private arrangements between residentual management and receivers

beaufoy

Last Nov I attended a AGM of a student village OMC. There was a asset manager there who was representing the interests of creditors of 40 apartments which were and still are in receivership. Said asset manager plus other members of OMC refused to endorse the accounts so A egm was arranged in order to examine the accounts in greater depth. Of course the accounts could not be submitted until approved by the OMC at a AGM. However, a few months later the planed EGM was cancelled and the accounts were submitted seemingly unapproved by an AGM. For some weeks I have been trying to contact the asset managers concerning their lack of concern that the EGM was cancelled and unapproved accounts were submitted. Finally the asset managers got back to me, and in effect stated that they allowed the OMC to cancel the EGM and submit unapproved accounts provided the directors of the OMC allowed the asset management company to examine the accounts at a private meeting rather than a AGM/EGM.
Any Ideas?

hullaballoo

Are you a member of the omc?

beaufoy

yes

Lockedout2

There are so many issues with OMCs, one major issue seems to be the directors who are elected by the members, acting in a manner which is not to the members liking.

Therefore the members should get rid of the directors and put in directors who would will act in a manner to the members liking.

Firstly despite what you think there is not a requirement for the members to approve the accounts at an AGM http://www.odce.ie/Portals/0/Documents/Media%20and%20Publications/Publications/Other%20Guidance/Chap%2024.pdf

The directors have a duty under company law to produce accounts that show a true and fair view of the companies affairs and have them audited and present them at the AGM. If the accounts do not show a true and fair view then the directors are guilty of an offence.

If the accounts are not audited then they are guilty of an offence.

If the members don't approve the accounts, then the members are saying that the accounts don't show a true and fair view and the members should remove the board, how do the members know that the accounts don't show a true and fair view?

The other issue here is the suppression of minority interests. It is inappropriate for the directors to provide information to some members and not others but again the members elect the directors. If the members don't like how the directors are acting then replace them.

I'd imagine your problem is that most of the members don't care and the reps of the 40 unit holders carry the power.

You have issues but the point of them filing unapproved accounts is not one of them.

beaufoy

good reply