT Case SCS 12/50460.
Two quotes for roof membranes for the four buildings.
Two quotes for proper repair of gardens beds.
Two quotes for additional telephone lines (in 2010, 20 owners showed desperate interest to get land line connections).
Any other major expenditure?
The Executive Committee failed in its duties to have proper 10-year plan (even at AGM 2012, in spite of all requests for prudent planning).
Nobody in the complex has any idea what kind of costs await us.
d) For the General Meeting agenda, I also requested the following subjects to be included in the general discussion on 31 January 2013:
Discuss Special By-Law 10
Analyze quotes for major projects and define requirements for Sinking Fund
Analyze the role and conduct of Solicitor Mr. A Mueller and discuss who benefits from his engagement without approval by owners at a general meeting - this must be done before any vote on a future engagement
Analyze Strata Manager's contract (not changed since 1999, in spite of what the Executive Committee claimed at AGM 2011 and 2012)
Personal liability of the Executive Committee and the Strata Agency in regards to mismanagement of common funds
Unanswered major questions and inquiries since AGM 2012
Analyze expenses from the Admin Fund for water and gas reimbursements to townhouse owners for period 2006 to 2012, with special emphasis on costs incurred in FY 2013. As a reminder, you failed in your duty to provide owners with the Registered Special By-Laws which were supposed to be registered after the AGM 2013. I asked for the copies (which you must provide free of charge) on 26 March 2013 and 14 April 2013 which you failed to reply to.
e) The issue of the wireless ISP business running in the complex illegally for more than eight years was initiated and documented by me many times. It is your duty to provide owners with the update at the EGM 2013:
15 months have passed without any action in regards to the ISP business that benefits the external company (unless some secret action was completed without me or owners knowing about it).
EC meeting after meeting, the same entries in the minutes are logged for the owners.
In addition, the Strata Manager falsely claimed to an owner that access to internet services that Whome provided was free to owners in the complex. It was a wrong statement that fooled the owner until he approached me to explain him the real story about the SkyNet Global network in the complex.
On 28 March 2012, I first raised the request to the Strata Manager to provide information on the ISP business running for more than eight years without any documented benefits to owners. The title of my email was:
INQUIRY TO BE TABLED AT NEXT EC MEETING: Macquarie Gardens SP52948 SkyNet Global Business on Premises
Back in 2003, when Internet services in the complex were not perfect (they are still poor, as we have no extra land-line phone connections and our ADSL2+ throughput is below standards due to incomplete cabling between the buildings and the exchange), it was agreed to allow SkyNet Global to install their services on our premises. In retrospective, this was a poorly defined agreement.
At the time, the agreement was valid for FIVE years, and the Owners Corporation was supposed to be paid a fee equal to 5% of the connection charge to individual owners. There were no renewals of the contract since 2009.
The response to my official request was never received.
Since then, I asked the same questions FIVE more times. Each time, no reply was received from any member of the Executive Committee or the Strata Manager. Instead, only vague and incomplete information is provided in the minutes of the EC meetings. Majority of owners have no idea what is really happening with it and how they are personally affected.
On 27 December 2012, the following request was sent to the Strata Manager:
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION: SP52948 Decommissioning of SkyNet Global ISP equipment
Again, the response was not received.
Here is the summary of what owners received in the minutes of EC meetings so far. It shows that absolutely no action was completed by the EC and the Strata Manager on this matter for 14 months now!
22 August 2012 (mostly repeated my original inquiry, without giving any credits):
BEGIN QUOTE
The current wireless internet service provider to the OC has submitted a new agreement. The EC discussed the 'Telecommunications Site Access agreement' from Open Networks and instructed the MA to review the terms and conditions of the previous agreement to determine if the payment terms to the OC have been complied with and determine what changes are being sought. The EC expressed the view that if there are no great number of owners using this service (previously known as 'whome' and because there are now many more alternative public networks, that unless costs are reimbursed, the agreement may not be renewed.
END QUOTE
17 October 2012 Annual General Meeting Not listed on the agenda and not discussed at the meeting.
5 December 2012 (put back on the agenda of the EC meeting after I caught the Strata Manager removing it from the "matters arising from the previous meeting"):
BEGIN QUOTE
On-site Wireless internet service provider
The MA is to follow up the matter of rental income payable to the OC by Whome, the current provider of wireless internet to a very limited number of residents throughout the scheme. As many alternative public wireless networks are now available, if no rental income has been paid to the OC, the contract for the renewal of this service will not be further considered by the OC.
