Identify the strata client and the disputed decision

State whether the question concerns a levy, a meeting decision, use of property, a by-law, repairs or a building defect. Describe the result you want assessed without assuming that a particular remedy is available. Include the scheme’s location and the date of any notice or upcoming meeting.

If you are contacting the office for a committee, ask what authority it needs before accepting instructions. If you are an individual owner, make that explicit. Do not assume the lawyer previously used by the building can also advise you in a dispute involving the building’s governing body.

Create a decision trail, not an email dump

Collect the relevant meeting notice, agenda, minutes, resolution and correspondence. Keep the exact wording of the disputed decision. Place your own explanation in a separate note so that the lawyer can distinguish the record from your interpretation.

For a repair problem, list the affected area, reported dates and responses. Include plans, photographs or reports if available, but label gaps rather than guessing ownership or responsibility. Common-property boundaries and responsibility for work need assessment against the applicable documents and law.

  • Role: owner, tenant, committee member or authorised representative.
  • Decision: exact wording, meeting date and notice received.
  • Evidence: records supporting each factual concern.
  • Question: advice, negotiation, preparation for a meeting or representation?

Use the correct jurisdictional starting point

NCAT’s housing and property information includes NSW strata disputes. In the ACT, ACAT separately identifies unit titles disputes. A familiar word such as ‘body corporate’ does not establish that a process from another state applies.

Ask the adviser whether an internal step, mediation, conciliation or another process needs consideration. If there is already a proceeding, provide the complete application and directions. A directory location search helps find contacts; it does not decide jurisdiction or eligibility.

Reference: ACAT: case types including unit titles ↗

Compare a limited review with ongoing representation

One useful first-stage output is a written assessment of the documents and available next steps. Another is help preparing questions for an upcoming meeting. Ask each firm to describe the output, documents covered and exclusions in comparable terms.

A broad promise to ‘handle the strata matter’ leaves too much unclear. Ask whether communications with a manager, committee, insurer or other owners are included, who can authorise extra work and how costs will be reported. Record whose interests the lawyer will represent and who will receive the advice.