Question: Can a building manager influence owners’ votes at an AGM by endorsing a committee candidate or contractor quote?
We have an upcoming AGM, and I’ve self-nominated for chairperson of the committee. However, the on-site building manager has sent an email to many owners expressing support for re-electing the existing chairperson. They have also indicated support for a particular job quote over another. I’m concerned the building manager has created a bias towards one nominee and one contractor.
Answer: There’s no prohibition on owners advocating for a committee nominee or a quote of their choosing.
While you’ve not actually asked a question, we’ll focus on your concern about ‘bias’ and ‘influence’. It’s an issue that comes up a lot.
Firstly, remember that your onsite building manager (aka, management rights (MR) holder) may also be a lot owner. This means they have an interest in what items are considered and voted on at the AGM. They’ll also be able to vote at that AGM if they’re an owner.
Putting that to one side, and focusing only on the MR holder perspective, Queensland’s strata legislation changed in 2024 to introduce a new provision in the Code of Conduct for MR holders, as follows:
- A body corporate manager or caretaking service contractor must not attempt to unfairly influence the outcome of an election for the body corporate committee.
‘Unfairly influence’ is not defined, and as far as we are aware, there are no published cases that consider the issue. So, it’s not possible to say what is and is not ‘unfair influence’. We’d also suggest that while the legislation prohibits ‘unfairly’ influencing, it doesn’t prohibit ‘fairly’ influencing.
Where does this leave you? There is nothing concrete, one way or the other, to say that what you’re encountering is or isn’t biased or unfair influence. If you feel strongly enough about it, you may wish to consider seeking legal advice regarding the provisions discussed above. Otherwise, you could consider discussing the matter with the MR holder (assuming you’re comfortable doing so). Finally, a point to remember: there’s no prohibition on owners advocating for a committee nominee or a quote of their choosing. So maybe you might like to consider doing some lobbying of your own.
This is general information only and not legal advice.
This post appears in the October 2025 edition of The QLD Strata Magazine.
Chris Irons
Strata Solve
E: chris@stratasolve.com.au
P: 0419 805 898
At our last AGM our Secretary was elect unopposed as she was the only person who nominated for the position. She was ‘financial” at the time of her self-nomination but unfinancial at the time the election was held and remained unfinancial throughout the rest of the year until it was time for nominations again (approximately 10 months).
Should she have been declared Secretary if she was unfinancial at the AGM and had been for at least a month prior.
Re Alanna Hill from Mathew’s Hunt Legal in #505. As #505 relates to August 2021 and the current Standard Module came into effect prior to this should not the answer provide all options? I agree with Alanna that once a person withdraws their nomination and the EOBCY has passed they cannot reverse that withdrawal. Alanna also correctly pointed out that the person could nominate from the floor of the meeting if the required number of nominations was less than the maximum however, Alanna only mentioned ‘orally from the floor’ when it is clear from s38(4)(2) that the member could nominate in writing if they were unable to attend the meeting. While I understand the legislation is complex, the contributors providing advice are deemed subject matter experts and as such lay persons place great faith in that advice after all isn’t that the purpose of your publication?
Hi Raymond
The following response has been provided by Alanna Law, MATHEWS HUNT LEGAL:
Thank you for your comment Raymond Varga. Our article relates to the withdrawal and reinstatement of Committee nominations and is intended to be a brief response, not a comprehensive advice. If you require comprehensive advice on this issue, we recommend that you seek legal advice.
Frank said:
if the committee holds physical meetings and an attendee does not attend twice in a row without the committee’s approval, the committee member is removed from their position.
Does it mean that these NOT attendance of the committee member at TWO committee meetings relate to in the body corporate financial year or not? I mean, one committee meeting was hold before the AGM, another one month later after the AGM. The committee member has been the same person who did not attend both committee meeting. Thank you.
Hi Helen
Frank Higginson, Hynes Legal has responded to your comment in the article above.
When there is not enough nominations for the ordinary committee at the AGM and the chair calls for nomination from the floor, can be elected an owner who does not attend the meeting for a position of ordinary member?
Hi Helen
Chris Irons, Strata Solve has responded to your comment in the article above.
