Question: How are votes counted at an extraordinary meeting with electronic voting and pre-voting before an EGM?
How are votes counted at an extraordinary meeting with electronic voting and pre-voting before an EGM? The BCCM explanatory note mentions counting votes for amending motions but not counting votes on the amended motion. Those who precast their vote before the meeting are deemed to vote against the amendment. But, if an amended motion is subsequently passed, how are the pre-votes counted? Are they discarded because now, it’s a different motion?
Answer: The voter who has already cast a vote is counted against both the motion to amend and the amended motion.
The legislation does address this circumstance.
The relevant Section 115 Amendment of motions at general meetings provides:
-
In counting the votes cast in favour of and against a motion to amend a motion, or an amended motion, a person who is not present at the meeting personally or by proxy, but would, if present, have the right to vote—
- if the person has not cast a hard copy or electronic vote on the motion in its original form—must not be counted as voting in favour of or against the motion; or
- if the person has cast a hard copy or electronic vote on the motion in its original form—must be counted as voting against the motion.
I have emphasised the relevant parts above.
The voter who has already cast a vote is counted against both the motion to amend and the amended motion.
This post appears in the May 2025 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Todd Garsden
Mahoneys
E: tgarsden@mahoneys.com.au
P: 07 3007 3753
Can an owner request to audit the details of voting, such as who participated and how they voted, for ordinary resolutions, special resolutions, or even secret ballots at a later date? Are these details considered public body corporate records?
Hi Jason
The following response has been provided by Chris Irons, Strata Solve:
Generally speaking, yes, those things would be a body corporate record. I say ‘generally’ because it’s so hard to be black and white about this sort of thing.
I am not sure what you mean by ‘audit’. I assume you have some concerns about how a vote has taken place or was counted and if so then you can challenge the outcomes of the vote in the Commissioner’s Office. You should have some solid, objective evidence in mind (an assumption, vibe or feeling wouldn’t be enough) before you embark on such a process though.
Perhaps you might like to expand a bit on the above and then come back to us to see if we could expand further as well.
This is general information only and not legal advice.
Are there any limits on what records held by the BCM can be accessed by a lot owner?
Hi Michael
We have a list of Q&As on this topic here:
QLD: Q&A Can I Access Body Corporate Records?
Plus, an article from the Commissioner’s Office here:
QLD: FAQ – Accessing body corporate records
We hope that assists with your question.
A secret ballot for committee nominations was sent with a wrong buildings returning officer envelooes by the strata managementcompany.
We are not sure how many owners returned the ballots in the wrong buildings envelopes without even noticing that the return envelope was not for out building
Is the whole AGM invalid.
Hi ALANA
Holly Dune, Mahoneys has responded to your question in the above article.
Re lobbying by the RUM against an owner (Lookup#581 2022 June 29)
For my money, the issue is whether the RUM succeeded in stopping you from getting onto the Cmttee despite all of your efforts to help the community. This says more about your co-owners than the RUM. Was it Winston Churchill who said “The strongest argument against democracy is a 5 minute conversation with the average voter”?
Reminds me of another quote (this time by Denzell Washington in ‘Roman J Israel Esq’)… “I am tired of doing the impossible for the ungrateful.”
We have a completely enclosed indoor spa and sauna facility (built in 1995) on the underground car park level within our QLD complex which is completely unmonitored and as a result of Covid and abuse by various tenants proposed that at the AGM a motion be introduced that the power be disconnected to both facilites at the AGM due to the health situation and until it is resolved.
Prior to our AGM and presentation of our motion our Chairman of the Body Corporate Committee has since sent a Circular to all Owners with a directive to all owners that “we have formed a view that the power should not be disconnected and accordingly the Committee will be voting against the motion and is recommending to all unit holders to do the same”.
The recommendation contains no reference to any health worries or Body Corporate responsibilties but rather that is is regarded as an asset to the complex and does receive wide use and is occasionally subject to abuse by tenants.
Your comments on the Chairman’s Circular to Owners on this matter would be appreciated
what is the procces to taking action on a chairman who has intentionally given a false vote count to benefit his intensions to win a EGM decision on a owner. and he also has the secutary position and treasure position aswell.
can the motion passed be stopped since he has tampered with the vote count and can be clearly proven by the owners who voted by sending there voting papers through by email which shows there vote.
We are a Standard Module Scheme of only 4 lots with unequal contribution entitlements.
We held our AGM 3 days ago.
