PDA

View Full Version : Tackling abuse of proxy votes at estate general meetings


reporter2
16-09-13, 17:59
http://www.straitstimes.com/archive/sunday/premium/think/story/tackling-abuse-proxy-votes-estate-general-meetings-20130915

YOUR LETTERS

Tackling abuse of proxy votes at estate general meetings

Published on Sep 15, 2013


Last Sunday's article ("Condo sails into troubled waters") quoted a resident as saying that "three council members held more than 60 per cent of the proxy votes" at the last annual general meeting.

Property agents and serviced apartment operators should not be allowed to seize control of the management council of an estate via the use of proxy votes. Unfortunately, this appears to be a growing trend.

The authorities know about this problem and are reviewing the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act. However, more than a year has passed without any new law being enacted.

Apart from the Act, other laws and practices need to be changed so that this problem can be eradicated. A holistic review should include:

Restricting the percentage of proxy votes that can be cast at an estate's general meeting, thus ensuring that the voices and will of subsidiary proprietors who personally attend the meeting can be heard and executed.

Mandating that proxy forms list down clearly all resolutions to be voted on at an estate's general meeting. Those who are voting by proxy should be made to indicate in writing if they would like to vote for or against a particular resolution. In other words, proxy holders will not be given a "blank cheque" to use indiscriminately.

Disallowing a proxy holder from casting votes and saving himself if a motion to remove him as a member of the management council is raised.

Educating subsidiary proprietors on the importance of attending general meetings personally.

Barring real estate agents and serviced apartment operators from becoming management council members, since the nature of their jobs could lead to conflicts of interest.

Making owners who rent their units to short-term (less than six months) serviced apartment operators liable for punishment.

Setting up specialised law enforcement units within the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) and Building and Construction Authority (BCA), so that they are better equipped to apprehend and punish offenders.

Being more proactive in estate-related law enforcement, instead of just attending to complaints or relying on citizen policing.

Establishing stronger inter-agency collaboration between the URA, BCA and the Council for Estate Agencies.

Victor Ng Beng Li
blackjack21trader
17-09-13, 07:23
Do something about the property agents la.
EBD
17-09-13, 08:28
This happens because subsidiary proprietors are lazy to attend AGM's

I have in the past out proxied the usual proxy collectors in my building & they were furious even hypocritically playing the victim card asking how can this be that one person can make all our voices irrelevant at the meeting etc...... when they have no issue doing the same.


The best is to attend AGM's in person & not give your vote to someone who may then use it to vote against your own interest. No pity for those who are lazy and stupid.


Also the article mentioned 60 percent of the proxy vote. Not sure if that is just of the proxies or of the total vote count at the meeting but you can have less than 20% of the overall building vote and still win because of apathy.

Those in a position to easily collect votes such as shopkeepers or agents can easily rule a condo because people don't care.

Why don't this guy get off his butt and link up with like minded people to bring their point of view to all the other SP's. Should learn to play the game.
kane
17-09-13, 08:37
is it easier to disallow proxy, if owners are genuinely interested, then attend, if not, then you allow other owners to decide liao. at most, if really travelling, then produce documents of travel and allow a family member to attend on behalf.
EBD
17-09-13, 08:50
proxy should be allowed & this letter won't change a thing.

I own a share of this building - I can either vote or authorise someone to do it on my behalf. That is quite standard. Nothing wrong.

Peoples apathy is the problem.
kane
17-09-13, 09:26
i guess the issue is if some development is own 51% by foreigners, how to allow the remaining 49% ow ers have a say in the meeting?
EBD
17-09-13, 09:42
Why does it matter if they are 51% owned by foreigners?

That 51% won't vote as of one mind. Can get all the Japanese, Chinese, indo's , indian , taiwanese, australian, british etc..... to all think as one cohesive block?

My old building was 80% non-owner occupied. Their agenda is totally different from owner-occupier & easier for agent to collect proxy than owner occupier.
EBD
17-09-13, 09:47
"
Mandating that proxy forms list down clearly all resolutions to be voted on at an estate's general meeting. Those who are voting by proxy should be made to indicate in writing if they would like to vote for or against a particular resolution. In other words, proxy holders will not be given a "blank cheque" to use indiscriminately."


Actually we have done this before too to minimize abuse.
kane
17-09-13, 10:20
"
Mandating that proxy forms list down clearly all resolutions to be voted on at an estate's general meeting. Those who are voting by proxy should be made to indicate in writing if they would like to vote for or against a particular resolution. In other words, proxy holders will not be given a "blank cheque" to use indiscriminately."


Actually we have done this before too to minimize abuse.

if agenda is laid out upfront, that would be best.
thomastansb
17-09-13, 10:36
How does this matter? I don't see any link.

Let's say to refurbish the gym. Assuming 101 foreigners and 99 singaporeans. How would this affect the votes?




i guess the issue is if some development is own 51% by foreigners, how to allow the remaining 49% ow ers have a say in the meeting?
kane
17-09-13, 10:43
How does this matter? I don't see any link.

Let's say to refurbish the gym. Assuming 101 foreigners and 99 singaporeans. How would this affect the votes?

i should qualify this further to say foreign owners who don't reside here. they probably don't even look at what's in the agenda.
EBD
17-09-13, 10:56
if agenda is laid out upfront, that would be best.

Agenda is laid upfront..... but once you sign over proxy you have given up all your voting rights to that person - who will vote how the hell they want to, even if it's against your interest.

Best change you that could be made is to make it compulsory to have agenda items that can be marked prior to handover of proxy. And if you care so much as to mark your pre-vote - why not just attend?

And who would want such a pre-voted proxy? I guess only those who want to control the MC makeup rather than care about agenda items.


.....now the hidden agenda's maybe very different - normally lays around clash of personalities who want to be on the MC.

Lesson - don't give out proxy , attend yourself.
In democracy, you don't always win.
EBD
17-09-13, 10:58
i should qualify this further to say foreign owners who don't reside here. they probably don't even look at what's in the agenda.

That's for sure. As long as someone's renting and value is increasing this is all the small stuff....... until they get hit for a renovation bill to common areas.

But that is also the same for local investors who don't reside in the condo.
The foreign thing is way off target to the problem.