January 30th 2013 – AGM Agenda

Posted on by

Hi folks, most of you will I’m sure like me have received the notice from Aspect regarding the upcoming AGM on 30th of January. I was surprised however to see that Aspect had chosen to omit the details of the two motions on which people are being asked to vote, replacing it instead with a 3 page critique of the Dunedin Canmore tender (to which DCPM was given no opportunity to respond). There was no consultation with the committee on that omission, and since without it proprietors who can’t attend are left without all the information they should have. The committee will endeavour to rectify that, as well as to give DCPM a chance to respond on the many points raised by Aspect, but in the interim please see below the section which was omitted.

Chris Chapman
Committee Chair

Agenda for Annual General Meeting at 7pm on Wednesday 30th January 2013, to be held at Gorgie/Dalry Parish Church.

  1. Introduction
  2. Minute taker
  3. Committee report
  4. Motion to appoint Aspect Residential or Dunedin Canmore Property Management as the Factor
    1. Brief statements from each factor
    2. Any questions for the factors
    3. Vote
  5. Dismissal and re-appointment of the Sinclair Proprietors committee
  6. Motion to change the policy of apportioning escape-of-water insurance claim excesses
  7. Factor’s report

Further, more detailed, information on the AGM can be found on the development website (sinclairresidents.org.uk), but the most important points follow:

Dismissal and re-appointment of the Factor and Committee

This is the normal annual process of re-appointment as described in our title deeds and the committee constitution. At the 2012 AGM, the proprietors passed a motion instructing the committee to seek tenders from multiple factors prior to the 2013 AGM, to allow proprietors a free choice in the factor that would take care of the development. The committee have contacted 15 factors, 9 of whom were formally asked to tender. 6 of those factors provided tenders, including of course the incumbent factor: Aspect Residential.

To be clear, as per the deeds of conditions on all our properties, this decision relates only to the 306 properties in Sinclair Place, Close and Gardens. The committee cannot represent the Gorgie Road / Stewart Terrace properties, and unless 15 of those 40 properties attend the AGM, no decision can be made on their behalf. As such, this selection of factor will apply only to the Sinclair properties, and the incumbent factor will remain the factor for the Gorgie Road / Stewart Terrace properties.

The committee have considered the details of all of those tenders and at the AGM will be asking the proprietors to make the final choice. The choice presented will be a straight decision between the incumbent factor and Dunedin Canmore Property Management. A majority of votes is needed to select a factor.

After careful consideration, the committee, barring the abstention of the Chair, is unanimous in the opinion that the tender from Dunedin Canmore Property Management (DCPM) is the best of those presented. The tender from Myreside Management was appealing, but on balance the committee felt that its merits did not warrant inclusion in the AGM. The tender from DCPM distinguished itself most obviously in that they are able to offer us insurance as part of their large portfolio of properties rather than as an individual development. This results in a yearly cost substantially below all of the other tenders (some £150 per year cheaper), as well as providing security against our continuing worries about being able to secure a common buildings insurance policy given our poor claims history. In addition, DCPM would not require an up-front maintenance float, which would mean that the refund of the current maintenance float at the end of the incumbent factor’s tenure should be more than sufficient to cover any debts currently owed by proprietors (at worst around £75 per property, but likely to be much closer to £25). The development would still have the option of pursuing the £7,000 of old (>90 days) debt independently even after a change of factor, although obviously this would take time and incur cost.

The committee feels that the reduced yearly cost, attractive insurance situation and DCPM’s solid reputation makes them the best option for our development. While the committee appreciates that Aspect have improved the quality of service provided since the change from McBrides, they do not feel that the improvement has been sufficient to outweigh the other benefits of changing factors.

The committee would like to encourage all proprietors to participate in this decision, the choice of which factor to select is an important one and all points of view should be represented. If you cannot attend, please nominate a proxy to make sure that your wishes are taken into account. The details of all of the various tenders are available from the committee, and any questions relating to the tenders or the reasoning behind the committee’s opinion are welcomed.

