Body corp cops 312 ‘nuisance’ email barrage from owner

A unit owner at Royal Pines Archer Hill has beeen ordered to halt her excessive emails

---

A unit owner accused of sending an “excessive” amount of threatening and insulting emails has been ordered to submit correspondence no longer than 1000 words.

In a decision published by Queensland Body Corporate and Community Management Committee, the owner of Lot 10, who bought into the luxurious Royal Pines at Benowa on the Gold Coast in December 2022, allegedly sent a staggering 312 emails to the body corporate manager between then and December 2024.

The body corporate – Archer Hill – alleged that there had been an increase in the frequency of emails in late 2024.

“Emails from the respondent to the body corporate manager have become more prevalent since that time, for example, with 25 emails received in a four day period in December 2024, and 13 emails in a 12 day period in January 2025, and which numbers do not include emails sent separately to individual committee members or lot owners,” the application by the body corporate said.

“In contravention of the by-law (By-law 23 regulates communications), the respondent has communicated via email with the committee, its members, and the body corporate manager in an unreasonable, discourteous, and disrespectful manner by: the sheer volume of correspondence, and the content of the correspondence, which includes accusations, condescending and demanding statements, unreasonable requests, and questions the committee’s integrity.”

---

On the day that the application for a hearing was lodged by the body corporate, the committee received 22 emails from the respondent in one night.

It was also claimed that even when the body corporate actioned a request made by the respondent, she would them make complaints about insufficient notice, demands about access times, details of contractors, and then denying access to her lot.

Submissions were received from the owners of eight lots within the scheme, all in support of the body corporate’s application.

The reasons for decision noted that the body corporate had previously attempted to resolve the issue (of communication) through both formal and informal channels, including a letter in September 2024, requesting the respondent to limit correspondence to one email per week.

Despite these efforts, the respondent reportedly continued to send multiple emails, prompting the body corporate to issue a notice of contravention on December 10, 2024.

In response to the application, the respondent argued that the volume of correspondence was justified, citing unresolved issues related to maintenance, personal safety, and alleged conflicts of interest within the committee.

The respondent also expressed a preference for digital communication, stating that they do not maintain paper files.

Her submission to the referee was described as “lengthy” and included 70 attachments.

“She says generally that she views the application as an effort to silence her efforts to have issues addressed by the body corporate,” the decision noted.

The respondent said that her emails were not unreasonable and rejected assertions by the body corporate that the tone of her emails was untoward.

But after reviewing submissions from the respondent, the body corporate, and other lot owners, the referee found the respondent’s communications to be excessive and not in compliance with the communications by-law.

MORE: Explosive new crackdown on rich tax breaks

The 20 suburbs homeowners never want to leave

A home a day: Qld’s top-selling property hotspots revealed

The referee found in favour of the body corporate

---

The by-law, introduced in December 2022, allows the committee to impose conditions on communications to manage their volume and tone.

“I accept on the balance of probabilities that the respondent has been sending emails to the body corporate in the number and at the frequency alleged and tallied by the applicant,” the referee said.

Further, the referee noted that the tone of the majority of the emails was demanding, accusatory, and/or belligerent, with many of the emails containing words in all capitals, and phrases such as “still waiting”, “not acceptable”, “I demand”, and ordering that things be done “immediately”.

As a result, the referee imposed conditions on the respondent’s future communications with the body corporate.

These include limiting written correspondence to one piece per week, addressed to the committee, unless additional communication is explicitly invited.

Each communication must not exceed two pages or 1000 words and should clearly state the issues, supporting facts, and desired outcomes.

The woman has been ordered to not send more than one, 1000-word email a week Picture: iStock

---

The decision also said that the body corporate committee was not necessarily required to respond to the woman’s correspondence, and the order did not permit the respondent to send a “follow up” email in the same week.

“I am satisfied that the volume of emails amounts to a nuisance within the ordinary meaning of the word and that the volume is excessive and therefore also unreasonable,” the referee said, finding that the lot owner had breached the communications by-law.

“Moreover, I am also satisfied the tone of a large portion of the emails is discourteous and disrespectful.

“I am also satisfied that the body corporate acted reasonably when it decided to place a condition limiting the frequency of the respondent’s communications with the body corporate to once per week.”