Some sectional title schemes, particularly smaller ones, choose to self-manage rather than appoint a professional managing agent. It's a legitimate option, and for the right scheme it can work well. But it's worth going in with clear eyes about what it actually requires, and where it tends to break down.
What Self-Management Actually Involves
A self-managed scheme has trustees (or a designated owner) personally handling levy collection and arrears, bookkeeping and financial statements, compliance with the Sectional Titles Schemes Management Act (STSMA), contractor sourcing and management, AGM administration, and owner communication. None of this is optional; it's the same set of legal obligations a managing agent would otherwise handle.
The Case for Self-Management
- Cost savings: no management fee, which matters more for smaller schemes where the fee represents a larger share of the total budget
- Direct control: trustees make every decision themselves without an intermediary
- Works best for: small schemes (often under 10-15 units) with a trustee genuinely willing and able to commit significant time, ideally with relevant financial or administrative experience
The Case for Professional Management
- Legal compliance expertise: an agent who manages many schemes stays current on STSMA requirements in a way that's harder for a volunteer trustee managing one scheme part-time
- Consistent arrears follow-up: professional processes tend to collect levies more reliably than ad hoc personal follow-up, which owners often find awkward with neighbours
- Contractor networks: established relationships and competitive quoting that individual trustees usually don't have access to
- Continuity: the scheme isn't dependent on one committed trustee who might move, get busy, or simply burn out
- Reduced personal liability exposure: proper procedural guidance protects trustees from the kind of governance mistakes that can create personal liability
Where Self-Management Tends to Break Down
The most common failure pattern: it works well while one committed trustee is willing to put in the hours, then falls apart when that person steps down, moves, or simply runs out of time. Arrears follow-up is often the first thing to slip, since it's the least pleasant task and the easiest to postpone. Compliance gaps (an outdated maintenance plan, incorrect AGM notice periods) tend to go unnoticed until they cause a real problem.
A Middle Ground: Partial Management
Some schemes opt for a hybrid, professional management of the financial and compliance-heavy work (levies, arrears, statutory requirements), while trustees retain more direct involvement in maintenance decisions and owner relationships. This can suit schemes that want cost savings without carrying the full compliance burden themselves.
Making the Decision
The honest question for any self-managed scheme is: what happens when the trustee currently doing the work is no longer willing or able to? If there's no real answer, that's usually a sign it's worth at least getting a quote for professional management, even if the scheme ultimately decides to continue self-managing.
Considering a move to professional management, or just want to know what it would cost?
Get a Free Professional Management Quote