The committee will resign and a new committee be appointed for 2013. Both Chris Chapman and Chris Hutton are stepping down from their positions as Chair and Treasurer respectively due to other commitments, and we are still without a representative for 1-6 Sinclair Close. However anyone from any building can stand for the committee, so we urge anyone else wishing to stand for the committee in January is more than welcome, please send an email to committee@sinclairresidents.org.uk if you wish to do so. The amount of time and energy needed to participate is not large, and by doing so you ensure that the development can continue to see the positive improvements we all want.

Insurance excess apportionment

Given our continuing rising insurance premiums and terrible claims history, Aspect has suggested and the committee agrees, that the current policy of equally apportioning insurance excesses 332 ways should be re-visited, specifically in regard to escape of water excesses. The motion to be considered at the AGM is intended to lessen the financial burden on properties that have been maintained well, and to encourage all proprietors to be pro-active in checking their property’s plumbing for potential or actual leaks.

Our current insurance policy has an excess of £2,500 for each escape of water claim. Split 332 ways, the amount paid is around £7.53, but every single flat pays that amount. As such, the cost of letting an escape of water happen is very low, and proprietors have little incentive to pro-actively check their plumbing to minimise the risk of a leak. Those checking the invoices for the last year will have already noted tens of thousands of pounds this year already on water damage claims.

We propose that if a escape of water claim occurs, where the source of the escape is clearly attributable to one or more properties, that those properties should bear a much larger share of the excess, £500 per property, and only the remainder of the excess should be split amongst the rest of the properties. Claims where there is no clearly attributable source would continue to be split amongst all properties as they are now. To allow for leaks which could not reasonably be prevented, it is proposed that if a property has their plumbing inspected and cleared by a factor-approved plumber, if a water escape from their property occurs in the two years following the inspection, they shall not be liable for the higher excess share. It is also proposed that if the same property is the cause of more than one claim in any two year period, their share of the excess should double each time (so £1,000 for the second escape, £2,000 for the third).

The motion before the AGM is to approve in principle this change in policy, although the final amounts and periods involved may change after discussion with the factor and committee.

———————————

For those unable to attend but who still wish to vote, please use this form to nominate a proxy to vote in your place. The proxy should bring this signed form to the meeting.

I, ____________________________, proprietor of _________________________________, assign the authority to vote on my behalf to ________________________, for the meeting occurring on the 30th January 2013.

Signed: _____________________ Date: _______________

If you have no suitable proxy available, please pass your signed proxy form to Chris Chapman (4/10 Sinclair Place), who has offered to act as proxy for anyone who wishes to vote, along with an indication of how you intend to vote on the proposed motions:

  1. Motion to appoint a new Factor – Aspect Residential  /  Dunedin Canmore
  2. Motion to approve in principle changing the apportionment of escape of water insurance excesses – YES / NO

 

September 24th 2012 – Committee Meeting

Posted on by

Here are the minutes of the most recent committee meeting held in late September:

SCMeeting-September24th2012-Minutes

I attended Aspect’s offices on November 6th for the usual quarterly invoice inspection, and found only a couple of minor issues which are already resolved. The previous two inspections made by the Treasurer showed up no issues of note, which is of course very positive. Town-house owners will note a refund item on their invoices this quarter relating to refurbishment fund payments that were accidentally included on previous bills as a result of the shift to the new billing system.

The work to solicit tenders from other factors continues apace, and the intention is to have all factors submitting their tenders in time to be included in an information pack, to be sent to proprietors along with the notice of the January AGM.

Residents should note the continuing improvements to the gardens, and that the bin and bike store roofs have been restored throughout to fix both storm damage and general wear and tear. In various places, ground floor proprietors who have trees and large bushes which are encroaching on windows have asked that they be removed or cut back; the committee would like to hear from anyone in that situation so that the trees can be considered for work.

Obviously the insurance premiums have jumped substantially again this year, once more due to our claims history. As the excesses no longer vary by building (they are £2,500 per claim), the apportionment of escape of water claims has been returned to an equal 332 way split (or around £7.50 per claim) as of the new insurance policy which started in August. Several such claims can be seen in the upcoming invoice. The committee is still considering a motion to require properties identified as the source of an escape of water to pay a higher share of the excess; the intention being to encourage proprietors to be proactive in plumbing maintenance. Opinions are very much divided however, and the committee would like to hear from other proprietors with their thoughts on the proposed policy. As always however, we urge all proprietors to continue to check their bathrooms and kitchens for leaks and sealing issues. We will continue to pay high premiums and suffer huge excesses until we can reduce the number of claims being made.

