Property & Strata Arrears & Compliance NSW Reference build

A 28-day deadline, a written reason, and a ledger that cannot hold either

Since 27 October 2025, a NSW owner's request to pay their levies by instalments has carried a legal clock: a decision within 28 days, in writing, with reasons if it is refused, and no fee for asking. The duty sits with the owners corporation. In practice it lands on the strata manager's desk — and the software that runs the ledger has no field for a request. We built the missing layer in a single sprint week: a working tool that reads requests out of the arrears inbox, runs the clock, drafts the letter, and blocks recovery action until the statutory conditions are met.

Reference build

jig designed and built this tool as a working demonstration against the published NSW rules. It has not been deployed inside a client's book, and the value figures below are modelled from published industry benchmarks, not measured from a client engagement. Every rule it applies is sourced and dated in the sections that follow.

Sector
Property / Strata management
Function
Arrears, compliance & owner communication
Built for
Firms managing 5,000–30,000 lots
Regulatory basis
NSW payment-plan reforms — commenced 27 October 2025
Runs alongside
  • Existing trust ledger (Strata Master, StrataMax, Urbanise)
  • Shared arrears mailbox
Time to working tool
1 sprint week
28 days
To decide a payment plan request, in writing
10% p.a.
Statutory interest, calculated per owner
5
Conditions that must pass before recovery can start
1 week
From written brief to a working tool
The rule

What changed on 27 October 2025.

When an owner cannot pay their levies, they can ask to pay them off over time. In NSW that request is no longer a conversation and an email. It is a process with a legal clock attached. The duty sits with the owners corporation, and in practice it lands on the managing agent:

  • Decide the request within 28 days of receiving it.
  • Put the decision in writing — and give written reasons if it is refused.
  • Charge no fee for asking, or for the arrangement itself.
  • Offer an arrangement before starting recovery action.
  • Give 30 days' notice before taking proceedings.

Unpaid levies also carry interest at 10% per annum, simple. That is the arithmetic of the ledger. The 28 days is the arithmetic of a case file — and the two live in different places.

Miss the clock and it does not become a bad debt to chase another day. The owner can take the matter to the Tribunal, and the scheme may end up paying their costs on a debt that was never in dispute.

Why the gap exists

The platforms are good at the ledger. This is not a ledger problem.

Australian strata firms run their books on Strata Master, StrataMax, Urbanise or MYBOS, and those systems are genuinely good at what they were designed for: lot records, levy generation, trust accounting, disbursements. Trust accounting is the most tightly audited workflow in the business, and we did not touch it.

The 28-day decision is a different kind of object. It is a request that arrives by email, a clock that starts on receipt, a decision that must be recorded, a letter that must go out, and a gate that holds recovery until all of it is done. A ledger is keyed on lots and periods. A request is keyed on a human being and elapsed time. There is no field for it, and no report that lists the ones nobody answered.

"This record will show in the Lot record but not in Debt Recovery" — and the plan details themselves are entered as free-text notes, while the same help article instructs users to exclude the lot from debt recovery so notices do not go out mid-arrangement.

MRI Strata Master — help article on payment plans, last updated 21 October 2022, five days before the regime commenced

A request is not a lot
The ledger knows what a lot owes. It does not know that a person asked for help on 20 September, or that nobody has answered them. A refusal sent by email leaves no footprint anywhere in the accounting record.
The workflow is split across four modules
Arrears ageing lives in accounting, debt recovery in a separate module, the plan record on the lot card, and letters in mail-merge. The statutory gate has to sit between all four — and the plan record and the recovery process are explicitly not joined.
The release notes tell the story
Eleven months after commencement, the vendor shipped a Financial Hardship Information Statement added to levy notice printing, then a release with bank deposit slips, PayID and a second-page arrears table. Both fit the existing data model. Neither added a request object or a deadline.
Judgement is not a feature
Vendors holding trust money for hundreds of firms will ship mechanical obligations. What counts as an adequate written reason is an interpretive legal question, and it belongs with the customer's lawyers — which is exactly why the workflow stays in Outlook.

The obligation is not a finance rule, so it cannot be closed by a finance feature. The clock belongs to a case file, and the case file does not exist.

What we built

One sprint week, one workflow, nine working parts.

The brief was narrow on purpose: run the statutory decision, and leave the ledger alone. The tool reads the shared arrears mailbox and a ledger export from the existing system. There is no migration, no integration project, and no change to how levies are raised or receipts are issued.

01
Inbox reader
Scans the arrears mailbox, classifies what is actually a payment request, and extracts lot number, amount, frequency and hardship language — showing how much of each case it could fill in. Fields it cannot find stay visibly blank instead of being guessed.
02
Case timeline
One record per request: when it arrived, what was asked for, what was decided, which letter went out, what was agreed, what has been paid. The object the accounting system does not have.
03
The 28-day clock
Every case shows days remaining or days overdue. Cases are ranked by what is closest to costing money, with a plain-English instruction on each row — "decide today", "answer by 25 Oct".
04
Statutory interest
Interest calculated per owner at 10% per annum simple from each levy's due date, recalculated as payments land rather than estimated by hand.
05
Decision letters
Approve as asked, approve at a workable figure, or refuse with reasons. Refusal reasons are only selectable when the grounds are actually true, and a late decision says so in the letter — because a letter that overstates the timeline is worse evidence than an honest one.
06
Instalment plans
Schedule, running balance, recorded payments and a cleared-by date, generated from the approved figure with the offered amount taken into account.
07
The recovery gate
Five conditions checked before any recovery action: request answered, decision in writing, reasons given where refused, no fee charged, deadline met. A failing condition blocks the action and says why. The deadline is the one that cannot be switched back on.
08
Statutory payment waterfall
Money received is applied in the order the Act requires: oldest levy first, then interest, then costs — so an owner is never pushed into arrears by allocation order.
09
Ledger import
Takes a CSV export from the existing system, including messy ones. Quoted amounts, day-first dates and mixed column orders are handled rather than rejected.
Running

What it looks like on a working desk.

Screenshots of the live tool on a demonstration book of 1,842 lots. You can open it and drive it yourself — the button is at the end of this page.

Levy Control arrears desk showing seven payment plan requests ranked by deadline, one overdue
The arrears desk. Seven open requests, sorted by what is closest to costing the scheme money, with the overdue one in red and a plain instruction on every row — nobody has to work out where to start.
Inbox view showing payment plan requests read from email with lot, amount and frequency extracted
Requests arrive as email, and stay email if that is what they are. The reader shows what it could extract and how much of the case it could fill in. A roof complaint is routed to maintenance and never touches the clock.
A generated decision letter approving an instalment arrangement at the calculated figure
The decision writes the letter. Approve, refuse with reasons, or approve at a figure that actually clears the debt — with the schedule, the interest already applied and an honest statement of when the decision was made.
The economics

Wages are the constraint, not the property market.

Management fees are charged per lot and recur, so a softer housing market does not cut a strata firm's revenue — it slows new scheme wins. What is actually compressing the margin is the cost of the people doing the work:

52.1%
of revenue now goes to salaries, up from 48.5% in 2022
415
lots per full-time employee — the sector average
19.4%
median EBITDA, down from 23% in 2022

Source: Macquarie Bank 2026 Strata Industry Benchmarking Report, covering more than 200 firms and 1.4 million lots. The same report puts the best-performing cohort at 470 lots per employee — a gap of about 13% between the middle of the market and the top.

That makes labour productivity the only lever with real money in it. Which is why a tool like this is measured against lots per employee rather than hours saved:

15,000 lots at 415 lots per FTE36.1 FTE
The same book at 1% better productivity35.8 FTE
Capacity released0.35 FTE
At the benchmark strata manager salary of A$125,252≈ A$44,000 a year

Modelled, not measured. The arithmetic above runs published benchmark ratios against a hypothetical book. It is not a claim about what any client has saved. What it establishes is the size of the prize: one workflow that returns a fraction of one percent of productivity pays for its own build several times over.

What this shows

The pattern, in case it applies to a workflow of yours.

This is what a jig sprint looks like when the problem is a rule rather than a report. Five things carried it:

The rule was read, not assumed. Every obligation in the tool traces to a published provision with a commencement date. Getting the rule wrong in code is worse than having no tool at all.

It works beside the system of record. The ledger stays the ledger. A CSV export and a mailbox are the whole integration surface — no migration, no data cleanse, no parallel accounting.

The letter is the audit trail. The date a decision was sent is the evidence that the clock was met. That makes the document the product, not an afterthought.

It is honest about what it does not know. Missing fields stay missing, late letters say they are late, and reasons that are not true cannot be selected. Software that drafts legal correspondence has to fail visibly.

One week, not one quarter. The whole tool was a single sprint week, because the scope was one workflow and one set of rules rather than a platform.

If a rule, a deadline or a decision in writing is living in someone's inbox and memory, it can usually be made into a tool in a week. That is the work.