the earlier discussion above on the possible lack of continuity as one of the disadvantages when employing a Managing Agent.
It will be recalled that the initial duration of a Managing Agent’s appointment under section 66 of the BMSMA is only a maximum of three years. A change of Managing Agent can lead to disruption in the running of the development. However the case of Strata Development B proves that continuity is not a benefit reserved just for in-house management teams – the development has retained the services of the same Managing Agent firm since its inception in 1979.
Despite the turn over of members of each new Management Council the Managing Agent in Strata Development B has acted as the constant and plays are gulatory role in the equation. This has proven beneficial to the strata development as the Managing Agent can advise the incoming Management Council on any pending issues as well as continue with its long-term plan and strategies for the development.
The value of a Managing Agent’s firm’s resources discussed earlier was particularly evident in the case of Strata Development B in 2004 when the property officer of the development tendered his resignation to the Managing Agent’s firm. Within the short period of a month a replacement property officer had to be appointed and a smooth handing over of duties for the new property officer from his predecessor had to be ensured. While this might have been a more difficult task if the development was managed by an in-house management team, the resources of the Managing Agent’s firm allowed a swift replacement through their existing pool of trained staff. The firm’s policy of regularly recruiting and training new staff ensured that the replacement of the property officer for the development did not escalate into a serious problem and create managerial and operational problems for the development during the transition stage.
The main reasons cited by Strata Development B’s Management Council as to why it has always engaged a Managing Agent are the
experience and professionalism of their appointed Managing Agent. This in turn can be attributed to the wealth of experience acquired by the Managing Agent firm through the management and solving of problems in different strata developments under their charge.
The case of Strata Development B reveals first that the Managing Agent’s dedication and competence are essential ingredients for the development to be run efficiently. Second it is imperative that the Management Council and the Managing Agent share a harmonious and open relationship based on trust and confidence. In addition this relationship must be viewed as more than merely a professional appointment whereby the Managing Agent simply carries out its duties with due diligence in order to justify its reappointment after each AGM. It is improbable that without all these ingredients, successive Management Councils in Strata Development B would have continued to retain the same Managing Agent firm’s services.
Summary and conclusion
This paper has examined two property management systems available to residential strata developments in Singapore: through a Managing Agent and through employment of an in-house management team. The case study of two residential strata developments in Singapore was also presented. The purpose of the case study was to showcase two residential strata developments that share similar age tenure and locational attributes and yet successfully employ different systems of property management. After examining the pros and cons of the two systems it appears that there is no definitively superior system for the management of common property in residential strata developments. Various influence and determine the choice of property management system. The findings of the case study are that engaging a Managing Agent to manage a residential strata development can yield several advantages:
In general in view of the various industry standards that have been
set by government and professional bodies a higher level of professionalism can be expected from a Managing Agent but see under drawbacks below
Investment in technology by the Managing Agent allows the Management Corporation to enjoy a higher standard of service
The Management Corporation can fully enjoy the pool of resources a Managing Agent has to offer and the Management Corporation may enjoy cost savings brought about through economies of scale.
However it is noted that engaging a Managing Agent also has several drawbacks:
As there is currently no licensing or even accreditation requirement for Managing Agents in Singapore there is no legislative assurance of a minimum level of professional standard: so for example currently out of 130 Managing Agent firms only 30 have been accredited under the scheme launched by the professional bodies SPRING 2007
The Management Corporation has to pay a monthly recurring Managing Agent’s fee charged over and above all other costs and fees necessary for the proper maintenance of the strata development.
When critical and swift decisions need to be made control and communication are not likely to as efficacious when compared to those of an in-house management team and
The diversified interests of the Managing Agent can be detrimental to the Management Corporation and the strata development.
On the other hand, Management Corporations which employ in-house management teams enjoy several benefits:
The issue of continuity favors Management Corporations that employ in-house management teams and.
The Management Council has better control and communication with the team as they are directly in charge of running the in-house management team.
The drawbacks of employing an in-house management team
include the following:
The Management Corporation may have to expect a comparatively lower level of standard and/or performance than if they had engaged a professional Managing Agent.
while it is theoretically possible for a Management Corporation to sue the employees they have engaged in contract according to the rule of vicarious liability 6the Management Corporation may have to bear the responsibility for the in-house management team’s actions and/or omissions for negligent acts in the course of employment.
The study reveals that when making a choice between the two different system property management, if the Management Corporation’s priority is practicality and efficiency, it would be better off engaging a professional and preferably accredited Managing Agent. On the other hand if the Management Council comprises members who are driven and committed knowledgeable enough and prepared to dedicate their time to their development on a voluntary basis it would be better off employing an in-house management team. In this way the Management Council may exercise direct control over the daily and long-term functions and operations of the strata development.
Source：Alice Christudason: Choice of property management system for residential strata developments in Singapore. Property Management Vol 26 No.22008.P97-111. 7
译文：
新加坡住宅区物业管理体系的选择
这一部分提供了一个关于新加坡两个住宅小区的案例研究——在这里称为“住宅小区 A”和“住宅小区 B”。该案例展示了两个小区的物业管理体系选择以及它们各自的影响。
从对两个小区物业经理和代管人的采访中可以确定，每个住宅小区不同的物
相关推荐：
loading