Assessment Area Governance and Oversight Assessment Last Assessed: 2nd Feb 2022 at 10:24 am Responsible Party: Detailed Assessment - Governance and Oversight Detailed Assessment - Governance and Oversight Is the Community Scheme a going concern at all times? * Yes, consistently so. Yes largely, but there have been times where deficits had to be funded. No, not really. The Body or Association are largely in survival mode. No. Consistently technically insolvent and/or reliant on bridging loans and/or special levies. Have background checks been undertaken to establish if all trustees/directors or office bearers are fit and proper for office/purpose and should not be disqualified e.g. due to sequestration or criminal record/prosecution? * Yes - part of our process Yes to a degree - unfortunately this is not always done/we rely on third parties to do this for us No Do the Trustees/Directors/Estate Management/Office Bearers have the required understanding of the Community Scheme, its assets, obligations, revenue, expenses, management dynamics and the prevailing regulatory environment? * Yes – required skills matched with solid induction/familiarisation and training programme in place Yes - to a large degree/mentoring from Trustees/Directors/some training Yes - to some degree/some have limited knowledge/familiarisation is provided No, not really - very limited to non-existent knowledge/familiarisation while in the role No, not at all – is largely a baptism of fire for everyone Don't know/Can't establish Do the Trustees/Directors/Office Bearers have the required experience and skill set for their roles and are they fit for purpose? * Yes - key element of consideration/good skill set and experience Yes - to a large degree Yes - to some degree/very limited experience No, not really - very limited skills base and experience No, not at all Don't know/Can't establish or tell Are the Trustees/Directors fully committed too, and are they spending the required and necessary time on the operational and business affairs of the Community Scheme to ensure timeous and conscientious handling of issues? * Yes - consistent high level of proactive involvement and commitment Yes to a large degree - active involvement but could be improved Yes to some extent - insufficient time is however being spent on issues No, not really - inconsistent involvement/low level of commitment No, not at all - very poor level of involvement/abdication of roles and responsibilities Do the Trustees/Directors act in the best interests of the Community Scheme, in good faith, without bias, not in their personal interest, not negligently or outside their powers at all times? * Yes Most of the time Difficult to know/ascertain No Are Trustees/Directors/Estate Management - their employees and staff/Developers/Operators/ and Managing Agents are required to provide regular written/disclose any financial interest or potential conflicts of interest in arrangements, contracts or supply agreements involving the Community Scheme? * Yes - very strict controls are in place around this which extend to employees/service providers. These are also required to be recorded and minuted at every meeting Yes to a large degree - procurement policies are in place and we do our best to control the area of any conflict Yes - however on occasions we are forced to use the services of connected/preferred parties No not really - some controls are in place but these are often bypassed No, not at all - not considered/monitored at all Does the Trustee/Directors body have a representative demographic mix -age/sex/race? * Yes - very representative/requirement of the Community Scheme Yes - to some extent Yes - but very limited/not sustainable/not practical No, not really - we haven't really considered this/select from available resources No, not at all - we have seen this as not important/not a consideration Don't know/Can't establish How stable and committed is the Trustee/Director/Estate Management/Office Bearer body? * Yes, very stable - long serving and hard-working/dedicated/go the extra mile Yes pretty good - is room for more involvement Fairly stable - need more stability and greater commitment from some Unstable - we battle to get Trustees/Directors and are forced to co-opt/lack of commitment and required involvement from many No, not at all - regular and high turnover/resignation of Trustees/Directors with positions often unfilled/very low commitment and involvement Don't know/Can't establish Does the Community Scheme have a clear formal constitution where required and which is strictly enforced and adhered to? * Yes - reviewed and updated regularly, strictly formalised among members and always adhered to. Yes to a degree - while there is a constitution in place, this is not always adhered to/followed. No, not really. This is obsolete/dated/not followed. Broad buy-in/acceptance not there. No not at all. Totally lacking Not applicable/not required Is there a turnover/change/rotation in the Trustee/Director body as recommended in the Companies Act and/or prevailing regulations/the prevailing constitution/best practice? * Yes, we have entrenched this requirement/the retirement of Directors/Trustees as part of our constitution/laid down rules/good governance/best practice. Yes, to a large degree - we endeavour to ensure this is adhered to/try and enforce this aspect. No, not really. We have been forced to allow extended terms of Trustees/Directors due to a lack of appropriate candidates. No- we battle to get new Directors/Trustees