This was emailed to all owners on 14/8/2924 for which I had email address.
Letting all owners no that the committee of Algester Gardens spent $11,000 more on insurance than it needed to. And even though they have the opportunity to reverse that, they have chosen not to do so. In that respect expect your levies to substantially increase, unnecessarily.
After receiving a email about the committee voting to spend $43,980.00 for insurance, I contacted a insurance broker I have used on another body corporate that I am involved with and asked them to quote for the insurance for Algester Gardens.
That quote was for $32,297.01 which is $11,683 cheaper for exactly the same cover and same conditions than the one that the committee accepted.
Even though the committee had aleady voted to accept the $43,980, at that time, the old policy had not expired, so I emailed the Secretary in 23/06/24 strongly suggesting they contact the broker that I had found, with the $11,000 less expensive insurance.
As I did not get a reply, and the deadline for the insurance renewal was getting closer, 30/6/24, I emailed another member of the committee to make sure the Secretary was still the Secretary. I was told he was.
On the 11/7/24 I emailed the committee asking:
“Did the committee take out the insurance that I suggested in emails of 21/06/24 that was about $11,000 less expensive than that the committee accepted?
If not why not?”
The reply I got was:
“Your letter and questions will be addressed at other matters along with insurance question when committee discuss it.”
They Stonewalled me. But I now no, they did not do what I suggested, and ther reason that the insurance had already been paid is invalid because, at the time the old policy had not expired. Additionally most insurance policies have a 21 day cooling off period. They did not to use that. See further below.
Below is part of an email I sent to the secretary in 2020 that highlighted multiple mistakes in previous emails from him and me trying to establish if correspondence was being authorised by the committee.
The secretaries statement
“Insurance: The premium for our insurance would be no different if we the committee approached the insurance company privately”
My reply
WRONG. you don't know unless you actually ask. I did for another body corporate and found I could get a less expensive policy.
This has now proven to be, substantially,so.
It is also quite possible that previous years insurance could have been far less expensive.
In previous correspondence with the Secretary he said that the committee took advice from the management companies and I pointed out that other than the contract that the body corporate has with the current and previous management companies does not include advise, any advise that they would give, would be to ther financial advantage. In the case of insurance, as they earn a revealed commission from the broker, it is to the management companies advantage to have the insurance premiums as high as possible.
That is only one reason that the committee should not be taking advise from Eagle Body Corporate.
As has now been partly revealed in the latest committee minutes (the amount was not revealed), even though each owner would have about $243 less in annual levies the committee, outside of a meeting have decided NOT to take the $11,683 less expensive insurance, as they are still taking advise from the Management company.
Of course the management company are going to suggest anything that would be to ther advantage. They get, a revealed, commission of at least 10% on the $43,980.00 insurance.
The committee, in not changing to the $11,683 less expensive insurance, are not working in best interests of all owners so are in contravention of the code of conduct of committee members.
I ask the committee to immediately reverse ther decision to not change to the $11,683 less expensive insurance?
The minutes of the committee meeting of 16/7/2024 are incorrect.
They in part they state:
“The Committee contacted Eagle to find out why there was such a substantial difference in premiums, taking into consideration the insurance company quoting for Mr. Greig had quoted for Algester Gardens at a much higher premium to our current insurers.”
The word, higher, should be, lower.
Please correct that and reissue the minutes to all that recipe them.
This is not the first time ther have been mistakes in committee documents, that could have significant financial ramifications for ALL owners
I no that the Chairperson is extremely diligent in insuring written documentation is correct, such that I assume that the secretary generated documents are not being vetted by all the committee before they are distribured.
Can the committee please confirm or deny that? If confirmed can the committee please take corrective action?
The minutes of the committee meeting of 16/7/2024 stated:
“The Committee discussed the quotes received for roadway resurfacing and agreed this will be a large capital expenditure and needs to be budgeted for to save having to apply a special levy on owners when roadworks become even more urgent.”
It is not something that needs to be budgeted for in the future, it WAS budgeted for in the past via the sinking fund forecast. But the committees choice to completely ignore the sinking fund forecast when setting previous sinking fund levies.
If it were not for me, bring up the issue of the short fall of over $200,000 in the sinking fund balance, the committee would not be doing anything about it.
I feel that the committees have been ignorant of ther responsibilities and are now trying to cover it up.
Simply stating that the sinking fund levies will have to be progressivly increased, without indicating exactly when and by approximatly how much, does not give owners any insight as to the extent of the existing serious financial problem.
Suggesting that the sinking levies can be increased and then later reduced is naive. The existing evidence indicates that the committee are not aware of how to financially operate a body corporate. I am concerned that the committee will approach the management company for advise, and accept it without due diligence and end up in a worse financial situation, as has happened with the insurance.
To head off this occuring, I request that a copy of the the present sinking forcast be sent to all owners together with the dollor value plan of how the committee intends to get to the situation of being able to resurface the common property and all the other capital expenses in the sinking fund forecast and that be done within the next 2 weeks?
I used to be the treasurer of the committee but resigned because other committee members were not doing what was legislatively required by a committee. Of which one item, was not setting the sinking fund levies to achieve the sinking fund objectives
Hence I will not be attending any committee meeting, as I am not a committee member and have no obligational or responsibility to do so.
However regardless of what the committees may write that does not give them the excuse to not answer the questions I have asked or any owner asks.
Therefore I expect an answer to all the questions I have asked in this email.
Geoff Greig Owner of Unit 35