As always, the committee is interested in any and all opinions or concerns about the development, so please do feel free to contact us.

August 2012 – Bike Shed Lock Change

Posted on by

Okay, so as of Friday, all but one of the new bike shed keys have been distributed to those who have asked for them, we expect the lock change to be happening tomorrow (Wednesday 1st of August), but it may take several days for the contractor to actually do the work. For anyone who hasn’t got a new key yet (or if you would like additional keys), you should still get in touch with Aspect and they will be able to get you a new key posted out.

To be clear, the bike shed keys are now unique to each shed. We had hoped to retain the common keying to allow people to change sheds if they wished, but failed to make that clear at the time of requesting the works, and I take responsibility for that. On the up-side, that will act to improve security, by limiting the number of people with access to any given shed.

As another a pleasant side effect of getting the locks changed, the resident who has been parking their motorbike in one of the sheds has been told quite clearly that it is not allowed, and they should be removing it forthwith. If anyone knows of any other bulky items in any of the sheds which are taking up space, then please do contact the committee and let us know. We have already made a quick pass over the shed between Sinclair Close and 18 Sinclair Place to clear out some of the dumped junk, and I personally hope to find some time to make sure the other sheds are similarly cleared up.

April 18th 2012 – Committee Meeting

Posted on by

Again, I must apologise for a delay in delivering the April committee meeting minutes, an extended holiday and other things intervened.

SCMeeting-April18th2012-Minutes

In other news, the test installation of a solar powered light went ahead last week, and the results are very promising. We chose the shed between 20 Sinclair Place and Sinclair Close, as it was the largest of the sheds and had the worst problem with lighting, rendering the back half of the shed virtually unusable, even in the middle of the day. I’d certainly recommend visiting the shed to see the results for yourself.

We will keep an eye on it to see how durable the light is, but on first impression the light produced is certainly bright enough, and the installation can be done with minimal impact to the sheds. The cost for this installation came in at well under £100, so underneath the budget approved by the committee. At the next meeting, we will consider whether or not to have similar lights installed in all of the cycle sheds.

May 2012 – General Update

Posted on by

My apologies for the lack of regular news postings here, rest assured that things have been progressing, just that lack of free time (and a two week holiday abroad) has limited my ability to post here. A short summary of recent events:

April committee meeting

This went ahead on the 18th of February, discussing issues such as fly-tipping, the external paintworks / refurbishment, and development lighting. Full minutes are still being written up, and I hope to have them posted within a fortnight.

External Paintworks

This item was highest on our list of needed refurbishments: the paintwork on almost all of the external doors of the development has decayed badly, and we were concerned that waiting any longer would result in damage to the woodwork. Aspect have provided an acceptable quote (roughly £15 per property), and work is due to commence on the 11th of June. Further notices will be put up around the stairwells to be painted to alert residents of the work.

There are other external paintworks planned and not yet approved by the committee; namely the painting of the external railings surrounding the estate, as well as the painting of the building exterior balcony rails. The cost, specification and expected timescale for these refurbishments is still under discussion.

Fly-tipping / refuse issues

In mid-May, some inconsiderate residents parking so as to obstruct the council refuse lorry’s access to the bin store by 19 Sinclair Place meant that those bins were not emptied. While we can’t control non-residents parking, please can all residents avoid parking outside of their allocated spaces at all times (not just on refuse collection days). Obstructing the car park means that emergency vehicles will also have trouble gaining access to properties.

We have also had a glut of people fly-tipping furniture and bulky items by the bin stores. I have written up a general advice page here, but to sum up:

  • Fly tipping is illegal, and costs us all to deal with it. If you see someone dumping, please report it to Aspect.
  • If Aspect arrange collection, it is considerably more costly. Instead, please arrange collection of the items yourself and the cost will be re-imbursed to you by Aspect.
  • If you aren’t prepared to do this, please contact Aspect to alert them to the items, and they will contact a committee member so that a pickup can be arranged.

