16 January 2026
I recently shared an article by Michael Teys with several strata committees I work with because it clearly articulated an issue many schemes are still reluctant to confront: the consequences of deferring maintenance and under-funding capital works.
It resonated because it reflected what many owners and committee members already sense but struggle to name, that decisions which feel manageable or reasonable in the short term often create far larger problems down the track.
Deferral Is a Governance Issue, Not a Budget Tactic
Across NSW strata schemes, a familiar pattern continues to emerge:
-
Maintenance works are delayed because they are inconvenient or expensive.
-
Capital works fund contributions are kept low to avoid levy increases.
-
Temporary repairs are relied upon far longer than intended.
-
Committees reassure owners that issues are “being monitored”, without a clear plan to resolve them.
These choices are often well-intentioned. Cost-of-living pressures are real, and no committee enjoys recommending higher levies. But postponement is not a neutral position. It is an active governance decision, and one that carries legal, financial, and asset-value consequences.
Under section 106 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015, owners corporations have a clear and ongoing duty to maintain and repair common property. That obligation also extends to planning and funding future works through a realistic capital works fund.
This is not discretionary. It is a statutory responsibility.
Why This Keeps Happening
There are structural reasons why deferral has become common in strata:
-
Most owners are not building professionals and rely heavily on committee and managing agent advice.
-
Committee turnover means long-term consequences often fall on people who did not make the original decisions.
-
Levy sensitivity can override honest conversations about future costs.
-
Responsibility can feel diluted in a collective ownership environment.
None of this excuses inaction, but it helps explain how schemes drift into under-preparedness without a single obvious failure point.
The Regulatory Environment Is Changing
What has changed is the level of regulatory scrutiny.
NSW Fair Trading now has stronger powers to inspect strata schemes, require the production of records, issue compliance notices, and intervene where owners corporations are not meeting their obligations. Schemes that continue to defer necessary works or operate with chronically under-funded capital works plans should not assume this will go unnoticed.
This shift reflects a growing recognition that deferred maintenance leads to safety risks, higher eventual costs, and significant consumer harm, particularly for owner-occupiers who inherit the consequences of past decisions.
What Responsible Committees Should Be Doing
Meeting these obligations does not require perfection. It requires realism.
At a minimum, responsible governance means:
-
Maintaining an accurate capital works fund plan based on the actual condition of the building.
-
Setting levies that reflect that plan, even when the numbers are uncomfortable.
-
Addressing maintenance issues early, before minor defects escalate.
-
Seeking professional advice where technical or compliance questions arise.
-
Communicating honestly with owners about long-term costs and risks.
These are not aggressive positions. They are the fundamentals of asset stewardship.
This Is About Protecting the Asset
A strata building is a shared asset of significant value. Decisions that prioritise short-term affordability at the expense of long-term integrity do not preserve that value – they erode it.
Schemes that plan properly and fund responsibly tend to experience fewer emergency repairs, fewer special levies, and greater confidence in committee decision-making. Conversely, schemes that defer and under-fund often face sharper cost shocks, increased conflict, and regulatory attention that could have been avoided.
A Necessary Shift in Mindset
The issue raised in Michael Teys’ article, and reinforced by what many committees are now experiencing, is that the margin for inaction has narrowed.
Owners corporations must treat maintenance and capital funding as core governance responsibilities, not optional decisions to be revisited later. Regulators are increasingly willing to intervene, and future owners are less forgiving of inherited neglect.
This is not about alarmism. It is about recognising that postponement has a cost, and that cost rarely reduces with time.
JM
Founder + Managing Director
Bettr Strata