The committee chair called it "the best decision we ever made."
Three years later, the numbers proved him right. A building that had been bleeding money on emergency repairs and reactive maintenance had transformed into one of the most efficiently run properties in its portfolio.
The total savings over three years: just over $180,000. Not through cutting corners or deferring maintenance — through doing things properly.
Here's exactly how it happened.
The building — a 15-year-old residential tower in Sydney's inner suburbs — wasn't in crisis. It wasn't falling apart. From the outside, it looked fine.
But the committee knew something wasn't right. Every quarter brought another surprise. An unexpected lift repair. An emergency plumbing call-out. A contractor invoice that seemed higher than it should be. The levies kept creeping up, but the building didn't seem to be getting any better.
When we first assessed the building, the picture became clearer:
No preventative maintenance program. Equipment was serviced when it failed, not before. The lift had missed several scheduled services. The fire panel hadn't been properly tested in over a year.
Contractor relationships were transactional. Whoever answered the phone got the job. No preferred suppliers, no negotiated rates, no accountability for quality.
No asset register or lifecycle planning. The committee had no idea how old major equipment was, what condition it was in, or when it might need replacement. Every major expense was a surprise.
Documentation was scattered. Certificates in email inboxes, invoices in filing cabinets, no centralised system. When we asked for the current AFSS, it took two weeks to find it.
Compliance gaps everywhere. Contractor insurance wasn't being verified. Fire safety deadlines were being missed. WHS requirements weren't being enforced.
The building wasn't being mismanaged maliciously — it was being managed the way most buildings are. Reactively, without systems, without technical oversight.
When we took over management, we implemented our standard onboarding process — a systematic 90-day program designed to get any building onto a proactive footing.
We walked every inch of the building. Documented every piece of major equipment — age, condition, service history where available. Identified every compliance obligation and checked current status. Built a complete picture of what we were working with.
The findings weren't unusual, but they were significant. Three fire doors with failed seals. A pump running hot that was six months from failure. Waterproofing on the roof showing early signs of degradation. All fixable — but only because we caught them early.
We reviewed every contractor the building was using. Verified insurance. Checked licence status. Compared pricing to market rates. Some were good — we kept them. Some were overcharging — we renegotiated or replaced. Some weren't properly insured — they were off the list immediately.
We established preferred supplier agreements with competitive rates locked in. The same quality of work, but at 15-25% lower cost across most trades.
We built a comprehensive maintenance schedule based on manufacturer recommendations and industry best practice. Monthly, quarterly, annual tasks — all mapped out, all assigned, all tracked.
The goal: no more surprises. Equipment gets serviced before it fails. Small problems get caught before they become big ones. Compliance deadlines get met automatically because they're in the system.
We established weekly reporting to the committee chair and monthly formal reports to the full committee. No more information vacuums. No more wondering what was happening in their building.
Every report included: completed work, upcoming maintenance, identified issues, compliance status, and financial tracking against budget. Transparency became the default.
Here's where the numbers get interesting.
Contractor renegotiation: $18,000 saved through preferred supplier agreements and competitive tendering
Avoided emergency call-outs: $12,000 saved by catching issues during business hours instead of after
Prevented failures: $8,000 saved by replacing the failing pump during a scheduled service window rather than emergency replacement
Insurance premium reduction: $4,000 saved after demonstrating improved risk management to insurers
Continued contractor efficiencies: $22,000
Lift modernisation planning: $25,000 saved by identifying the optimal timing and scope — avoiding both premature replacement and emergency failure
Waterproofing early intervention: $8,000 repair instead of projected $85,000 full replacement (counted as $8,000 spend avoided, with larger savings to come)
Reduced resident complaints: Harder to quantify, but committee time freed up significantly
Major capital works planning: $45,000 saved through proper scoping and competitive tendering of façade repairs
Ongoing operational efficiencies: $28,000
Avoided waterproofing failure: The early intervention from Year Two prevented what would have been a $77,000 additional cost — the membrane held, the repair worked
And this doesn't include the intangibles: committee members getting their weekends back, residents experiencing fewer disruptions, and the building's long-term value being protected rather than eroded.
This building wasn't special. It wasn't unusually neglected or uniquely positioned for improvement. It was a typical Sydney residential tower that had been managed the typical way — reactively, without systems, without technical oversight.
The savings came from doing the basics properly. Maintaining equipment before it fails. Getting competitive quotes. Catching problems early. Tracking compliance. Communicating regularly.
None of this is revolutionary. It's just rarely done consistently.
The committee chair's comment about it being "the best decision we ever made" wasn't really about the money — though that helped. It was about finally feeling like someone was actually looking after their building. Not just responding to problems, but preventing them. Not just managing, but protecting.
That's what proactive management delivers. Not magic — just competence, applied consistently.
Where could your building be saving?
Take the free Building Management Scorecard to identify where reactive costs might be hiding in your building — and what proactive management could deliver.
Dino Biordi
Founder & Managing Director, LUNA Management
25+ years in construction | NSW ABMA Independent Review Panel
A Building Manager oversees the safety, security and maintenance of designated properties and ensures that these properties comply with all applicable regulations. A Building Manager is also known as a Facilities Manager, Caretaker or Resident Manager. They are assisting the Owners Corporation with managing the common property, controlling the use of the common property by non-residents, arranging the maintenance and repair of common property.
Hiring a building manager? Most committees focus on price. Here are 10 questions that reveal whether a manager will actually protect your building — not just tick boxes.
The Australian building management industry has a trust problem. From the severed link between construction and management to systemic failures in oversight, here's what's broken — and what to look for in a manager you can trust
