What trustees should look for in scheme-management software

Start with the trustee's actual job, not the feature list

Trustees are elected to govern a scheme, not to keep its books. The managing agent (where one is appointed) handles day-to-day administration; the trustees set direction, approve budgets and expenditure, oversee compliance and answer to owners at the AGM. The best scheme-management software for trustees reflects that division of labour.

When evaluating a platform, ask a simple question: does this give me visibility and control over decisions, or does it expect me to capture transactions? A trustee dashboard should surface the things you are accountable for — the fund balances, arrears position, pending approvals, expiring compliance items and upcoming meetings — and let you drill into detail only when you choose to.

Plain visibility matters because trustees can carry personal accountability for the scheme's affairs. Software that produces a clear, time-stamped record of who approved each payment or decision is designed to support that accountability, rather than leaving it to memory or scattered email threads.

• A trustee-facing overview of funds, arrears, approvals, compliance and meetings
• Drill-down to detail without requiring you to capture data
• Clear separation between trustee oversight and managing-agent administration

Governance visibility and approval thresholds

Approval workflows are where governance becomes real. Schemes typically set spending thresholds — amounts a managing agent may pay without trustee sign-off, amounts that need trustee approval, and larger items that may require a members' resolution. Software should let the scheme configure those thresholds and then route expenditure to the correct approver automatically.

Look for an auditable trail on every approval: who requested it, what supporting documents were attached, who approved or declined, and the date and time. This is the record you will want if an expense is later queried by an owner, an auditor or the CSOS. Generally, the more an approval trail is captured by the system rather than reconstructed afterwards, the more defensible the scheme's governance is.

Role-based access is the other half of governance visibility. Trustees, the chairperson, the managing agent and owners should each see what is appropriate to their role. A trustee portal that gives trustees standing access to the scheme's financial and compliance position — rather than waiting for a monthly pack — tends to improve oversight and reduce disputes.

The levy roll and participation quota

The levy roll is the backbone of a sectional title scheme's finances: it lists every unit, its participation quota (PQ), and the levies raised against it. Under the STSMA, levies are generally raised in proportion to participation quota unless the rules provide otherwise, so the software must calculate and apply levies correctly against each unit's PQ.

A capable levy roll handles ordinary monthly levies, special levies approved for specific projects, and any agreed interest on arrears, while keeping a clear history of what was raised and why. For HOAs, the equivalent is the levy or membership contribution schedule set out in the association's constitution or memorandum of incorporation, which the software should accommodate even though HOAs are not governed by the STSMA in the same way sectional title schemes are.

When assessing a platform, check that levy increases approved at the AGM flow through cleanly, that adjustments are traceable, and that each owner can see their own statement. A levy roll that owners can reconcile against their own records reduces friction and supports faster collection.

• Levies raised per unit against participation quota
• Support for monthly levies, special levies and arrears interest
• Per-owner statements owners can self-serve

Two funds, reserves and the maintenance plan

The STSMA generally requires a body corporate to maintain two distinct funds: an administrative fund for day-to-day running costs and a reserve fund for future maintenance, repair and replacement of common property. Trustees should never accept software that blurs these together. You need to see each fund's balance, contributions and movements separately.

Tied to the reserve fund is the maintenance, repair and replacement (MR&R) plan — a forward-looking schedule of major works and their expected costs. The STSMA framework expects schemes to plan reserve contributions with reference to such a plan. Good software lets you record the plan, track reserve contributions against it, and see whether the reserve is keeping pace with what the building will eventually need.

For trustees, the practical test is this: can I tell, at a glance, whether the reserve fund is adequately funded for the next major item — the roof, the lifts, the painting cycle — or whether a special levy is looming? Software that links the reserve balance to the MR&R plan helps trustees make that call early rather than in a crisis.

Arrears oversight and collections

Levy arrears are the single biggest threat to a scheme's solvency, because the scheme's obligations — insurance, utilities, security, staff — continue whether or not every owner pays. Trustees should treat arrears reporting as a core requirement, not a nice-to-have.

Look for a live arrears view: which units are behind, by how much, for how long (an ageing analysis), and what collection steps have already been taken. The value to a trustee is being able to see the trend month on month and to confirm that the managing agent is actually pursuing defaulters rather than letting balances drift.

Collections in South African schemes can run from internal reminders through to formal letters of demand, CSOS applications and, ultimately, legal proceedings. The software's job is to record each step with dates and documents so the collection trail is complete and auditable. Where third parties such as attorneys are involved, the platform should still keep the scheme's central record intact. Trustees should be cautious of any system that cannot produce a clear, owner-by-owner history of what was done to recover an arrear.

• Live ageing analysis by unit and by period
• A complete, dated record of collection steps taken
• Owner statements that match what collections are pursuing

AGM, meetings and resolutions

Trustees run on meetings: the annual general meeting, special general meetings and trustee meetings. Each carries procedural requirements around notice periods, quorum and the recording of resolutions, and getting these wrong can leave a decision open to challenge.

Software should support the meeting lifecycle — issuing notices to owners, circulating the agenda and supporting documents, recording attendance and quorum, capturing resolutions and their voting outcomes, and storing minutes. For trustees, the benefit is a defensible record that a decision was properly taken, which matters if it is ever questioned by an owner or referred to the CSOS.

Where a scheme wants to broaden participation, look for support for proxies and, where the rules allow, electronic or hybrid meetings. The key is that the system records the procedural steps accurately; the convenience features are secondary to having minutes, notices and resolutions that hold up.

Compliance, CSOS and owner data

Two statutory frameworks shape scheme compliance in South Africa. The STSMA (Act 8 of 2011) governs how sectional title schemes are managed and how funds and rules work. The CSOS Act (Act 9 of 2011) establishes the Community Schemes Ombud Service, which provides a dispute-resolution route and to which schemes generally have registration and levy obligations. Software should help the scheme keep the records these frameworks expect and track CSOS-related items rather than leaving them in a filing cabinet.

Where a managing agent handles trust money on the scheme's behalf, the Property Practitioners Act 22 of 2019 (notably the trust-account obligations around section 54) is relevant to how those funds are held and reconciled. Trustees do not administer the trust account themselves, but they benefit from software that makes the agent's handling of scheme funds transparent and reconcilable.

Owner and resident information is personal data, so handling it engages POPIA. A trustee should expect the platform to control who can see owner details, to keep an access record, and to support the scheme's data-protection responsibilities. Communication tools — notices, statements, levy reminders and meeting documents — should reach owners through the platform with a record that they were sent.

A practical checklist before you sign off

Before approving any scheme-management software, trustees can work through a short, vendor-neutral checklist. The aim is to confirm the platform serves governance and oversight, integrates the scheme's specific rules, and produces records that are defensible under the relevant Acts.

Treat the demonstration as a test of your real workflow: ask to see your own scheme's situation modelled — your levy roll, your two funds, a sample arrears case and a mock AGM — rather than a polished generic tour. If the platform cannot show those clearly to a trustee, it is unlikely to serve you well in practice.

• Can I see fund balances, arrears and pending approvals on a trustee dashboard?
• Are the administrative and reserve funds tracked separately, with a link to the MR&R plan?
• Does the levy roll apply levies per unit against participation quota?
• Is there an auditable approval trail with thresholds the scheme can configure?
• Does it produce the meeting records (notice, quorum, minutes, resolutions) we rely on?
• Does it handle owner data in a POPIA-aware way and keep CSOS-related records?