By the Paddocks Club team
Below are examples of two questions on the Paddocks Club discussion forum, to show you what is available to our Community members!
Validity of WhatsApp trustee decisions – i.e. Resolutions without meetings
Member’s question:
Hi Prof
A body corporate has just set up a WhatsApp group and have sent the managing agent an instruction by email (with a copy of the WhatsApp thread) to pay an invoice in accordance with the approval of the trustees in the thread. The WhatsApp thread contains phone numbers and not names etc…
They believe that this is a round robin approval of the trustees, now in writing as the thread has been printed. We do not want to, and in fact cannot read all the correspondence relating to each and every instruction we get.
Your view please:
– Is this a valid instruction to pay?
– The invoice is referred to in the instruction and the thread, but not signed.
Graham’s answer:
Dear member,
I suggest you tell the trustees to look carefully at Prescribed Management Rule 14(4). This describes how trustees can take resolutions without actually having to meet, but it is not “anything goes”. And it does not sound as if the procedure they followed complied with the requirements in this provision.
I agree that you cannot /should not take responsibility to read a part or all of an online discussion and try to figure out whether or not they have complied with the requirements for a valid resolution.
Here are the basics:
Someone, a trustee or the managing agent, must send a message to all the trustees. The message must set out the text of a proposed resolution and invite a positive response before a specified date. If the majority of the trustees agree to that particular text, without changes, and send a signed response confirming that agreement, the resolution is taken.
This could be a service you offer to client schemes, where you are the initiator and recipient of the trustee responses, so that you can see, for example, that they are signed.
If the trustees want to handle the admin of this process themselves, I suggest you change your management contract to confirm that you can rely on the chairperson or other trustees’ advice that the resolution has been properly taken in writing, otherwise you could be at risk.
Graham.
Only some sections have solar panels: How can we make sure only they pay?
Member’s question:
Good day
If only certain units in a fairly new complex have solar panels and their 10 year maintenance plan makes provision for the maintenance and repair of the solar panels can the maintenance reserve for that section of the 10 year maintenance plan be adjusted to be only for the owners with the solar panels.
Graham’s answer:
Dear member,
The normal rules will apply to who has to pay for what maintenance. The body corporate must maintain all the common property, and I assume these panels are common property.
I suggest you consider getting the scheme to make a rule that makes the solar panels subject to exclusive use rights in favour of the sections they serve. This will have the effect that the owners must re-imburse the body corporate for its costs in maintaining and replacing these panels. Once this rule is in place, the reserve fund budget can show anticipated income from these owners to offset the body corporate’s costs.
Article reference: Paddocks Press: Volume 14, Issue 04.
Graham Paddock and Ané de Klerk are available to answer questions on the Paddocks Club discussion forum for Community members. Get all your questions answered by joining Paddocks Club.
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Graham Paddock on Body Corporate Functions: Insurance
- Graham Paddock on Spending body corporate funds
- Graham Paddock on The Levy Clearance Certificate: The Body Corporate’s Cheap & Effective Weapon
- Graham Paddock on The benefits of online sectional title meetings
- Heinz Wiesner on The benefits of online sectional title meetings
Archives
- February 2025
- January 2025
- December 2024
- November 2024
- October 2024
- August 2024
- July 2024
- June 2024
- May 2024
- April 2024
- March 2024
- February 2024
- January 2024
- December 2023
- November 2023
- October 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- July 2023
- June 2023
- May 2023
- April 2023
- March 2023
- February 2023
- January 2023
- December 2022
- November 2022
- October 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- July 2022
- June 2022
- May 2022
- April 2022
- March 2022
- February 2022
- January 2022
- December 2021
- November 2021
- October 2021
- September 2021
- August 2021
- July 2021
- June 2021
- May 2021
- April 2021
- March 2021
- February 2021
- January 2021
- December 2020
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- February 2020
- January 2020
- December 2019
- November 2019
- October 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- July 2019
- June 2019
- May 2019
- April 2019
- March 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- December 2018
- November 2018
- October 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- February 2008
- February 2007
1 Comment.
Good day,
A recent decision by the Body Corporate has resulted in contributions to the reserve fund being based on a PQ other than that used to recover the administrative levy. This as resulted in a number of owners being negatively affected without giving consent. Managing Agent claims due to Developer not being liable for administrative levies, contributions to Reserve Fund must be amended to accommodate recovery from Developer.