AI that finds the record. People who make the call.
Most of a strata manager's day goes into finding things: what was decided, who did the work, what the plan says, what the owner wrote last time. We built our own system so that part takes seconds, and your manager's time goes into looking after your building.
A building's history shouldn't live in one person's head.
Every owners corporation builds up years of correspondence, minutes, quotes, insurance papers, contracts and plans. In most firms that history is scattered across inboxes and shared folders, and much of it lives in the memory of whoever has managed the building longest.
That's why owners end up repeating themselves, why a change of manager can feel like starting again, and why simple questions can take days to answer properly.
We decided in 2025 to fix it at the root. Before we let AI write a single word, we connected and organised the records: email, documents, building records and the law that applies to them. Then we gave our team an assistant that can search all of it, inside the tools they already use, and show where every answer came from.
What owners and committees notice
Every fact has a source
When the system finds something, it links back to the email, minutes or document it came from. Your manager checks the source before relying on it.
Urgent issues jump the queue
Every incoming email is read and sorted every 10 minutes. Emergencies and legal matters alert the responsible manager straight away.
Continuity when people change
A new manager starts with the full history, including what the previous manager did about each matter, so you don't have to explain it all again.
Complex questions in about a minute
Questions that need five or more lookups, the kind a newer manager would once take to a senior colleague, typically come back in about a minute.
Meetings into action
Draft minutes are prepared from the agenda and meeting notes for your manager to review. Decisions become tracked work, so actions don't get lost.
Maintenance followed through
The system spots repair reports that haven't become work orders, and raises scheduled maintenance when it falls due, for the right person to act on.
A leak through the ceiling: who does what
An owner reports water coming through their ceiling from the balcony above. This illustrative example shows where the AI helps and where your manager takes over.
An email, a call or a photo
The owner emails us with photos of the damage. They don't need to know the plan number, the committee's history or which contractor was here last time. That's our job.
Read, matched to the building, prioritised
Within minutes the email is read, matched to the right owners corporation and given a priority using our own rules. An active leak is urgent, so the responsible manager is alerted rather than the email waiting in a queue.
Matching the right building is harder than it sounds: many buildings share street names. We check the plan and owners corporation, not just the name, and send anything uncertain to a person.
The full picture, with sources
The manager asks the system what we know. It pulls together earlier leak reports from the same part of the building, past contractor visits and reports, any warranty letters, what the committee has decided, and the registered plan of subdivision showing the balcony boundary.
Each item links to the original record, so the manager can open and check it.
Judgement starts here
Your manager reviews the evidence and decides the next step: whether this is the owners corporation's responsibility or the lot owner's, whether a plumber or a waterproofing specialist is needed, and whether the committee or an expert should be involved.
The system can explain what the plan shows. It doesn't make legal rulings about who is responsible. That stays with people and, where needed, their advisers.
A work order, raised and tracked
Your manager raises a work order with the right contractor. The system can prepare the paperwork and a draft update for the owner; your manager checks it and sends it.
Follow-through, on the record
Every email, quote and invoice about the leak is filed against the building automatically. If the job stalls, it's flagged for the manager. And if the same balcony leaks again in two years, whoever is looking after your building will see this whole history in seconds.
Measured honestly
We measure what changed using our own email records, and we report what didn't change as well as what did.
More owner emails, same team
Customer emails needing a reply rose from 3,269 a month to 4,411 between July 2025 and July 2026. Our team was 12 people at both ends.
Reply rate held
Even with a third more email, the share answered within 24 hours held steady: 49.5% in July 2025 and 49.9% in July 2026.
Whole team uses it
By August 2026 every staff member was using the system, and 10 of 12 used it on at least 80% of working days. A new manager used it from their second day.
Sources: our own email and system records, re-measured October 2026. Reply-rate figures count replies from a staff member to the customer's address on the same matter. Response times are the system's answer times, not the manager's full checking time.
Switching managers used to mean losing history.
When a building moves to us, its records arrive as boxes of files and a previous manager's mailbox. In one handover in October 2026, we loaded the full set the same day: 2,525 of 2,542 files became searchable and linked to the building, and the 17 that couldn't be read were listed so we could chase them.
That evening, test questions about the building were answered correctly with sources. One found a resident's earlier lift report, the forward to the lift contractor and the contractor's job number, so the new manager could pick up the thread.
We then checked seven years of statutory records against the Owners Corporations Act and drafted requests for what was missing.
Built in, not bolted on
The first question a committee should ask about AI is what stops it going wrong. Here's how we've set ours up.
| Rule | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| People make the decisions | The system reads, files, flags and prepares. People send replies on substantive matters, approve minutes and make payment decisions. Some standard administrative replies, such as acknowledgements, run within defined automated processes. |
| Show the source | Facts come with a link back to the record they came from, so your manager can check them. |
| No legal rulings | It can cite the Act, your rules and your records. Legal conclusions stay with people and their advisers. |
| Right building, every time | Records are matched by plan and owners corporation, not just street name. Anything uncertain goes to a person, and managers check sources before relying on them. |
| Access by role | Each person only has the tools their role allows, and every question, lookup and approval is logged against the person who made it. |
| Learn from corrections | When a manager corrects a draft or a set of minutes, the change is reviewed and can become a lesson. About 1,400 lessons have been approved so far. |
Straight answers
Does AI replace my strata manager?
Will I receive emails written by AI?
What if the AI gets something wrong?
Who can see my information?
Which AI do you use?
Does AI change what we pay?
See it for your building.
Book a conversation with us. We'll show your committee how we'd look after your records from day one.