Bike Shed Lock Change

As agreed at the January AGM, the bike shed locks will be changed on or around the 1st of August. The new keys will be secure, and cannot be copied by proprietors. Proprietors / residents should contact Aspect to purchase a new key, at a cost of no more than £13.60 per key.

Keys requested by 9th of July will be delivered prior to the locks being changed, so if you don’t want to be without access to the sheds, it’s important you contact Aspect in advance of that date.

Billing

Aspect have migrated to a newer, more capable software system to handle the development billing. The first quarterly invoice using the new system was inspected by the Treasurer as per the previous agreement, and no errors in apportionment or figures were found, which is great news.

Subsequently it has emerged that there has been a minor glitch in the handling of monthly standing orders, please contact Aspect if you find that payments made to your account are not reflected in your statement. Aspect have assured us that the problem will not recur on the next invoice.

May 2012 – Garden Improvements

Posted on by

The eagle eyed amongst you will have hopefully noticed the various changes to the gardens around the development. As mentioned in the February committee meeting minutes, we agreed a planting budget of £500 for the Roots n’ Shoots team to start filling in all the unsightly bare patches around the gardens.

New plantings

This, combined with the increased maintenance budget that means the gardeners will be on site much more often (every week instead of every fortnight), should get us some much needed improvements all around the estate.

More new plantings

We’ve already done one walk-around with the gardeners and factors, to agree on the work that needs tackled most urgently (mostly replanting of bare areas and replacing dead plants, and attending to the fountain in Sinclair Gardens). The intention is that a gardening sub-committee of sorts will do more such walk-arounds over the summer, until we have a clear list of areas we think need improving, that the gardening team can attend to over time. If any residents have any comments on the gardens, or particular areas they’d like to see tackled, we’d be eager to hear them. Please do comment on the general mailing list with your thoughts, and let us know if you’d like to get involved in the gardening discussion.

January 25th 2012 – AGM Summary

Posted on by

You should have received a hard copy of the January 2012 AGM in the post by now, but it is also available here. Aspect have added additional documents with the AGM minutes, digital copies of which are not yet available. As and when they become available we will update this post with them.

To summarise, the following motions were proposed and passed at the meeting:

  1. Motion to reappoint Aspect Residential as the factor: Passed – 48 in favour (28 proxy + 20 in person), 3 against (2 proxy + 1 in person), and 1 abstention (by proxy)
  2. Motion to support seeking tenders from other factors prior to the 2013 AGM: Passed – 37 in favour (9 in person, 28 by proxy), 13 against (10 in person, 3 by proxy) and 2 abstentions (in person)
  3. Motion to approve the changing of the locks on the bike sheds, with new keys to be distributed by request to the factor: Passed – 38 in favour (19 in person, 29 by proxy), 2 against (by proxy), with 2 abstentions (in person)
The committee was re-instated with no changes:
  • Chris Chapman (4 SP) – Chair – representing 32 SP
  • Barry Moore (1 SG) – Secretary – representing 1-5 SG
  • Chris Hutton (28 SP) – Treasurer – representing 27-29 SP
  • Richard Simpson (2 & 3 SP) – representing 1-2 SP
  • Rosina Weightman (7 SP) – representing the town-houses
  • Alan Eccles (19 SP) – representing 18-20 SP
  • Bob Buchanan (6 SP) – representing 3-6 SP
  • John Fox (24 SP) – representing 24-26 SP
  • Stuart Hamilton (30 SP) – representing 30-31 SP

2012 AGM – Agenda

Posted on by

Agenda for Annual General Meeting at 7pm on Wednesday 25th January 2012, to be held at Gorgie/Dalry Parish Church.

