I EMPATHISE with Mr Paul Chan Poh Hoi ('Doubts about foolproof condo management'; ST, Sept 11) and would like to offer my two cents' worth.
Indeed, it is heartening to see more voluntary self-regulation by professional bodies in the property management industry, and it is timely that the industry, with agencies like the Building and Construction Authority and Spring Singapore, is taking steps to further improve standards in clearer terms.
With regard to the point that the decision to terminate the services of the managing agent (MA) rests solely with the current management corporation (MC) after the annual general meeting, my understanding is different.
Section 66 of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act 2004 clearly outlines the circumstance in which an MA may be appointed, namely, by the MC through ordinary resolution in a general meeting or by the council of the MC without a general meeting if duly authorised to do so by the subsidiary proprietors at the last general meeting of the MC.
The Act puts in a democratic process for the subsidiary proprietors or collective owners to decide the mode in which the MA is to be appointed. Whichever way is adopted, the majority wishes prevail at the duly convened general meeting.
Dissatisfied owners, if any, can also influence the decision to appoint an MA through the same democratic process by attending the AGM of the MC to make themselves heard by moving a resolution that the MA is appointed at a general meeting and not authorise the MC to do so. Again, a vote can be taken and the majority decision will prevail.
While Section 66(2) (a) of the Act allows appointment of an MA for a three-year term, Clause 1(3) (c) of the First Schedule of the same Act states that: '...every notice for an annual general meeting of an MC shall...include a motion for the termination of any managing agent or for the continuation of the managing agent for the next ensuing financial year.'
One interprets that the security of tenure of a three-year term of an MA is as good as none at all because within the same Act, it is mandatory to put in a motion for termination or continuation on a yearly basis.
My view is that condo owners and professional MAs should work as partners with common goals and objectives for the collective betterment of the condo and not as adversaries.
No one will be beholden to anyone if both owners and MAs act professionally. Sometimes it is a problem with the MA but sometimes, it is a problem with the owners. It is more fruitful to look at the issues and resolve any differences in an objective, amicable and professional manner.
Wong Yew Heng
