Some practices deter condo owners from participating in estate management

I refer to the letter “Impractical to force condo owners to attend AGMs” (May 10).

While I agree that it is impractical to force condominium owners to attend annual general meetings (AGMs), I disagree that the 10 to 15 per cent regular attendance witnessed at AGMs is due to the excellent job done by councils and managing agents (MAs). It seems more to do with the lack of publicity by MAs about the dates of AGMs.

The writer is correct in saying that important issues are decided at AGMs. He is also right in pointing out that it is wrong to say the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act (BMSMA) is inadequate for protecting the interests of subsidiary proprietors (SPs).

It then falls back on how the Act would be interpreted fairly to resolve issues and whether employees act professionally in their interpretation.

The AGM at my condominium is scheduled for May 31. As a concerned SP, I submitted a requisition motion for an ordinary resolution at the coming AGM.

Under the BMSMA, this requires 14 days’ written notice. My request was sent on May 9, which is more than 21 days’ notice. However, the strata residential manager rejected my request.

Publicity about AGM dates is meant to achieve good attendance. But, with such an attitude, how will it attract more SPs to attend AGMs?

This incident illustrates only one of many such practices by MAs and Management Corporation Strata Title councils, where matters are taken into their own hands, even though the BMSMA is meant to protect interests of SPs. This turns off SPs who may have a keen interest in how their estate is managed.