  1. Introduction
  2. Minute taker
  3. Committee report
  4. Dismissal and re-appointment of the Factor
    1. Motion to re-appoint Aspect Residential as the Factor
    2. Motion to support seeking tenders from other Factors prior to 2013 AGM
  5. Dismissal and re-appointment of the Sinclair Proprietors committee
  6. Motion to approve the changing of the locks on the bike sheds, with new keys to be distributed by request to the factor
  7. Factor’s report (including comments from Insurance Broker)

Dismissal and re-appointment of the Factor and Committee

This is the normal annual process of re-appointment as described in our title deeds and the committee constitution. For 2012, Aspect Residential is the only Factor being considered; at the meeting they will set out the expected fees for the year, and their commitments in regards to the development. In addition, the committee is asking the proprietors to give their support to a motion to seek tenders from other Factors, with the intention being to offer a choice of Factors to the proprietors in advance of the 2013 AGM.

The interim committee appointed at the SGM in September will resign and a new committee appointed for 2012; it is expected that the current committee will continue. Colin Douglas has stepped down as representative for 1-6 Sinclair Close, so we are in need of a new member for that building. In addition, anyone else wishing to stand for the committee in January is more than welcome, please send an email to committee@sinclairresidents.org.uk if you wish to do so.

Bike Sheds

The committee would like the proprietors to approve a motion to have the locks on the bike sheds replaced, and new keys made. The bike sheds have terrible security problems and have many abandoned bikes and other items that don’t belong taking up space (motorbikes, dumped items, etc.) To facilitate improvements to the bike sheds, the committee would like to see a register of proprietors who actually use the bike sheds, including asking proprietors to state which bikes are theirs, to allow us to start the long process of identifying abandoned bikes and making arrangements for their removal. In addition, the old keys have been copied and distributed widely, so the locks are no longer effectively securing the sheds.

Obviously changing the locks requires notice to be given to everyone, both on the bike sheds themselves and in a letter from the factor; otherwise people might find themselves unable to access their own bikes. The committee would like the proprietors to approve replacing the locks (after a suitable amount of notice is given to all), asking proprietors who wish to use the bike sheds to contact the factor in advance, with details of the bikes they store in the sheds, so they can receive a new key.

Further changes to the bike sheds have yet to be agreed on. At the 2011 AGM, Alex Corrigan suggested that a key-pad system could be installed, allowing us to change the codes on a regular basis and keep the sheds secure. However on consulting with locksmiths, he reported that a key-pad lock wouldn’t give a satisfactory level of security and would be prone to damage (accidental and malicious). It was suggested that standard keyed locks combined with regular key changes would get us the level of security we wanted, but obviously that comes with a cost (every time the locks were changed, those with keys would need to pay again, at a cost of around £6 per key). How frequently the locks were changed would be a decision that the bike shed users would take, balancing cost against security.

September / October 2011 Billing

Posted on by

Update: There have been some errors which we’ve identified as slipping through after the invoices were audited. They include £25 cost for a fountain repair, apportioned 346 ways instead of 306 ways and a missing charge for a roofing repair; both of which will be refunded and recharged in the next invoice.

The bill, produced and sent out on the 2nd of December, is the first where the newly formed committee has had a chance to work with the factors to audit the invoices before they were sent out. As a result, we’ve had a chance to spot any mistakes early, and also work with Aspect to correct mistakes we’d identified in recent billing cycles. As a result, there are far more charges on the invoice marked ‘refund’ and ‘recharge’ than there would be normally. This is the mechanism by which the charges are corrected so that they are apportioned correctly.

It should be noted that this invoice is for two months only instead of the usual three. This was a decision on Aspect’s part, in an attempt by them to make the process go more smoothly.

Since there were more errors than could be readily explained in the header of the invoice, we wanted to explain them here, so that the factors could simply point concerned proprietors in the direction of this post for a more detailed explanation. For additional reference, consult the list of types of charges we expect, which details how they should be apportioned. Here are the corrections:

Electricity correction

After the AGM in January, it was agreed that the electricity should be split evenly amongst the entire development (i.e. we each pay an equal share of the entire electricity costs, rather than each stairwell paying for their own meter). This was needed to even out the disparity caused by some stairwells having external lighting and fountains attached to them where the others do not. However in the two previous billing quarters (March/April/May and June/July/August), the electricity had been summed, and the charged distributed amongst only the 292 properties in Sinclair Close / Gardens / Place. The properties in Gorgie Road and Stewart Terrace paid no electricity for those two quarters, even for their own stairwell lighting.