I understand that the Body Corporate must keep the same number of committee members throughout the year as elected at the AGM. For instance, if five people were elected at the AGM, the committee must have five members for the whole year. If an executive position becomes vacant, and an existing committee member fills the vacancy by a VOC decision, this creates an opening for an Ordinary Member. Can the committee then pass another VOC motion to appoint a new person as an Ordinary Member without calling a general meeting and allowing nominations and ballots? As an owner, we did not receive any notice of the VOC motion to be voted, only the result. Does this invalidate the VOC motion? I also know that this was not an emergency vote.
Hi Elians
The response to this Q&A above should assist:
Question: Can a committee member resign on the condition that her brother, who is a co-owner, replaces her?
We have a small complex of 8 units. We have one non-owner (A) who has a POA from his landlord and currently holds all three executive positions.
Our AGM now has received 4 votes for applicant A and 4 votes for another applicant B.
All other nominations are for ordinary member.
How should this be resolved?
our caretaker has been door knocking other owners to try and vote us off the committee, as we question his astronomical quotes. He ignores us when we ask for works to be done on our unit.
Hi Martine
Chris Irons from Hynes Legal has responded to your comment in the article above.
A Committee Member who has listed their Lot for sale may not be legally required to stand down but surely there is an ethical requirement to stand down. It doesn’t make sense to have an Owner who no longer has an interest in the complex involved in making decisions for those that do.
We have experienced a Committee Member announcing he was about to put his Lot on the market and voluntarily resigning from Committee. On the other hand, we had a Chair who put his Lot on the market and announced he was not resigning from Committee. His Lot didn’t sell but became a rental with the Chair moving off site and becoming an “absentee Chair” – outcome was the Building Manager ran the complex until the Chair’s Lot sold at a later date.
Being a Committee Member is not always just about legal requirements.
Hi Len
The following response has been provided by Chris Irons, Hynes Legal:
So if a lot owner lists their lot for sale and, under your suggestion, they should resign at that point, what happens if the lot doesn’t sell? Or if a contract is entered into or it falls over for some reason? Or what happens if a lot owner puts their lot up for sale and then the housing market takes a dive and there’s no real prospect of a sale? Does the owner, under your suggestion, get the right to take back their committee position? Or is it a case of ‘bad luck’ because they had the temerity to think about selling?
More to the point, I am most curious about your suggestion that someone who has ‘no interest in the complex’ should no longer be making any decisions about it. Just who decides if someone does or doesn’t have ‘interest’ any longer? You could have someone who has lived in or owned the same lot for 20 years but never once has sent back voting papers, or put their hand up to be on the committee – does that mean they have ‘no interest’? Or what if someone always votes ‘no’ to every motion on a meeting? They’re voting and thus, presumably, ‘taking an interest’, but surely this action is far more harmful than taking no interest at all?
I also don’t understand your objection to someone not living onsite and being Chairperson. I am aware of plenty of instances of committee members living offsite (including living interstate and overseas) and still being part of decision-making processes. You don’t need to reside to be part of a body corporate. I think the bigger issue here is not that your chair put their lot up for sale but that, as you say, the building manager ‘ran the complex’. That should not be happening. The onsite manager has a vital role to play but they don’t run things and indeed, they are not a voting member of the committee anyway. If the other committee members were not doing anything about this, or there were no other functioning committee members, then that is the issue which you should be focussed on because at that point, your body corporate is just about dysfunctional and may require intervention , perhaps in the form of an administrator.
I completely understand your concern and likely frustration at the situation, it’s just that I don’t think your suggestion is practical – or is really what you should be most concerned about. I suspect there are bigger issues at play in your building and you may need to consider what actions need to be taken. Unless someone initiates something to occur, then nothing will change.
Hi
We have committe member who is selling their unit and have listed it with a Real Estate Agent.
Do they have to resign from the Committe?
Hi Brad
Chris Irons, Hynes Legal has responded to you question in the above article.
Regarding the Committee member who also stands in for the caretaker when the caretaker is aware.
Am involved with a Maroochy complex where this was happening for many years. The Committee member concerned was at times either the Chairman or (mostly) the Treasurer. She and her husband ran a locum business for a number of complexes in the area, and at our complex they would take on the role of Caretaker and Rental Manager. As you would imagine, none of the many investors were game to challenge her serving as both Treasurer and Rent Mngr.