A motion to appoint a Body Corporate Manager was submitted by a lot owner prior to the voting papers being distributed. The owner also forwarded 2 proposals from Body Corporate Managers which were attached to the voting papers.
This Motion was the last item on the agenda as we had received 2 nominations for Executive Committee Positions and we also called for further nominations from the floor at the meeting. A Committee was not formed.
A motion to change to a Small Scheme Module with Form 19 and associated costs was also an agenda item.
This was voted 2 for and 2 against the motion. A poll was not called for as the owner who lodged the motion to appoint the Manager challenged the result of the vote and verbally attacked the meeting chair causing the meeting to descend into a shambles. The Chair suggested that the meeting be halted and rescheduled but this only aggravated the situation.
The same owner refused to vote (recorded as abstain in the minutes) on any other motion on the agenda by stating that even the statutory motions had been loaded to stop the appointment of a Body Corporate Manager and were unnecessary as the Body Corporate Manager would ‘sort all of that out’.
All in all the actions of this owner were disruptive and offensive and she stated without proof, that there had been financial fraud. She would not listen to any explanation offered by the secretary or treasurer as to how the proposed budget was derived and how the levies were calculated.
The meeting continued and some motions passed.
So, finally the last motion is tabled and she ducks out and comes back with 1 of the 2 proposed Body Corporate Managers. She had paid him to attend. This was a positive as it afforded the owners a chance to directly ask questions and assist in their decision.
The votes were 2 for and 2 against and as it was a special resolution failed the 2/3 majority needed.
She was extremely angry and stated that she considered the whole meeting to be void and would not accept the outcome of any of the votes.
N:B: This was the first meeting she had attended in her 9 years as an owner and had never previously returned a voting paper. As a courtesy for submitting a motion we let her choose the date for the AGM.
We need to call an EGM.
But as there is no committee how do we do that?
Who calls the EGM and distributes voting papers?
The motion to hold future meetings via email was passed.
What are the legislative requirements?
Thank you!
Suellen
Hi Suellen
Chris Irons from Hynes Legal has responded to your comment on this post: QLD: Q&A Body Corporate Decision Making
If a lot owner has an enduring power of attorney for an elderly parent that is also a lot owner in our complex, does that entitle them to have 2 x votes in the case for voting for Body Corporate Management rites, given you cant vote for this motion via proxy.
Hi Michelle
We have answered your question in the above article.
Hi Nikki,
A little clarification to my question about counting votes submitted by voting paper which Chris kindly answered.
My point about “validity of votes” went to simple matters such as, is the papers signed, or the Lot number indicated. I would have thought those were matters which could potentially affect the validity of the votes. Could Chris clarify those point please?
We responded to this question in the above Q&A.
An EGM was recently called by a small number of lot owners in order to table the sealing of a road that is not, and has never been, a designated access road for the estate. Voting papers were distributed to all lot owners as the funds required to complete the works were well above that which a committee is authorized to approve. Seems straightforward.
However, after the EGM was called, the agenda issued and electronic voting papers distributed to all lot owners, there was an 11th hour cancellation of the EGM by the same lot owners who had called it in the first instance. We have received confirmation that they attended a meeting with the Body Corporate Managers the day before the proposed EGM and were informed/indicated that their proposal had been unsuccessful…a ‘no’ vote was overwhelming. They then immediately cancelled the EGM.
As the legislation stands…had the EGM gone ahead and their motion been defeated, they would not have been able to call another EGM for 12 months. It appears that the cancellation was/is intended to ensure that they buy time, reassess their tactics and call another EGM when they have their next strategy planned. (This has been an ongoing process during the past 15 months.) It is an attempt by a small number of lot owners to spend body corporate funds on an issue that is not supported by the majority.
My concern is that the actions of the Body Corporate Managers, in disclosing the outcome of the electronic voting to those who called the EGM in the first place…the day before the EGM (giving them time and opportunity to once again manipulate the system), must surely be unethical? I would hope such action is actually illegal. Our Body Corporate Chairman did NOT agree to the cancellation when approached by the BC Managers.
The situation seems quite corrupt. I await your advice. Thank you.
Hi Melinda
We’ve received the following response from Frank Higginson, Hynes Legal:
In simple terms:-
1. EGM’s can be called as often as the committee or owners force. There is no 12 month limit to having them. In theory, you could have one a day!
2. Votes cast (not in a secret ballot) are a body corporate record, so owners are entitled to see who has voted what way before a meeting.
This will ultimately be decided by the votes.
