• Login:
Welcome, Register Here
follow PropertyTalk on facebook follow PropertyTalk on twitter Newsletter follow PropertyTalk on LinkedIn follow PropertyTalk on facebook
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 54
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    183

    Default Feed Back

    Quote Originally Posted by whitt View Post
    If any one has concearns please send your comments to board members. If members stay silent then they will never get true feedback how people feel.
    Here may actually be a better place so it's in the open and doesn't get silenced. Furthermore, all get to see how other members think and feel about these issues.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    5,086

    Default

    Correct me if I'm wrong, APIA, but I don't think Barry is a board member any longer.

    It would be a bit of a worry if the organisation was not able to turn to it's elected board members to answer members questions!

    I had hoped much of these issues would have been fixed following the last APIA breakdown/ Shake up. Apparently issues still exist.
    Of course they exist. I don't think that there would be any not-for-profit organisation in the world there aren't some members with issues over the way things are being run.

    A for-profit organisation can say to its customers "stuff off, we'll things our way for the sole benefit of our share holders", but an NFP has to do things more democratically, which means allowing members to air their grievances in any way they see fit.

    I respect Barry and what he has done, and suspect that he will have some valid points, but that doesn't mean that APIA has gone to hell in a hat basket and is about to disappear quicker than you can say 'Lehman Brothers'.

    cube
    DFTBA

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    236

    Default Emails to members

    I remember last time there was conflict - I received two emails from different factions at APIA promoting their respective point of veiws - I have a business, (and am not a board member) - can I promote my business through the APIA database to promote my cause - NOT!!!

    Yes it is a whinge -

    So heres a question - Has anyone from NZ largest property education company - "Richmastery" ever spoken at an APIA event.The APIA should be totally devoid of conflict and bring in Leaders of Property - regardless of wether they like them or not.

    I have been told I have been baned from RM events but the question stands Do the APIA memebers get the chance to see "all the sides of Property"

    and why have I not been invited to show my side of Property to the APIA - (self seeking here)

    HMMMMM

    and Barry Bridgman - I say to you - you are not self seeking and you see a problem and I personally will support you

    APIA do have a problem

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    787

    Default APIA: Herald on Sunday 22/2/09

    Property politics boil over
    4:00AM Sunday Feb 22, 2009
    Andrea Milner

    A member of the Auckland Property Investors Association's board is calling for a vote of no confidence in the organisation's "autocratic" president, Sue Tierney, amid allegations it is on the brink of insolvency.

    Board member Ron Hoy Fong says he has no confidence in Tierney's leadership and that the organisation's financial position is "dismal". He estimates the not-for-profit organisation is losing between $10,000 and $18,000 per month.

    Hoy Fong is not alone in his concerns about the association's current management.

    A former board member, Dianne McAteer, who resigned earlier this month, wrote to the other board members in January referring to "the financial issues at hand"; stating the board was "in serious trouble" and that "the membership would have a good case for a vote of no confidence".

    Its former chief executive David Baty has just resigned as well, also claiming the association has hit financial dire straits.

    Board secretary Tony Steindle, the association's honorary solicitor, confirms it is solvent. He responded on Tierney's behalf as she is currently overseas. Funds held by the APIA as at March 31 last year were $134,000, Steindle says, and at the end of this financial year the accounts are likely to show funds of $78,000.

    Yet on March 31, 2007, funds held for the association were $262,000. The association's profit and loss statement to November last year shows a loss of more than $81,000.

    Baty says association members are unaware how badly the organisation's financial status has deteriorated: "They're still accepting membership fees when in essence they're very close to insolvency."

    Feedback indicates association members are dissatisfied with a lack of communication from the board, Baty says, and membership turnover is more than 30 per cent.

    The board's minutes of June 23 last year show Tierney noted member feedback indicated "concern about the state of finances for APIA". On August 18 last year, board treasurer Ann Loudon was "very concerned at the loss of $38,000 for the year to date", but the minutes record that "It was agreed that we should not go to the members at this point."

    In a discussion document appended to the minutes, under the heading "Finances", it was noted that "Financial sustainability is of critical concern. We are currently using capital reserves. Expenditure needs to be reviewed and limited."

    McAteer noted that legal and accounting expenses were high early last year. These services are provided by the legal and accounting firms of which Steindle and Loudon respectively are principals.

    Legal fees of $17,000 were charged by Steindle Williams, the firm in which Steindle is a partner, over a two-year period. Steindle says he and Loudon have both declared their interest to the board in terms of their firms being lawyers and accountants to APIA.