One owner eventually contacted a senior strata lawyer who advised “My gut feel is they would be very close to being an associate, and therefore prevented from being on the committee. That is more from a combination of the factors – not a single one.” The owner then went formal via the Commr’s Office…and the Treasurer resigned. Just reinforces the old saying ” Its what they do when they think no one is watching.”
This comment was received via email from M.G. in Maroochydore:
I believe you are where you are saying that one person may hold all three positions in the executive committee. Yes they can be nominated for all three positions but in the case where there is others nominated for the Secretary and Treasurer positions, if he is vote in as the Chairman then his nominations for the other two positions are cancelled or removed.
The idea for one person holding all three positions is used in a situation where there aren’t enough members or nominations for this to be voted on. The likes of a Strata with say only four units or even less is where this ruling is used, not in a complex that has ten plus units in the complex and there are more than one nominations for the positions.
We received the following reply from Todd Garsden, Hynes Legal:
Respectfully, I tend to disagree with the comment.
The Modules provide that “The one person may hold the positions of chairperson, secretary and treasurer, or any 2 of the positions, in conjunction.” (similar provisions are found in the other modules).
This was confirmed in Everton Mews [2014] QBCCMCmr 114 where an owner made an application for a declaration that the executive committee positions may not be occupied by one person. In dismissing this part of the application, the adjudicator stated, “In respect of final outcomes sought, the Applicant might note that the legislation allows executive committee positions to be held by one person.
Similar positions have been held in:
River Park Plaza [2008] QBCCMCmr 402 “There must be a chairperson, a treasurer and a secretary, although one person may hold all three or any two of those positions. In this case that means that Dixon can hold all three executive positions on the Committee but, if he does, there must be at least two ordinary members on the Committee so that the Committee membership comprises at least three.”
The Pandanus [2007] QBCCMCmr 328 nine lot – “The minutes of the AGM state that Maree Fort-Rushton was elected to these positions with 2 other individuals being elected as ordinary committee members. One person may hold these positions”
I have an investment unit where there is a majority lot owner. This Lot owner has two companies that own lots in the scheme together totalling 68 lots out of 107. Recently the majority lot owner called for an EGM to stand down the current Committee and appoint a new Committee primarily appointing 5 representatives of their own companies and leaving two ordinary positions to be filled from the floor. I was voted to hold one of those ordinary positions. I note in a previous article that if the Executive Committee is filled by one owner (or representative of that owner) they only have one vote. Can you please confirm that given the facts as stated above, the majority lot owner has only one vote on the committee?
At this same meeting a motion was put forward from the majority lot owner to change the Committee spending limit from $300.00 per lot to $1,200.00 per lot.
At this same meeting a motion was put forward from the majority lot owner to pay all Committee members $5,000 each – no reason given apart from reimbursement of possible expenses in attending meetings.
At this same meeting a motion was put forward from the majority lot owner to vote down two quotes for cleaning contracts for the scheme at a cost of $104,000 pa. and $145,000 pa, and vote for a their own motion that the Body Corporate should engage their own cleaners which can be looked after by the Committee at a cost of $175,000.
As this majority lot owner is now controlling how the body corporate will be run, the remaining private investors are at their mercy.
If you would be so kind as to clarify how many of the votes this majority lot owner has at Committee level would be a great start.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Kind Regards
Jan Davies
Hi Jan
Very sorry for the delay in getting back to you. We have received the following reply from Todd Garsden, Hynes Legal:
The Module allows a lot owner with more than 3 lots to nominate up to 3 committee positions. That would be the limit for each separate entity. So it would seem that the majority owner (across his two entities) fits within this requirement.
The body corporate can also choose to (assuming that the motion is correctly drafted):
(a) change its committee spending limit;
(b) remunerate its committee; and
(c) engage a particular contractor – even if there is an interest in that contractor by a lot owner. There is no conflict of interest at a general meeting.
However, all the decisions of the body corporate are subject to an overarching requirement to be reasonable. If one of those decisions, such as to choose the most expensive contractor over another (with no differing service level), was considered to be unreasonable it could be challenged in the Commissioner’s Office.