Strata scheme CTS 16829
CTS 16829 · Registration date not recorded · Lot count not recorded · Queensland checked 30 June 2026
Public record: 4 tribunal matters. A reasonable pre-screen, but not the full picture, the financials and minutes that decide the purchase are in the report, not the registers. Read it, and obtain a strata records search, before you bid.
- 4 tribunal or court matters, the most serious about repairs and common property
- $5,000 indicative cost exposure per lot, moderate band
The public record is a pre-screen, not the strata report. Read on for the detail, then obtain a strata records search before you bid.
-
Public record checked
Litigation, building-work orders, and governance for this scheme, the page you are on.
- Read the strata report →
Paste the section 184 strata search or AGM minutes to see the fund balance and red flags the public registers can't. Obtain a strata records search if you do not have it yet.
- Questions to ask
The specific questions this scheme's record raises, ready for the strata manager or your conveyancer.
-
Decide
Take the public record and the report findings to your conveyancer before you bid.
Risk read
What the public record shows for this scheme, read for a buyer. This is not the strata report, and a quiet record is not a guarantee: obtain a strata records search before you bid.
-
4 litigation matters on record
Tribunal and court decisions naming this scheme as a party. A litigious building is more likely to be carrying unresolved disputes, defects, or levy fights.
Cost exposure
Moderate exposureAn indicative, itemised estimate of what one lot here could face, built only from this scheme's public-record signals. Indicative ranges, not this building's actual figures, and not financial advice.
Special levies are apportioned by unit entitlement. Set this from your contract; 1.0× is an average lot.
| Driver | Good | Expected | Worst |
|---|---|---|---|
Tribunal and legal costs 4 tribunal or court matters on the public record. Indicative per-lot share of tribunal and legal costs in a strata dispute (NCAT). Scaled for: 4 matters. | $600 | $5,000 | $18,900 |
| Total per lot | $600 | $5,000 | $18,900 |
Estimate only. Figures are indicative ranges from public remediation programs and reporting, apportioned to one lot; they are not this building's costed works and not financial advice. Obtain the capital works fund balance, any special levy resolved or proposed, and a strata records search before you transact.
Questions to ask before you bid
- 1
What by-laws apply to pets, parking, short-stay letting, and renovations, and have any been disputed?
Because we found a by-law matter on record.
- 2
What is the capital works (sinking) fund balance, its adequacy ratio, and the 10-year plan?
- 3
Are any special levies raised, proposed, or scoped-but-not-yet-levied?
- 4
Can I see the last two years of AGM minutes, including any motions that were defeated?
Ask about this building
Ask a plain-English question and we'll answer from our record: litigation, building-work orders, water and defect matters, the managing agent, and more.
Save keeps this scheme on your dashboard. Monitoring tracks the matter count from 4 today; we'll flag new matters here as they appear.
Building record
Strata plan CTS 16829 is on the register.
Location not mapped for this scheme yet. Map coverage is New South Wales today. Open the full map.
