Yes, but are they obliged to notify you of the AGM? Is this in legislation? I have taken this up with one management company in similar circumstances. They were adamant that there is no legal requirement to notify apartment owners of the AGM. I couldn't find it anywhere in legislation that proved them wrong. That company was limited by guarantee without a share capital. If anybody can tell me otherwise (with source!) I would be one happy camper.Yes the Management Company are obliged to hold an Annual General Meeting and to supply you with an audited set of accounts.
Essentially as an owner of a property you are a shareholder,and they are obliged to let shareholders/owners know of agms/egms. Who are the directors of the company?
Yes, but are they obliged to notify you of the AGM? Is this in legislation? I have taken this up with one management company in similar circumstances. They were adamant that there is no legal requirement to notify apartment owners of the AGM. I couldn't find it anywhere in legislation that proved them wrong. That company was limited by guarantee without a share capital. If anybody can tell me otherwise (with source!) I would be one happy camper.
Each apartment owner is a member of the Management Co. I think you may be confused. Initially the Management Company is set up by the builder and when all work is finished, management is handed over the the owners at which time, they may keep the status quo or employ a different Management Co.. Until that time, the Management Co. appointed has a duty to notify all owners about anything to do with the property. It is not in their interest to keep the owners in the dark as they eventually have a vote as to whether this company is kept on!! I can't point to the legislation but what you were told is rubbish. Are you saying that owners hand over their cash each year to this company with no onus on them to report where it goes?
However the owners can gain control by voting off the directors. Of course they have to know when the AGM is happening.
And on what basis have they retained dierectorships-have they retined some units in the development?
jd
The oft-used catch is that the developers insert a clause in the contracts stating that they will run the management company until the last unit is sold. In principle, this isn't a terrible idea as it allows the developer to maintain the site while new owners are moving in. However, if the developer then opts to retain a few units, he can retain control of the management company indefinitely.But this doesn't necessarily mean that the owners have control of the company/development-as far as I am aware, developers have de facto control until they choose (or are taken to court) to hand the development over to the owners.
The developers are the directors. What you say about their obligation to notify owners/shareholders sounds right, but what authority are you quoting there?Essentially as an owner of a property you are a shareholder,and they are obliged to let shareholders/owners know of agms/egms. Who are the directors of the company?
The developers are the directors. What you say about their obligation to notify owners/shareholders sounds right, but what authority are you quoting there?
AFAIK, the management company is the legal owner of the common areas of an apartment complex, and the ground that the block is built on. When we buy an apartment, what we are buying is the right to occupy the cube of space that our apartment occupies. However, we also automatically own a share of the management company, so in that way we own an equal share of the common areas, stairs, lifts, roof, etc, so that we are responsible for payment of an equal share of the cost of maintaining it all. So, AFAIK, it can not happen that the management company is an entity entirely independent of the owners.Are you sure? Why would it be unusual for the management company to be an entity entirely independent of the apartment owners? Surely an agreement must be signed on occupation with the management co., setting out terms and conditions?
I know if I was building a block of apts I certainly would not consider it an obligation to make directors of property investors.
Ahem, therein lies the problem. The apartment owners have become shirty with the directors for the very reason that they held an AGM and adopted the accounts without giving the owners a chance to examine them, and only told them later what was in them. My interest in this is finding out if the adoption of accounts in this way invalidates them, hence my search for the relevant piece of legislation.Are you saying that owners hand over their cash each year to this company with no onus on them to report where it goes?