Any one has any questions on Strata Management Act 2013 and Strata title Act, I will try and pose it during the talk.

Questions must be received on/before 27 July 2015.

I will submit your question with some sugar coating

Anyway, my earlier thoughts:-



This post has been edited by aurora97: Jul 21 2015, 12:35 PM

law firm.

my company's property division.

I am from another division.

the talk given exclusively to our property division.

at the very least pose me a question rather than tell me you did not read the act. Anyway I suggest strongly that you read up, otherwise it’s going to be a very one-sided discussion and it will be very dull (as it is now).

1st question.
Can a proxy be part of the committee member?
No. (see item 8 of Schedule 2)

2nd question
Company (regardless whether multiple or single unit)
Yes. (see item 7(b) of Schedule 2)

3rd question
Wife (owner), husband proxy. (assuming wife only own 1 unit.)
No. (see item 7© of Schedule 2)

He passed the immediate family test BUT in order for a proxy to be nominated to committee, the wife must own two or more parcels.

On second thoughts, I would agree with you... with further clarifications to 7(b) and ©.

Proxy cannot be voted as committee member, only can vote on behalf owner, but not being voted.

This statement is true and supported by item 8 Schedule 2.


illustration
A is owner, A request B to attend as proxy, B may attend as a proxy to vote based on the instruction of A.

However….

There are also other recognized type of “proxies”…

A proxy for a company (see item 7(b) Schedule 2)
A proxy who is not an owner but is a immediate family member, who is an owner of 2 or more units.(see item 7© Schedule 2)



This post has been edited by aurora97: Jul 27 2015, 03:32 PM

No worries.

I will pose your question later. See what I can extract out of him.

Bummer all covering developer side of things.

Really can exercise the right of going in and selling fixture of the house ?

MC:
Sections 79(8)- sold by auction by the MC.
Sections 79(10) – deals with perishable goods. Sold immediately.


whats the proper procedure of exercising that ?

MC:

Commissioner = COB.

79(1) –
> sworn application made by member of the committee
>submit to commissioner
> commissioner to issue warrant of attachment.

79(2) –
> warrant of attachment to be executed by any member of the committee
> in the presence of the commissioner or his officer

79(3) –
> difficulties in enforcing the warrant?
> may request assistance from commissioner.
> commissioner will request assistance from police (not below the rank of inspector).

79(4) –
> force entry
> make inventory

79(5)
> got tenant in the property?
> no problem, tenant to pay rental monies to management corp directly to offset maintenance due by owner.
> tenant’s property will be attached until amount of maintenance is full paid.

79(6)
> (for the above matter)to issue receipt to tenant hahahaha….

P/S: same provisions in JMB also, see section 35.



my conclusion is, avoid attaching property and do it as last resort.

This post has been edited by aurora97: Jul 29 2015, 09:45 AM

Before I go into your question…

Section 15 of Schedule 2 states that ½ of the proprietors are eligible to vote. However if after 30 mins the quorum is still not met, whoever is in the meeting will form the quorum.

Next…

The Act itself recognize other voting methods such as:-

Special resolution (75%)
Comprehensive resolution (60%)

Now your question…

My view is, if the legislator had intended a unanimous vote to constitute (say 90%) they would have expressed it. In this case, whoever forms the quorum and everyone votes in favour of the resolution that will be called a “Unanimous Resolution”.

I think (again)…

The issue previously with Act 663, there is no specification of quorum for a meeting (AGM/EGM). Also there is no provision for postponement of meeting.

Nevertheless, good question.

Cherroy, I think he meant the casting of vote to appoint the new “management committee”.

If I re-call correctly, the proprietor will have to complete the proxy form. In the proxy form, it will state whether he is for/against a particular agenda to be tabled during AGM. The proxy will than vote based on that proxy form. As such, the power of the proxy is only limited to what is stated in the proxy form.

