1 reviews | Active since Nov 2024
Owners Misled on Prepaid Water Meter Costs and Terms
I am extremely disappointed with how Enbaya has managed the prepaid water meter project for our complex.
During the special general meeting, owners were able to vote on this project but the revised proposal with updated pricing, rental terms and installation did not get sent to owners until the very day of the meeting. Therefore no owners had an adequate chance to properly review or understand the financial impact prior to voting.
The way the project is currently being implemented is very different compared to how it was first proposed in the meeting notice sent to owners. Examples of these differences include the payment holiday terms have changed, monthly costs are higher, duration of agreements has changed, and there is additional operational and financial limitations that were not disclosed upfront.
Many owners feel like they were set up for long-term financial commitments that were not properly disclosed or explained to them upfront. Owners have made repeated and respectful requests to Enbaya to pause the project until all of the internal disputes within the scheme have been resolved, however, implementation has continued.
Based on my experience, the level of transparency and honesty in the manner in which this project has been managed raises serious concerns regarding this company's business practices and I would caution any complex from entering into any business relationship with Enbaya unless all terms/pricing are disclosed in advance.
Thank for your efford to respond, but your response avoids the core issue raised in my review.
Regardless of whether Enbaya was formally appointed by the Body Corporate, the company was aware that owners only received the revised proposal with materially changed pricing, terms, and financial commitments on the very same day of the meeting, leaving no reasonable opportunity for proper review before voting. This raise question on the business ethics of Enbaya.
Also, owners formerly requested that implementation be paused until the disputes and concerns within the scheme were resolved, yet the project continued regardless, and this invalid excuse was not provided in writing.
My concern is not about internal governance alone, but about the lack of transparency and fairness surrounding how this project was presented and implemented.
Thank for your efford to respond, but your response avoids the core issue raised in my review.
Regardless of whether Enbaya was formally appointed by the Body Corporate, the company was aware that owners only received the revised proposal with materially changed pricing, terms, and financial commitments on the very same day of the meeting, leaving no reasonable opportunity for proper review before voting. This raise question on the business ethics of Enbaya.
Also, owners formerly requested that implementation be paused until the disputes and concerns within the scheme were resolved, yet the project continued regardless, and this invalid excuse was not provided in writing.
My concern is not about internal governance alone, but about the lack of transparency and fairness surrounding how this project was presented and implemented.