View Pacific [2000] QBCCMCmr 305 (27 June 2000)

RA MeekREFERENCE: 0333-2000

ORDER OF AN ADJUDICATOR

MADE UNDER PART 10 OF CHAPTER 6

BODY CORPORATE AND COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT ACT 1997

Number of Scheme:	12064
Name of Scheme:	View Pacific
Address of Scheme:	5 View Avenue SURFERS PARADISE QLD 4217

TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to an application made under the abovementioned Act by the body corporate manager, on behalf of the body corporate committee


RA MeekI hereby order that the application for an order of an adjudicator authorising the committee of the body corporate to spend funds above the relevant limit for committee spending for this scheme, is approved.

I further order that the committee of the body corporate is authorised to spend funds up to a maximum of $6000 on repair windows by re-poprivit stays back to awning windows. $6000repair windows by re-poprivit stays back to awning windowsn two quotations
STATEMENT OF ADJUDICATOR’S REASONS FOR DECISION - REF 0333-2000

“View Pacific” CTS 12064

The applicant, Abdul Lateef Gundru, the body corporate manager on behalf of the committee, has sought an order of an adjudicator under the Body Corporate and Community Management Act 1997 (the Act) that the committee of the body corporate be authorised to spend in excess of its relevant limit for committee spending, on the basis that the spending is required to meet an emergency. Specifically, the order is sought to authorise the committee to spend funds up to a maximum of $6000 on the repair of windows by re-popriviting the stays back to awning windows.

Section 103(1) of the Body Corporate and Community Management (Standard Module) (the module) provides in part as follows -

The committee may only carry out a proposal involving spending above the relevant limit for committee spending for the scheme if ... an adjudicator is satisfied that the spending is required to meet an emergency and authorises it under an order made under the dispute resolution provisions.

The module defines the “relevant limit for committee spending” as an amount worked out by multiplying the number of lots included in the scheme by $100. Given that there are 34 lots in this scheme, then the relevant limit for committee spending is $3,400.00. The applicant seeks authorisation to expend up to a maximum of almost $6000.

In the application, the applicant states that –

The committee of the body corporate requests that it be granted emergency powers to authorise expenditure of $5820.00 to carry out the necessary repairs on the windows of the building. To date two windows have fallen down and could have caused substantial damage and injury. The insurance company has refused to accept any liability or pay for any damages as they consider it is a maintenance job.

Could you please authorise this expenditure as any delay could cause a serious injury for which the body corporate may not be covered.

In addition, the applicant has attached copies of two quotations. The first, from Southport Glass and Aluminium for $5820 and the second from Murphy Glass and Maintenance for $6160.

In the circumstances, I am satisfied, in accordance with section 103(1)(c) of the module, that the spending sought to be authorised is required to meet an emergency. I did however have significant reservations in coming to this conclusion. In particular, I agree with the insurance company assessment that the work required is maintenance. Given this, maintenance which should be foreseen is not usually considered appropriately the subject of an order for emergency expenditure.

However I note that in this instance, two windows have fallen and I accept that this situation does constitute a possible danger to persons, which might potentially involve the body corporate in significant litigation. Also, I note that the body corporate committee have obtained two quotes, so I am satisfied that the amount sought to be expended is comparable with a second quote obtained. $6000repair windows by re-poprivit stays back to awning windowsn two quotations