and are forced to allow/accept the status quo by default. No, not at all - we are totally out of line here. Is there a focus on ensuring continuity in the Community Scheme in respect of Trustees/Directors, levies, financial accounts, communication, AGM's, rules, day to day administration and operations? * Yes, business continuity is a key focus. Yes, but only certain areas have been considered. Yes to a limited extent. No, not really. No, not at all - this has received no focus or attention and we are very vulnerable here. Was a chairperson of the Community Scheme formally elected at the meeting of the Trustees? * Yes - formally elected Yes to a degree - co-opted representative No - totally dysfunctional/unconstitutionally elected Have you established the potential liability of Trustees and/or Directors? * Yes No, not really/haven't concerned ourselves No - haven't considered this Have the Directors/Trustees put the required indemnity insurance in place for possible conduct and omission on their part? * Yes Yes, but limited insurance is held. Not sure/ can't establish No - haven't considered this/not held Are Trustee/Directors meetings being held with at least two Trustees/Directors being present? * Yes- always Yes- normally Don’t know/can’t establish historical attendance Not always Who is providing the secretarial services to the Community Scheme and are these professional and procedurally correct? * Yes - these are undertaken by either the Trustees/Directors/Managing Agents/Developers/Operators. Meetings are well organised, minutes are accurate, signed off by Trustees/Directors and the required procedures and notices are well managed. Yes. This is handled by the Managing Agents/Developers/Operators and/or Trustees/Directors but could be improved. Yes to some degree. This is handled by the Managing Agents/Develoers/Operators and/or Trustees/Directors. Minutes are not always accurate, procedures are not always followed and notices are sometimes incomplete/go out late. No one in particular/no clear responsibility resulting in things falling between the cracks. Minutes are not accurate and procedures around notices often don't comply with the act. This area is largely managed by the Trustees/Directors and is very poorly done. Very limited minutes and/or notices are produced. No one/this area is not being attended to at all. Does the Community Scheme have an environmental policy and conservation focus e.g. use of indigenous plants, removal of alien species, care of fauna and flora, protection of natural areas, habitat protection, wetland preservation, water-wise focus etc * Yes - this forms an integral part of the Community Scheme's focus. Yes - to some degree. Yes - to a degree - we need to do much more. No, not really - we are giving lip service to this aspect. No, not at all. How well and effectively do the Trustees/Directors/Estate Management and/or Managing Agents/Developers/Operators and/or third parties communicate with the Community Scheme members? * We are very responsive and general communication is done on an on-going basis in a very transparent and focused basis This is done fairly well but responsiveness could improve To a degree - communications are not consistent and can improve Not really very well at all - we are not very responsive or transparent Very poorly/non-existent Do owners, lessees, shareholders, tenants largely comply with, accept and live with the house/conduct rules and regulations e.g. safety protocols, movement restrictions, fire drills, speeding controls, noise levels, use of private generators, overcrowding, washing restrictions, use of balconies, water usage, visitor restrictions, safety and security measures, social behaviour, disaster management restrictions, servant restrictions, access controls, alteration approvals, colour/aesthetic conformity, pet restrictions/limitations, illicit activities, parking restrictions, payment of fines etc? * Yes. These are mostly welcomed and supported and there is high level of acceptance and compliance. Yes to a large degree. Yes to some degree but there is some resistance and non-adherence to certain rules/regulations No not really. We experience lots of resistance and non-compliance. No, not at all. We experience endless non-adherence and non-compliance. Does the Community Scheme have a formalised internal dispute resolution structure and process in place to deal with owner/tenant/neighbour problems, conflicts and disputes? * Yes. We have a formal structure in place to deal with these issues to reduce/eliminate legal and CSOS processes. Yes to a large degree. The structure is in place but is not always used. Yes to some degree but there is resistance to/scepticism around its use/role. No not really. The structure has fallen into disuse/is not really being used as intended. No, not at all. We do not have a formalised internal dispute structure in place. Do the Trustees/Directors/Managing Agents/Estate Management of the Community Scheme use legal and other laid down required processes/procedures to ensure compliance with conduct rules and/or required approvals e.g. follow CSOS processes where required, laying of criminal charges where applicable, use disciplinary measures such as formal warnings followed by fines, imposition of fines to owners of transgressing tenants, enforcement of expulsion of transgressing tenants, clamping of wheels, or make use other measures to punish undesirable behaviour or enforce the desired behaviour of owners/tenants/lessees/residents/visitors? * Yes - strictly and quickly enforced on a consistent basis with the use of lawyers where necessary. We adopt a zero tolerance to non-adherence. Yes largely - enforced but could be improved/more pro-activity and harsher measures taken. Yes - but selectively and inconsistent/stronger and quicker actions needed. Yes to some degree - imposed on an ad-hoc basis/token action taken. Laid down procedures not followed. Not really - largely ignored and not formally enforced. No - not at all/totally ineffectively dealt with/action hardly ever taken. Do owners/shareholders/lessees get the required approval and consent from the Trustees/Directors/Estate Management before undertaking any building operations or the undertaking of alterations or improvements to their properties/units e.g. kitchen and bathroom revamps, external doors/windows, aircon units, gas installations, deployment of generators/solar panels or drilling of boreholes/deploying water tanks, and do these have the required compliance certificates, comply with standards and processes? * Yes - there is high compliance with and acceptance of the requirements and approval process. We are very consistent in our approach and stance. Yes to a large degree. There are minimal objections/non-adherence. Yes to some degree but there is continual resistance and attempts at non-compliance. No not really. We experience lots of resistance and non-compliance and struggle to enforce our requirements. No, we struggle to get owners to seek prior approval/get compliance certificates and often find ourselves having to get structures removed/work re-done. No, not at all. We are faced with continuous non-compliance with approvals and standards. Rectification is costing the Community Scheme. Are the Trustees/Directors/Estate Management consistent and transparent in their approval and ruling processes and do they personally adhere to rules and decision-making processes and not pursue private agendas? * Yes - We are very objective, consistent and transparent in our approach and stance. Private agendas are not tolerated. Yes to a large degree. While we try to be objective and consistent, there have been odd occassions where personal agendas have been pursued/inconsistent decisions were made. Yes to some degree . There have been occasions where our decisions have been inconsistent and requirements overlooked. No not really. We have experienced a number of instances of inconsistency and/or Trustees/Directors not themselves complying with rules and approvals. No, not at all. There is no consistency in approvals and rulings along with many private agendas. Do the Trustees/Directors/Managing Agents control the practices or activities which are undertaken from/in the common property or from units or dwellings in the Community Scheme e.g. sporting/recreational activities, trading, the conducting of active commercial business, Air bnb, short term rentals, illicit activities, clubs, day care etc.? * No, not at all - we have lost complete control over activities being conducted and are now faced with all sorts of issues arising from this. No, not really – all activities have to be approved by the Trustees/Directors/Developers/Operators but we are often not approached/find ourselves turning a blind eye to these. Yes to a large degree – the Trustees/Directors/Developers/Operators are very active in this area of control but some exceptions have been made. Yes - the conducting of any activities of a commercial nature, or those that might impact on the privacy of residents or which might increase the security risk in the Community Scheme are strictly disallowed and quickly stopped/closed down. Are the conduct/house rules, approval processes and/or constitution reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they are enforceable, current, relevant and that they comply and align with current regulations and legislation? * Yes - this is done as part of our on-going governance in conjunction with our attorneys Yes to some degree but we are not consistent. No - not being attended to or done at all. No phase 2 rules in place to review. Do the Trustees/Directors/Estate Management/Managing Agents/Developer/Operators resolve owner/member/lessee issues and those facing the Community Scheme diligently, quickly, transparently, fairly and objectively? * Yes - issues are dealt with transparently, fairly, quickly, objectively and in the best interests of owners and interested parties. Responses are always provided in writing. Yes to a large extent - financial affairs are transparent and the conduct and house rules are consistently applied. Yes to some extent - responses and actions are however not consistent. No. There is a complete lack of transparency and issues and complaints are largely left unresolved and not dealt with. There is generally no response from Trustees/Directors/Estate Management/Managing Agents/Developers/Operators and issues often escalate into confrontation and/or into legal action. Before the Trustees/Directors/Estate Management/Developers/Operators enter into any projects, contracts or supply/service agreements do they assess the potential impact on the Community Scheme e.g. funding and resourcing requirements, budget availability, ability to support and maintain, risks involved, the ability of service providers to perform as required, cash flow implications, impact on levies? * Yes – this forms an integral part of informed decision making. Yes to a large degree. Yes to some degree but the process is very