If you consider these scenarios, who do you think will incur most costs for the estate?
1) use function room / clubhouse once or twice a year, each time 3 hours (on air-con)
2) use gym 1 hour every week, 54 times a year (on air-con) + need to service/repair gym equipment
3) use tennis court 2 hours every week (on flood lights) + need to service/repair flooring
It is obvious that 2 & 3 will incur much more costs. Then, we will ask what is purpose of charging for (1)?
If to recover costs &/or discourage incurring more costs, then should charge for (2) & (3) as well!
Only idiots here will tell us it is fine to charge (1) because less people use it! So less people means fine?! They probably means they don't use it anyway so ok to charge others? This is just selfish & idiotic thinking.
They then tell us "Either u pay $300 a mth or u want everyone pay $320 a mth. if only 20% of household use the club house. "
So if charge for clubhouse is justified because reduce maintenance fund to say $300pm, why not charge for tennis court and gym and swimming pool? Can reduce maintenance fund to $200pm since so many people using! Looking from this point of view, not charging is totally unfair for people who don't use all these facilities.
Oh, I forgot about car park. They should charge for car park since only 33% of families drive in Singapore! Less people use car park, just like clubhouse, why didn't charge to help to reduce maintenance fund? If charge car park means can reduce MF to <$150 pm! Wow! Total can reduce MF to <$150 pm from $320 pm! So unfair to so many people who don't use car park and all those facilities!
In my condos, increase MF fee with inflation we always pass in AGM. Only cheapos like you and cheapo estates full of cheapos like you will not pass MF increase in AGM!