This has been rectified by refunding all six months worth of electricity to the SC / SG / SP properties, and recharging the entire development (332 properties) for those 6 months. If you live in SC / SG / SP, you’ll see six refunds for electricity, and six recharges for a smaller amount (e.g. £2.75 instead of £3.12). If you live in Gorgie Road or Stewart Terrace, you’ll see 6 recharges, but no refunds.

Electricity apportionment

For the September / October period, the electricity costs are split into two parts: internal and external. Internal is all of the stair lighting, external is all of the fountains, bollard lighting, etc. The reason for this is that the town-houses are responsible for a share of the external electricity costs (which fall under the ‘maintenance of the common parts of the development’), but not for the internal electricity costs (which fall under the ‘maintenance of the common parts of the building). So, there are two charges for each month; the internal cost (split 332 ways, amongst all the flats), and the external cost (split 346 ways amongst all the flats and the town-houses).

The exact split of electricity costs (9% external, 91% internal) was based on analysis of the previous 6 years of electricity charges, and agree by a committee vote to be fair. The split amount will be monitored so as to make sure that it is still considered to be correct, based on current and future meter readings.

Communal Garden Maintenance

In July, this was incorrectly split 306 ways (Sinclair flats + town-houses), not 292 ways (Sinclair flats only). The agreement was to charge the town-houses from August onwards. So properties in SC / SG / SP should see a refund, and then a recharge for a slightly higher amount (£2.48 instead of £2.36)

Communal Fountain Maintenance

Like the Garden Maintenance, this was incorrectly split 306 ways instead of 292 ways, in both June and July. Properties in SC / SG / SP should see a refund, then a recharge for a slightly higher amount (£0.30 instead of £0.28)

Refurbishment Fund

The town-houses do not contribute to the refurbishment fund (because they are not refurbished by the factor), however the refurbishment fund payment in the June/July/August invoice was split 346 ways (all flats + town-houses) instead of 332 ways (all flats). This resulted in a shortfall in the refurbishment fund, and so an additional charge of £134.40 was made, split 332 ways, to bring it back up to the correct amount. To be clear, the properties paying into the refurbishment fund should have still only paid £10 each for that quarter, £9.59 last quarter, and an additional £0.41 this quarter.

The refurbishment fund amount for this quarter was £6.67, on account of the fact that it only covers a period of 2 months instead of 3.

Insurance excesses

In previous quarters, insurance excesses have been charged equally to the entire development (332 ways). Aspect have decided, and the committee agrees, that the insurance excess costs should be borne by the buildings incurring them. We felt that this would encourage proprietors in the poorly performing buildings to take note and maintain their properties better to avoid water damage claims, and would reward proprietors in buildings with a good claims history.

Since our excesses are very high for water damage claims (£5000 for some buildings), it was felt that limiting the share to a single building would result in problems, as a single £5000 claim could result in a per-property cost in the hundreds of pounds. To limit the impact of this, and the potential for property owners to be unable or unwilling to pay, excess costs will be shared amongst several buildings, grouped by the size of their insurance excess. For example, an excess incurred by 1 Sinclair Gardens would be shared not amongst the building (1-5 SG), but amongst the 3 buildings (235, 241, 247 GR, 4 ST, 1-5 SG and 1-6 SC, comprising 132 flats) that have a £5000 excess. This limits the maximum excess for any one claim to around £38. More importantly, the buildings with a good claims history and low excess do not have to pay for the excess.

For information, the four insurance groups are:

  • A: 235, 241, 247 Gorgie Road, 4 Stewart Terrace, 1-5 Sinclair Gardens and 1-6 Sinclair Close. 132 flats in total, and a £5000 excess per claim, meaning a maximum of ~£38 per claim.
  • B: 3-6 Sinclair Place. 44 flats in total, and a £2500 excess per claim, meaning a maximum of ~£57 per claim.
  • C: 1-2, 24-26, 30-31 Sinclair Place. 80 flats in total, and a £1500 excess per claim, meaning a maximum of ~£19 per claim.
  • D: 18-20, 27-29, 32 Sinclair Place. 76 flats in total, and a £1000 excess per claim, meaning a maximum of ~£13 per claim.