limited. No, not really – there is no formal structured approach to these aspects and elements. No structured process is followed This is left entirely up to the Managing Agents/Developers/Operators. Does the Community Scheme hold strategic assets or have alternate or potential income sources e.g. surplus common area land, unsold garage units/parking bays, communal storage areas, short term lettable accommodation, rentable/leasable parking, frail care units, under-utilised communal facilities like bars/kitchens/sport facilities, recyclable materials, desalination plant, power generation or water/energy resources that could be realised/monetised if needed? * Yes - we have some material assets/resources that could be utilised/are already being utilised to derive income Yes - but these are fairly limited We have not considered this aspect/they would require a significant outlay to make viable No - we have no opportunities that could be exploited here Upside of anything is for the Developer only Do the Directors/Trustees/Estate Management of the Community Scheme review or consider possible alternative sources of revenue or income or alternative billing models to ensure sustainability? * Yes - this forms a key element of strategic thinking and planning To a limited degree We have not really considered this No not at all Not relevant to us Are there rules governing the right to sell properties in the Community Scheme e.g. subject to qualifying criteria, subject to approval of trustees/directors, subject to operators having first option, subject to conditions of purchase etc? * Yes - very strict and enforced. Yes to a degree but not always enforced/adhered to/complied with/often bypassed. Subject to guidelines only. No - none at all. Do the title deeds of properties in the Cluster and/or Home-Owners Association include conditions that owners must seek the consent of the Trustees/Directors before selling? * Yes - this is done as part of our on-going good governance to ensure that levies and/or fees are up to date and that new owner will be able to pay these. Yes to some degree but we are not consistent in the application of this. No - not included in title deeds or enforced. Are there limitations around the operations of letting and estate agents in the Community Scheme? * Yes - only accredited agents are allowed to operate as per contractual arrangements. and subject to rules governing property sales. Yes to a degree - agents are allowed to operate subject to certain conditions and familiarisation with House Rules. Yes - we have restrictions and limitations but these are not enforced and/or adhered to by owners. No - owners are allowed to use any agents they wish. This is handled totally in-house by dedicated representatives/employees of the Community Scheme/Developer/Operator subject to rules governing property sales. Do letting/rental agents comply with the protocols, disciplines and processes set down by the Trustees/Directors/Managing Agents/Community Scheme as it relates to the disciplining of tenants, compliance by tenants with conduct rules, maintenance/repair reporting, insurance claims, damage to common property, sub letting, provision of tenant details, provision of lease/rental agreements, communication with tenants etc? * Yes - we have very good relationships with letting agents and receive great co-operation and compliance with our required processes and controls. Yes to a large degree - we receive good co-operation from the majority of letting agents. Yes - we have very mixed relationships with letting agents and receive mixed co-operation. Not really. We really struggle to get compliance with our controls and processes and co-operation from letting agents. No. We have continuous issue with nearly all the letting agents and have a number of outstanding issues. Not at all. Our situation with letting agents not complying is placing considerable burden on the Community Scheme and is having financial implications. Does the Community Scheme/Managing Agent/Estate Management/ Developer/ Operator terminate or reduce the provision of any service (i.e. water, electricity or gas) to defaulting owners/tenants of units or sections in contravention of the prevailing law? * No - we are fully compliant with the law, despite the impact No to a large extent - we are largely compliant but have had to make exceptions Yes - to some degree as it is the only way we have been able to resolve the non payment of services Yes - we actively use this in order to resolve issues of non payment/arrears To what extent would the Community Scheme be impacted by a major deterioration in the socio-economic environment e.g. levy collections, level of bad debts, rentability of units, use of facilities, sale of units, cash resources, balance sheet, ability to maintain the assets of the complex/property? * Not at all. Marginal impact on the payment of levies. Modest impact on the payment/affordability of levies with an increase in arrears/lower usage of facilities Major impact on the use of facilities, increase in levies arrears, increased bad debts, lower occupancy of units and an impact on the value of the units/assets/and the ability to maintain the Community Scheme assets. Massive impact on the use of facilities, arrears levies, increase in bad debts, depletion of cash resources/reserves, weakened balance sheet, lower occupancy of units, decrease in the value of assets/and the ability to maintain the Community Scheme assets. If you are human, leave this field blank. Submit