Why are there no rules when it comes to enforcing consumer protection for WA apartment owners?
It can’t be that hard.
If you buy any other product and it’s faulty, you have the right to have it exchanged, repaired or fixed to a serviceable standard at no cost to you as the consumer. Or you get a refund.
But when it comes to apartments, more WA buyers are discovering an extremely inconvenient and costly truth.
Where there are rules, they appear to be completely unenforceable.
Australian Apartment Advocacy wants buyers to get the product they paid for. It’s no secret that we do not believe quality controls are being enforced in the development and building of some WA apartments.
Worse, despite changes to the WA Strata Act in 2020, the long-term outlook for apartment owners stuck with rogue body corporate or strata companies is frustratingly bleak. Revamped rules are an improvement.
But what is the point of rules if it’s virtually impossible to get them enforced?
A year ago, I was approached by a group of frustrated Leederville apartment owners. The strata manager (Cosmic Realty) had not held the mandatory Annual General Meeting for two years.
AAA succeeded in calling an annual meeting by rallying the apartment owners and five were successfully elected, of the seven seats on the council of owners.
However, a rather grim picture emerged during the meeting. Each of the businesses engaged for cleaning, landscaping, repairs and fixing defects were owned by the developer. The strata manager had been appointed by the developer and the developer, who still owned 40 per cent of the apartments, remained on the council of owners.
It was agreed that renewal of the strata manager’s contract, which had lapsed, would be be dealt with at the next month’s council of owners meeting.
At that subsequent meeting, not attended by the developer, the council of owners decided to terminate the strata manager’s contract.
It should have ended there but the strata manager complained to the developer, who took it on himself to sign a two-year contract with the strata manager, that the council of owners had voted to terminate (which is in breach of the Act). The developer held another EGM with the strata manager, removed the newly appointed councillors and reinstated the former three person council of owners, the developer and the owners of the two commercial lots.
The deposed council of owners residents took action at SAT and the apartment owners stopped paying levies in protest.
The first four-hour SAT meeting was presented with evidence of 30 examples of breaches by the strata management company. SAT was asked to dismiss the strata company but alas there was no resolution.
There were two further SAT meetings of the same duration and yet no order made to rescind the contract.
In the end, the resident councillors approached their preferred strata company who negotiated to buy the strata management contract and have the business transferred.
Obviously if the apartment owners knew they would have to wait a year and endure three SAT meetings with no definitive resolution, they would have approached the new strata managers there and then.
My question is: How is it possible that SAT does not have the ability or desire to enforce the Strata Act?
In the middle of last year AAA wrote to Landgate, REIWA, the Minister for Planning John Carey and the Minister for Commerce Sue Ellery about this issue. Not one of them responded.
The State Government needs to provide robust consumer protection for apartment owners.
Rogue operators should be held to account and the mechanism to resolve disputes should be effective, transparent and timely. This is the least consumer protection that apartment owners deserve.
Samantha Reece is AAA director and a passionate driver of change.
Comments