Litigation
- Santorini by the sea [2021] QBCCMCmr 392
Other QBCCMCmr 20 August 2021
whether a motion proposing the engagement of a person as a body corporate manager complied with the legislation; whether it is just and equitable in the circumstances to dismiss a request to invalidate such a motion because of a contravention of the Act; whether the outcome sought is no longer relevant or required Act, ss 122, 276
- Santorini By The Sea [2020] QBCCMCmr 255
Repairs and common property QBCCMCmr 19 May 2020
CARETAKING SERVICE CONTRACTOR – where dispute about status of caretaker agreement – where body corporate purported to pass motion to cease acquiring caretaking services – where motion purported to extinguish jurisdiction for caretaker to take proceedings in QCAT – where motion described caretaker as “past” caretaker – whether motion unlawful – whether voters were misled – whether to invalidate motion REASONABLENESS – where motion requires external common property gate to be kept closed – where caretaker alleges keeping gate closed would affect letting business – whether resolution was unreasonable BODY CORPORATE POWERS – BODY CORPORATE DEBT – where motion requires common property gate to be kept closed – where motion purports to create body corporate right to recover as a body corporate debt costs of attendance, remedy or repair against persons manipulating or interfering with operation of gate – where motion alleged to be a purported by-law – whether to invalidate resolution ELECTRONIC VOTING – where general meeting proposed motion to approve electronic voting and also invited electronic voting for that meeting – where two versions of voting paper issued – where lack of a vote on a motion was recorded as an abstention – whether to invalidate electronic voting motion – whether to invalidate votes cast electronically COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT STATEMENT – where motion sought to create easement – where separate motion sought to record new CMS for easement – where same CMS motion proposed to record change of regulation module – where CMS motion allegedly did not clearly disclose change of regulation module – where easement motion defeated but new CMS recorded to change regulation module – whether to invalidate CMS motion – whether to order new CMS be recorded to revert to previous regulation module BODY CORPORATE RECORDS – where request for access to body corporate records – where request denied because request referred to incorrect regulation module – where request denied because access seeker requested to see all of the records – where request denied because access seeker wished to bring family member – where request denied because access seeker had commenced legal proceedings – whether to order to allow access – whether to order that family member be allowed to attend inspection. Act, ss 94(2), 204, 205; Standard Module, ss 86(1)(d), 96(1)
- Santorini By The Sea [2020] QBCCMCmr 44
By-laws QBCCMCmr 30 January 2020
RESOLUTIONS – where body corporate resolved to issue notice to caretaker to cease acquiring services – where caretaker alleges that notice designed to extinguish QCAT jurisdiction to hear dispute about caretaking service contractor agreements and limit other future remedies – whether any contravention of legislation – whether BCCM or QCAT is appropriate jurisdiction BY-LAWS – REASONABLENESS –where body corporate passed resolution requiring external pedestrian gate to be kept closed – where applicant alleges that resolution purports to be a by-law and impose a penalty – where applicant alleges keeping gate closed will disrupt his letting agent business – where applicant alleges rationale for keeping gate closed is not genuine – whether resolution purports to create by-law or ‘house rule’ – – whether resolution purports to impose penalty – whether decision to make resolution unreasonable INTERIM ORDER – whether to grant interim order Act, ss 94(2)
- Santorini By The Sea [2020] QBCCMCmr 34
Management and meetings QBCCMCmr 22 January 2020
GENERAL MEETING – whether opposition to a motion requiring a resolution without dissent is unreasonable. Act, ss 276(1) and (3), Schedule 5 Item 10.
Decisions naming this scheme as a party, from QBCCMCmr via AustLII. The line beneath each matter is the decision's own catchwords, quoted; the topic tag is our grouping of those words and reads "Other" when they do not clearly fit, so you can always check it against the source. Every matter links to the full decision. Whether a matter helped or hurt the scheme is not assessed here.
Evidence ledger
Litigation-only record: this scheme is on file because a tribunal matter named its plan number, with no registry address, parcel, or map.
| Checked | Found | Match | Last checked |
|---|---|---|---|
| Registry and parcel | Land registry | Stub only | Not harvested here yet |
| Governance: AGM, managing agent, annual reporting | Not yet checked | Not matched | Not harvested here yet |
| Litigation: NCAT and courts | 4 matters | Direct | Not harvested here yet |
| Levies and financials | Not yet checked | Not matched | Not in the public record |
| Defects and building-work orders | Outside current coverage | Not matched | Not harvested here yet |
| Fund balances, current levies, minutes, defects not yet litigated | Not on the public record, and no registry entry for this scheme | Not matched | Never in the public record |
What was checked, what it found, how strong the match, and when each source last ran. A source that has not run here yet reads as not checked, never as checked and clear. The unknowns the public registers structurally cannot show stay named, so silence above is never read as a clean bill.
Deep report · coming soon
On top of the public record above, the deep report will add the scheme's minutes, financials, capital-works fund, and a defect inspection. We're building it. Leave your email and we'll tell you when it's ready.