    Steindle says the association's financial losses result from an expo it organised in November 2007 and the Christmas dinner function held that year, together with costs associated with the departure of a former chief executive, Ashley Church. Board meeting minutes from December 18, 2007 show the association lost $12,000 on the dinner. The total cost of the expo was more than $120,000 and the income was $90,250, with Tierney noting that she was "not expecting" this loss.

    Baty asks: "How do you lose $12,000 on a Christmas function and $30,000 on an expo?"

    Since then, Steindle says further losses have resulted from dropping membership. On November 3 last year, Loudon noted the projected loss for the year to date was exceeded by $30,000. But Steindle says the board has undertaken cost-cutting measures and negotiated new sponsorship agreements, and now "is in a sound position financially".

    One board member, Simon Shreeve, is also a shareholder and director of XLR8 Events, which has owed the organisation $5625 since November 2007, and is now in liquidation. Steindle says the association is pursuing recovery of this amount with the liquidator and that Shreeve did not vote "on matters relating to this debt".

    Hoy Fong says he has "brought up the issue of conflict of interest" recently. Five of the seven board members are actively employed serving the property investment industry and Baty says that on the board "they can control a database of business. You're talking a multi-million dollar industry within this captive market."

    The organisation has churned through four chief executives in the past 18 months. The first, Ashley Church, resigned following the last board election when Tierney became president.

    Dianne McAteer stepped in as acting chief executive until a permanent replacement could be found. Jane Bollard was then appointed to the role, followed by David Baty who quit after three months - as Bollard had.

    Baty says he left because of undue interference with his role from the association president and other board members and says his predecessors left for the same reason. Steindle says Bollard told the board she chose to leave the role "as based on the strategic plan she had presented to the board she did not see that she wished to take on the role of its implementation".

    Regarding Baty, Steindle says the board "had concerns as to prioritisation of work and his dealings with third parties".

    But McAteer, who joined the board once she was no longer the acting chief executive, wrote to the other members in December last year saying: "We have failed to give clear direction to Jane [Bollard] and now David [Baty]. We are still confused between governance and management, and are doing neither well at a strategic level. There is a lack of commercial maturity being shown around personnel management."

    In January, she wrote again to the board members saying: "I can't see a way forward with the current make-up of the board ... I have to say a whole new board might be the answer as this one appears to have too much history and bad blood to be able to move forward. The politics are ridiculous."

    "If the current president resigns, I think the organisation can go forward," says Hoy Fong. "If it continues the way Sue has managed the [association], nothing will happen."

    WHO'S WHO ON THE ASSOCIATION

    The Auckland Property Investors Association (APIA) is an independent, non-profit organisation formed to provide professional development and networking opportunities for its members, who are property investors and other professionals involved in the property market.

    The current board comprises:

    Sue Tierney - association president and head of Ponsonby mortgage broking business Mortgages by Design.

    David Whitburn - association vice president and head of property development company Fuzo.

    Tony Steindle - association secretary and principle of Ponsonby property law firm Steindle Williams.

    Ann Loudon - association treasurer and director of accountancy firm Streetsmart.

    Simon Shreeve - director of a home staging, interior design and property makeover company.

    The other two board members, Chris Marston and Ron Hoy Fong, are property investors who do not also run businesses directly serving the property industry.

    Ructions behind closed doors

    The association has been dogged by difficulties at the top since before August 2007 when they first spilled beyond the boardroom during electioneering for board appointments.

    Andrew King was then president and Ashley Church chief executive. Only days before members were to elect a new president, Church said he would run for presidency.

    Members then received two bizarre emails.

    The first, sent on August 14, by Sue Tierney and supporter David Whitburn, referred to issues between board members and problems between the board and Church. "Both Ashley and another board member have strongly objected to Andrew King standing for the board, which has now resulted in Ashley standing ..."

    The email denied King was the source of the issues, claiming debate related to "the extent to which the APIA is a profit-making venture".

    Hours later, Church supporters - John May, Garth Melville and Annette Kann - emailed members, denying problems between Church

    and the board over the association's commercial activities but acknowledged "deep-seated and fundamental problems within the organisation". They said debate related to King's attempted management interference, culminating in an attempted no confidence motion in his presidency.