Our AGM was held recently, the Strata Managers term was up for renewal and they submitted a quotation/proposal to continue as Strata Manager for 3 years for the meeting to consider, 3 years ago when they were appointed, at the end of the meeting, as the attendees were leaving, the Strata Manager said to the Chairman of the Committee, “Oh my appointment was only for 1 year do you want me to carry on”, to which the Chairman replyed, “yes make it for a futher 3 years”, no vote, no discussing on the matter, this was my first AGM and I did not know the rules and regulations, however I did realise during the meeting that the Chairman and the Strata Manager were very friendly and familiar towards each other, I had also become aware that for the appointment of companies to carry out work on the property, it always seemed to be companies that the Strata Manager submitted quotations who were awarded contracts. Local tradesmen have a name for her which I will not repeat, with many refusing to carry out work at properties with which she has any involvement.
There are numerous suspicious dealings which I am aware of, 2 very large contracts were approved, both with only 1 quote obtained, I queried why more quotations were not obtained for both at General Meetings and the answer for both was that there is no other company in the city that can carry out the work required, I voiced my disapproval but the contracts were awarded anyway.
It was my intention at the recent AGM, to adsvise the owners what I know about the Strata Manager and the decisions and appointments which I believe that they have made which are certainly not in the best interests of the owners, at the end of the AGM, the matter of repointment was tabled, I stated that I believe that the appointment of the Strata Manager was a matter to be discussed in the absence of the Strata Manager, to which the Strata Manager became very angry and said that I was not right and that she didn’t have to leave the meeting, she was subsequently reappointed for a term of 1 year.
Since the meeting I have sent to the Chairman the relevant document which states that if requested the Strata Manager is to leave a meeting whilst their appointment is discussed.
I believe that as she has mislead the meeting, her appointment should be revoked and another meeting to discuss the appointment of a Strata Manager be held.
Your response would be greatly appreciated.
In Relation to the Question above “Where it can be established that the voting form was completed by the letting manager but signed by the lot owner, what are the body corporate voting rules and are these votes valid?” and Response “This would not breach the code of conduct in the way complained of but would more than likely invalidate the votes.” – could you please clarify if the response “would more than likely invalidate the votes.” refers only to whether the voting papers were passed back through the Letting Manager (which they were not) or whether the completion of the voting form by the Letting Manager, is perhaps going a step too far in terms of influencing owners whose properties are in the letting pool,, even though owners forwarded the signed form by email direct to the Body Corporate Manager?
Does a body Corporate Manager have to disclose to Committee what the outcome is when a Manager stated – they have sourced legal advice and a member of Body Corporate should get their own advice. This is with regard to a Manager of the Body corporate saying the Body corporate is responsible for payment to repairs in a private court yard.. when an Adjudicator has stated it is owner. The rest of the Committee are now arguing who is correct.. with thanks for feedback. Doris
Hi Doris
We’ve received the following response from Frank Higginson:
If a body corporate has obtained legal advice it may well be privileged meaning it does not need to be disclosed to all owners – and certainly not the owner about whom the advice may be about! If a body corporate manager has sought advice on their own account about an issue they definitely do not need to give that to the body corporate.
Re Dec 12 comment regarding Auditor… The Auditor appointed last year has provided an auditor’s report with the upcoming AGM agenda papers together with an engagement letter. The auditor put forward by our BC managers has nothing attached, only a motion to appoint them.. and the auditor chosen last year is not on there as a second choice.
Your question….did the committee have the opportunity to approve the agenda? I am not sure about this, but I do know they are in league with Caretaker Managers and the Strata managers and act on their behalf not the owners. We will be attempting to vote in a new committee at the AGM on 18 December… and get new BC managers as current managers are closely associated with the Caretaker managers..
Hi Jennifer
This response from Todd Garsden:
There are a lot of assumptions being made – and a lot of it is going to depend on the committee’s instructions which we won’t know if the poster isn’t on the committee.
Admin: Please note we can only offer general information. For further details, we recommend you contact a strata lawyer.
Yes, we have an engagement letter and fees from another auditor approved in November last year. The auditor on this year’s agenda is employed by the Strata Group we are trying to get rid of.
Further voting question – I just got an email from our Caretaker Managers telling me how to vote for both the committee, stating names (who are the current inactive ineffective committee that we are trying to change) and motion to change our current Body Corp Managers whom we are trying to get rid of. I find this highly inappropriate – are they allowed to do this?
We have our AGM coming up soon and are hoping to vote out our dodgy Body Corp managers whose contract is almost up. The committee voted for a certain auditor to do the books last year. We have just noticed that the BC managers have put in their own auditor with no choices.. What can we do to add the auditor we want, or can we vote NO but then hold a special meeting in the New Year to put in a motion for the auditor we want… Please help with this question.
Hi Jennifer
We’ve received the following reply from Todd Garsden, Hynes Legal:
Was there ever another auditor put forward by an owner or the committee which did not make it to the agenda and did the committee have the opportunity to approve the agenda?
Thank you Nikki and Hynes – every vote will count, I will pass that on to others who have nominated. Unfortunately our current committee is not doing its job properly and in fact mainly inactive, and a few of us are trying to get a new committee on board who will work on behalf of the owners and not be in cahoots with our current caretaker managers who are not performing well at all and in fact were taken to court for ripping of tenants in the complex, tenants won. We also aim to change our Strata managers… Big job, but hope we can pull it off.
Our Body Corp AGM is coming up in a few weeks. I have nominated to be on the Committee. Can I vote for myself on the ballot paper.. ?
Hi Jennifer
This response from Frank Higginson, Hynes Legal:
Yes
Nikki (Admin): Good for you!
We had our AGM last week. The meeting was chaired by the BCM. The BCM turned to the Chairperson and said “Do you want me to do it.” The Chairperson replied in the affirmative. No valid reason was given for this. At the beginning of the meeting the BCM advised that there were no votes mailed in. I pointed out that this was not true. I was told that I should have sent my email to the BCM’s email address as opposed to the address listed in the Agend documents. When it came to voting for the Treasurer and Committee Members, the BCM took some ballot forms from the Chairperson and Secretary, as well as going around asking people in attendance to indicate who they wanted to vote for. There was no show of hands. She did not disclose the number of votes for each candidate. This is a Body Corporate that consistently fails to comply with the BCCM and Standard Module. There were defects and irregularities in how the meeting was called.
We have received this question via email:
Someone has nominated for chair of bodycorporate. There were 2 nominations, and one withdraws after nominations have closed. Does the ballot still go ahead or does the remaining candidate become the chair?
Frank Higginson, Hynes Legal responds:
The remaining candidate gets it by default – the same as if no one had nominated against them.
Does the president of body corporate has the right to be in charge of the body corporate fund or should it be in the hands of someone outside the corporate area
Hi Reno Martin
We have received this reply from Frank Higginson, Hynes Legal:
Who controls the funds of the body corporate is ultimately a decision for the committee. Normally the professional body corporate manager engaged by the body corporate would also have some authority to deal with the accounts from a day to day payment perspective.
What is the situation when a body corporate chairperson proposes that the committee assess the current body corporate manager against other body corporate managers to determine if we continue with our current manager. The chairperson now has a change of heart and abstained from a committee vote to seek capability statements from three body corporate managers, including the current one and seek approval at the next AGM to undertake this process. Would the chairperson abstaining from this vote preclude him from further decisions and making statements at the AGM regarding this matter and would further motions/resolutions require him to abstain?
Hi Philip
This response from Frank Higginson, Hynes Legal:
Unless the chairman has an actual conflict of interest, his abstaining from the first discussion / vote would not preclude him from participating in later ones. The key question is whether he does have a conflict, and the only way to know is to ask him.
Has Kate McLean (refer above) received an answer?
January 25, 2019 at 3:00 pm
Kate McLean says
January 25, 2019 at 3:00 pm
Qld.: Can you please tell me what the procedures are for a body corporate committee to do when an owner corresponds to the committee regarding a number of different issues e.g. resident caretaker not watering gardens, parking issues, etc. Does the committee need to acknowledge the receipt of his issues and that the issues will be submitted at the next body corporate meeting? Is there a time frame?
Reply
Thank you
Hi John
Yes. Please see the reply comment from Frank Higginson: January 25, 2019 at 3:18 pm
What the committee has to do is act reasonably. They don’t have to consider everything every owner throws at them, but if the issue is of a nature that ignoring it would not be reasonable then they should deal with it. This is the grey area that lawyers love.
If the committee doesn’t do what you think it should it is always open to you to look to submit a motion at the next general meeting requiring them to do whatever it is you want them to – assuming of course that the action you want would be a lawful one. If a committee is directed at general meeting to do something, then it simply has to do it.
Qld.: Can you please tell me what the procedures are for a body corporate committee to do when an owner corresponds to the committee regarding a number of different issues e.g. resident caretaker not watering gardens, parking issues, etc. Does the committee need to acknowledge the receipt of his issues and that the issues will be submitted at the next body corporate meeting? Is there a time frame?