Now, the underlying rationale (I suspect) as to why proxy can’t vote for the new “management committee” is because they are not proprietors. If proxy voters are allowed to vote in new “management committee”, this action will encourage forged proxy forms and phantom voters (as my ex-chairman did).

I am just pulling rabbits out of the hat for the time being because I am new to this issue as well.

Now let me tell you why I have differing opinion from Cherroy and yourself. Why would I side with management.

Before that... need to clarify and you are right, sorry for the sloppy explanation there.

Proprietor in the Act is the parcel owner.
As for votes, there is two types, show of hand and by poll. (section 17(1) of Schedule 2 SMA)
Where there is an equality of votes, whether show of hands or by poll, the Chairman is entitled to cast a vote (section 17(5) of Schedule 2 SMA).

Now back to the topic...

As we all know, before the AGM/EGM commence, the agenda will be published in notice board or circulated to proprietors. Attached together with the agenda is a proxy form.

Now when you look into the proxy form, it will most likely address all the agendas except for appointment of new committee members, reason being at that early point in stage it is not possible to know who has been nominated as a committee member. Hence, that subject matter is discussed during the AGM itself.

For obvious reasons, the proxy derives his power from the proxy form. It will therefore be safe for me to say that the parameters of action of a proxy is subject to the content of the proxy form dictated by the Proprietor.

Besides, the committee members are something that is "personal" to proprietors and third parties (example where such powers are not accorded in a proxy form) should not be allowed to participate in such voting for fear that the voting process may be skewed or tempered with.

unfortunately, the Act doesn't elaborate further on proxy (i.e. voting of committee members), if the Act is silent, we will need to refer back to the proxy form. If the proxy form is silent as well, then your management is correct in disallowing your sister (as proxy) to vote.

You don’t have to buy my explanation.

Am in this discussion because my guess is as good as yours, I am new to the SMA as well and my participation is intended to further my understanding of the SMA.

Also, I am calling my “theory” based on what I can see in the SMA. If you find something that is different, please feel free to share.

Let’s stick to your original question, whether the SMA has loopholes or otherwise, whether technology etc…, like it or not SMA is here to stay and it’s the best you got.

I believe your referring to Gated and Guarded Developments, although recent amendments to the Strata Title Act and SMA cater to G&G, I have no coverage on this area. Am a condo warrior at heart.

In any case I agree with Cherroy’s point. Common area (since G&G now fall under strata title act/SMA) is a very broad based definition, to put things into perspective… aside from parcels owned by purchaser, everything else is common property.

noted.

Even more out of topic.... hahaha... no coverage on your topic.

Dragging another dead rabbit out of my hat...

Look at your scenario, the only thing i can't think of under the SMA that will help you is basically to set up subsidiary JMB/MCs (this feature wasn't available in Act 663).

I gather it will work out something like this:

Parent JMB/MC.
Subsidiary A
Sub B
Sub C
Sub D
etc...

Income will be collected by parent company, whereas all the subsidiaries will calculate the cost of maintaining those facilities in their strata scheme and bill it back to the parent JMB/MC.

P/s: oh common areas/property = shared amenities.

This post has been edited by aurora97: Aug 13 2015, 06:43 PM

I think your may have foretold of things that will come, JMB will soon be a museum artifact. Not an expert in Strata Title Act...

If i recall correctly... this is what I have gathered....

Under section 8A Strata Title Act, the developer is required to apply for "certificate of proposed strata plan" and thereafter apply for subdivision within one month from the date of issuance of certificate of proposed strata plan.

so come VP, definitely you (or your bank lel) will get Strata Title, if i am not mistaken according to section 39 Strata Title Act, once registered in the strata register, the management comp will need to be formed.

condominium's don't face the problems you face because all the common areas/properties are located within the development plan.

Your case is like scattered across different strata titles, which poses a separate and unique issue just like Mix Development projects.

These are all developer created problems. Trying to lump everything all in and make a quick sale.

As for legal framework, please refer to section 63 of the SMA for subsidiary Management Company. The tools are there, only problem is how to use it proper.