END QUOTE
20 February 2013
BEGIN QUOTE
On-site Wireless Internet Service Provider:
The Strata Manager is to follow this matter up and advise the Executive Committee of his findings.
END QUOTE
The delay to deal with it properly adds to our utility expenses as owners corporation has been paying for the electricity supply for their equipment for the last eight years (and maybe something else?). In short, owners are bearing the costs for a third-party running a commercial business in the complex.
For CTTT cases, the following was requested from the EC members and the Strata Manager in early March 2013:
1. Confirm, with documentary evidence, on which date their equipment was, or will be, uninstalled in the complex.
2. Confirm, with documentary evidence, that all costs for the decommissioning of the ISP services provided by SkyNet Global are fully covered by them and that owners corporation carries no liabilities in that regard.
3. Confirm, with documentary evidence, the ISP business that ran in the complex for the last eight years did not affect our insurance premiums.
4. Confirm, with documentary evidence, that the owners corporation earned income from each registered customer that the SkyNet Global was supposed to pass and the amounts earned over the last eight years.
5. Confirm, with documentary evidence, the electrical power rating and calculate the usage for the SkyNet Global that the owners corporation actually paid for over the last eight years (benefiting directly a third-party company).
Thorough updates and completion of this project to remove the foreign equipment from the complex is required now.
f) Issue of insurance for the complex:
In the six-monthly balance sheet for FY 2013 that was published recently, it states that the insurance cost was $77,345.85, which was actually 58.77% higher than what we had paid in FY 2012 ($48,409.75).
The agenda for the AGM 2012 told owners that the increase was 57%, which was misleading and misconstrued . It is close to 3% higher than stated.
But, there is even worse discrepancy. In the web document, here is what is listed for the insurance. We paid $84,414.77 on 21 September 2012, a month before the AGM 2012. The owners were declined rights to know the full figure for the insurance.
If this difference between what was listed in the balance sheet was just the GST component (10%), then we should have paid $85,080.43 ($77,345.85 + 10%). The difference is not 9% either. It is actually a little bit above 9% and the Strata Manager and the EC have refused to provide any explanation in the past.
So, where are these figures coming from and how can they be justified? And why were owners told the incorrect percentage for rise in these costs when they were known one month before the AGM 2012?
The other questions in regards to our insurance are still outstanding for five months too (proof that no other insurer wanted to insure our complex, details of any possible fees paid to the broker, some items disappearing from the insurance in 2012, and so on).
INSURANCE DETAIL
Insurer Name: QBE INSURANCE GROUP LTD
Policy Number: 836665
Expiry Date: 22/09/2013
Start Date: 21/09/2012
Premium: 84,414.77
Premium Paid Date: 21/09/2012
Broker Name: GALLAGHER BROKING SERVICES
Risk Code
Description
Coverage Amount
BLDG Building
$99,815,352.00
CATAS
Catastrophe Insurance
$29,944,606.00
CONTS
Contents
$998,154.00
ESCAL
Escalation cost of temp accom
$1,497,230.00
EXTEN
EXTENDED COVER - RENT/TEMP
$4,491,691.00
FIDG
Fidelity Guarantee
$100,000.00
GOVAU
Government Audit Costs
$25,000.00
LEGEX
Legal Expenses
$50,000.00
LOR
Loss of Rent
$14,972,303.00
LOTOW
Lot Owners fixture/improvement
$250,000.00
OBL
Office Bearers Liability
$2,000,000.00
PAVW
Voluntary Workers Lump/Weekly
$0.00
PLIAB
Public Liability
$20,000,000.00
STORA
Cost of storage & evacuation
$1,497,230.00
WH&S
Workplace, Health
& Safety Bre
$100,000.00
Therefore, the Extraordinary General Meeting has lot of issues to deal with and cannot be rushed without the Strata Manager and the EC completing serious preparatory tasks.
I gave four month advance notice for the general meeting, so complaints about lack of time to organize it will not be allowed.