    On election night, Tierney was voted president and King was elected to the board. Church resigned days later.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/n...ectid=10557966
    Last edited by Marc; 22-02-2009 at 08:37 AM. Reason: duplication of some text

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    59

    Default

    Wow! If the rumours are even slightly true, we have a problem. This year APIA hosts the National Conference, and if there is any possibility of being anywhere near insolvent, there needs to be urgent action, if not change. Assuming per Sue we are in good shape, can I propose as a paid up member;

    The books are opened (selectively if needs be, to a small group of INDEPENDANT professionals who can then confirm to everyone that they are up to date and with good savings and therefore shut down the rumour)

    Re allegations of conflict of interest and self- interest, I started a thread last year entitled APIA VS ASHLEY CHURCH after I attended a meeting and was absolutely shocked and disgusted by the behaviour of then board members Tony Steindle and Andrew King... in my opinion if I was to serve selflessly on a board and give my time voluntarily there is always the natural question "WIIFM...whats in it for me?" For some it is acknowledgement; for some it is giving something back or knowing you made a difference; for others it may be credibility, which brings in extra work or opens doors... but I repeat it is my opinion that a board member owning a legal firm should not be acting as the APIA lawyers as there is a huge temptation to persue frivolous legal action (In the case of APIA vs Ashley Church) where APIA coffers are drained financially and the only winner in the end is the Lawyers and board member who owns the company. Unless of course the lawyer/ board member is prepared to act for FREE so there is no potential conflict of interest (and no one would expect one to work for free... therefore easier to just USE ANOTHER LAWYER!!!)

    Maybe this time around there will be transparency not cover up. Changes to the constitution which make the running of APIA more open and accountable so we dont lose good hard working people like Barry Bridgeman, Ron Hoy Fong and others who feel they are tainted by the actions of certain other self serving.

    Heres hoping

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    3,936

    Default

    Totally agree Lincoln.
    Apia should have fixed the issue a long time ago after first shake up.

    Here is the Herald article
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/property/n...ectid=10557966

    Funny thing is the "conflict of interest" issue still exists many years after it was first raised.
    Seems while the majority of APIA members think it is unacceptable the board has been unable to fix it.
    Maybe some members of board turn a blind eye?

    As Lincoln says "How can a board member also be the Lawyer for APIA etc? Is this not "conflict of interest" and one of the major issues which is still to be resolved by the current board?

    Open up the books to a select few members, confirm the rumours of big losses or not.
    Vote no confidence on president they have had long enough to fix issues. And bring back Ashley Church since he seems to be one of the few with Barry and RHF who actually grasp the issues and how serious they are.
    Last edited by whitt; 22-02-2009 at 11:41 AM.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    473

    Default

    Well the only way for the APIA to regain any credibility would be to sack the board with the exception of Hoy Fong and Chris M and re elect a new one.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    3,936

    Default

    Yes. Bring it on............
    Bring back Ashley and Barry also once the deadwood has been cleared.

  9. #19

    Default

    I have been a member of Apia for several years now and have become disappointed with the infighting that has been going on over the last couple of years within the board of Apia. During this time they have lost the services of excellent personnel like Ashley Church and John May. I believe there is only room for one organisation - either Apia or The Traders . For me I think I will give the Traders a go. Part of the problem with APIA, is that they have board members with businesses in the property industry. Conflict of interest !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Auckland
    Posts
    236

    Thumbs up Whitt

    You are on to it

    Here is a radical idea - why not make board members unable to have business or contracts with the APIA

    and secondly why not have a group of investors that are independant of the board (say 10) reveiw all speaker applications and vote on their choices or any other matter that the board may be conflicted in

    This 2nd tier is also independant and what they say goes - they get to vote and majority wins -

    The board must implement their decisions and lets get even more radical - It is done by a membership ballot open to all members and the lenth of stay is for say 6 months - then a new person is allocated to this team

    What do you think of this idea?

    Auckland is the biggest APIA in NZ and needs new ideas and leadership. It was frankly embarrassing to read the article today in the Herald on Sunday today. There is no win / win in that

    I have spoken at a number of PIA's around the country and I have seen the good ones - Blenheim, Rotorua , Hamilton

    Auckland PIA - what is this - do I want to join again - NOT - unless they grow up -

    Like the radical ideas?


 

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. email from trademe
    By muppet in forum Coffee Lounge
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 22-03-2011, 03:20 PM
  2. Got this in an email.....
    By donna in forum World in General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 14-04-2007, 12:17 AM
  3. Email alerts
    By [email protected] in forum Ask Us a Question about the Forum
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 24-10-2006, 11:16 AM
  4. Watch Out for this Email!
    By Marc in forum About PropertyTalk.com
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-10-2005, 08:28 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •