Why a 10-Year Maintenance Plan Matters in a Strata
When people look at strata levies, they often focus on one question:
Are the fees too high?
In many cases, the better question is this:
Is the building properly planning for future repairs?
Across Australia, long-term maintenance planning has become a major part of strata governance. The exact rules differ by state, but the principle is the same: a building should not wait for major items to fail before it starts raising money. In NSW this sits within the 10-year capital works fund plan framework, in Victoria it appears through mandatory maintenance planning for certain owners corporations, and in Queensland it is built into the sinking fund budgeting system.
For buyers, owners, and investors, this matters because poor planning usually shows up in one of three ways:
levies that look artificially low
repeated deferral of major works
special levies when the building runs out of options
A well-prepared long-term plan does not guarantee a perfect building. But it is one of the clearest signs that the owners corporation or body corporate is budgeting with some discipline.
The basic idea
A 10-year maintenance plan is meant to forecast major common property spending over time.
That usually includes items such as:
external painting
roof works
waterproofing
lift renewals
plant and equipment replacement
fire safety items
common area services and infrastructure
The aim is simple: collect funds gradually instead of waiting for a large repair bill to arrive all at once. In NSW, every strata scheme must have a 10-year capital works fund plan and review it at least every 5 years. In Queensland, the sinking fund budget must allow for major capital spending in the current year and the next 9 years. In Victoria, Tier 1 and Tier 2 owners corporations must prepare and approve a maintenance plan and have a maintenance fund.
State-by-state snapshot
State | What is required | Practical meaning |
|---|---|---|
NSW | Strata schemes must have a 10-year capital works fund plan. It must be reviewed at least every 5 years. From 1 April 2026, new or reviewed plans must use the NSW standard form. | Buyers should expect to see an actual long-term plan, not just a rough allowance in the budget. |
Victoria | Tier 1 and Tier 2 owners corporations must prepare and approve a maintenance plan and have a maintenance fund. Lower tiers may still choose to have one. | In larger Victorian schemes, the absence of a proper plan is a serious governance issue. |
Queensland | Bodies corporate must budget in the sinking fund for major spending in the current year and the next 9 years. | Even where there is no glossy consultant report, there should still be evidence that future capital costs have been forecast and funded. |
How these plans affect levies
This is where buyers often get caught out.
A building with a proper long-term plan may have higher regular levies, but that does not automatically make it worse value. In many cases, it means the scheme is collecting money steadily for predictable future works rather than ignoring the problem. NSW requires the capital works fund plan to estimate expected major expenditure, and Queensland’s sinking fund framework is specifically designed to reserve for likely future capital spending.
That is why low levies are not always good news.
Sometimes low levies mean:
the plan is outdated
contributions have been kept low for political reasons
major work has been postponed
the committee is relying on future special levies
In practical terms, a building can look cheap to own right now but become expensive later.
What a good plan usually shows
When reviewing strata records, do not just look for whether a plan exists. Look at whether it is actually useful.
A stronger plan will usually include:
major asset categories clearly identified
timing for repair or replacement
realistic cost allowances
evidence that the annual budget is at least loosely aligned with the forecast
review dates that are current, not stale
In NSW, the plan must be considered at each annual general meeting and reviewed at least every 5 years. For larger NSW schemes, financial scrutiny is higher, including annual reporting obligations and, in many cases, audit requirements for accounts and financial statements depending on the scheme’s size and circumstances.
Red flags buyers should watch for
This is the part that matters most in a strata records review.
1. No long-term plan, or a plan that is badly outdated
If a building should have a plan and does not, that is an immediate warning sign. Even where a plan is not strictly mandatory, the absence of one can still suggest weak financial planning.
2. Repeated deferral of major works
Watch for meeting minutes that say works were recommended, then postponed, then postponed again. That often means the building knew about the issue but did not want to fund it.
3. Levies that stay low while the building ages
Older buildings usually need more capital planning, not less. If the levies look unusually low for the age and complexity of the scheme, that deserves a closer look.
4. Major asset categories missing from the forecast
Common examples include:
waterproofing
roof membranes
lift modernization
fire safety systems
façade or concrete repairs
pumps, hot water systems, or other shared plant
If these items are not being budgeted for, that does not mean they disappeared. It usually means the cost has been pushed into the future.
5. Special levies becoming normal
A one-off special levy can happen even in a well-run building. But repeated special levies often point to underfunding, delayed maintenance, or poor forecasting.
Why this matters to value
A buyer is not just buying an apartment. They are also buying into the financial condition of the common property.
If the building has:
a current plan,
sensible contributions,
and evidence that works are actually being carried out,
that generally gives buyers more confidence.
If the records show:
underfunding,
deferred repairs,
and large future liabilities with little money set aside,
buyers will often treat that as a pricing risk.
Suggestion: Avoid making a blanket statement like “all well-funded buildings sell for X% more,” because sale price is influenced by many factors. But in real transactions, poor strata financial governance often affects negotiations, due diligence, and buyer confidence. That is an informed practical conclusion rather than a fixed national rule.
A simple way to read the records
Here is a practical shortcut buyers can use.
Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
Is there a current 10-year plan or sinking fund forecast? | If not, future major costs may not be properly planned for. |
Has it been reviewed recently? | An old plan may no longer reflect current building condition or current costs. |
Do the AGM budgets line up with the plan? | A plan is not very useful if the levies ignore it. |
Are major works mentioned in minutes but not funded? | This often points to future levy pressure. |
Is the building relying on special levies? | Frequent special levies usually mean regular funding has been inadequate. |
Are major asset categories missing? | Missing items often become expensive surprises later. |
The practical takeaway
A long-term maintenance plan is not just a compliance document.
It is one of the clearest indicators of whether a strata scheme is:
thinking ahead,
funding common property properly,
and reducing the risk of sudden financial shocks for owners.
For buyers, the goal is not simply to find the building with the lowest levies.
The goal is to find the building where the records show:
realistic planning,
current maintenance forecasting,
and fewer signs that expensive problems have been pushed down the road.
That is why a proper strata records review should not stop at the balance sheet. The real story is usually found in the relationship between the forecast, the budgets, the meeting minutes, and the condition issues mentioned across the records.