Under Statements of Comprehensive Income for Revenue see Assessments for years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Notes for 2009 and 2010 are number 10 and numbers 10 & 13 for 2011 in their respective Audited Financial Statements. In 2012, what was covered solely under Assessments was divided between Assessments and Other Income with notes under 12 & 13, respectively. As with much else in the Audited Financial Statements in 2012, under note 16. Reclassification, only a general statement is made with no details as to the changes.
2009-2010
In 2009-2010, Assessments
for electricity and water in the second sentence were not exactly described
well given the situation in the building.
Why a clear sentence was not constructed at the time is not known. I would suggest the following clear
explanation:
Assessments for
electricity for the common areas are billed by the electricity provider based
upon actual consumption used in the common areas. Assessments for water computed using the rate
per cubic meter for the common areas and individual units are billed in total by
the water provider for actual consumption.
In turn, individual units are billed by the condominium corporation
based on the developer installed meters for individual units.
If this suggested
revision is not correct, someone had better explain.
Additionally, no
meter is installed in “each unit” as written.
Electricity for individual units is a transaction handled directly
between the individual unit and Meralco with meters in the utility rooms on
each floor. The electricity in the
statements concerns the common areas.
Water is handled by the building as whole with individual units having
meters not in each unit but in cabinets throughout the hallways. Please know that a main meter for water is
the transaction with the water company, Manila Water. That is their meter. The individual unit meters in all the
cabinets are the property of the condominium corporation. Those meters are read for consumption and
billed by the administration office. Of
course, water used in the common areas have their own meters and are the
financial responsibility of the condominium corporation.
While Association
dues is understood with insurance briefly explained in the note and electricity
& water having now been explained and questioned above, Real estate tax and
Others need clarification. It may be
understood that Real estate tax is for the common areas of the building. Each individual unit are also billed by the
city for real estate tax which is not included in the financial
statements. Many unit owners were and
some still may be confused by this real estate tax division.
What is
“Others?” There is no explanation.
The second
paragraph has a question that has been asked in conversations and there seems
to be no logical answer. Logical? Listen to me speaking of logic regarding the
situation with this building.
The first
sentence of the second paragraph: “The
Condominium has two commercial spaces located in one of the floors of the
residential area.” What floor? What commercial spaces? Why was this not clarified by the auditor and
the Board at the time? Of course, there
is also a problem with this statement as written given known floor locations.
Sentences two
through four also bring up some questions.
Again, what are these “two establishments” during the 2009-2010
financial years? “The Corporation
granted two years of free lease to these establishments...” Nice of the developer controlled Board that
meets in private & secret meetings to deny income to the condominium
corporation. How many favors have they
done for us?
The fourth
sentence makes no sense as written given that the previous sentence stated that
the establishments were given a free lease:
“As of the period ended, no rent income has been recognized by the
Corporation since the rental fees are yet to be determined.” The fees were determined to be a free lease
if one were to be logical given what is written. So why write the sentence in this manner?
2011
In 2011,
Assessments under the Statements of Comprehensive Income have notes in 10 and
13. The first paragraph in note 10 has
less explanation in comparison to the prior audited statements. Additionally, electricity and water have been
removed as separate categories. Were
they placed in Others?
The second
paragraph is basically the same once again explaining that there were free
two-year leases and once again the odd remark “the rental fees are yet to be
determined.” Again, if the leases are
free, what rental fee is to be determined?
I was told the
term should not be “free lease” as written but lease free for rent to give a
better sense of reality the members’ condominium corporation was stuck with in
contracts not openly discussed.
2012
In 2012, Revenues
under the Statements of Comprehensive Income no longer has the two categories
of Assessments and Interest Income. The
two categories under Revenue are now Assessments and Other income. Assessments notes are with note 12 and Other
income notes are with note 13. Water and
electricity reappear as separate categories and a new category of Penalties is
introduced in note 12. The explanation for
note 12 is minimal at best.
I have also
noticed that the word “Company” is now used instead of Corporation. Who let this slide? Soho Central is a condominium corporation and
the term corporation needs to be used for such matters as audited financial statements. Who missed the sloppy term?
For the three and
a half years in row no one noticed and corrected the commercial space
locations. Why? Does anyone on the unelected Board of
Directors read the statements?
Given that there
are a declared two commercial spaces in the residential area of the building,
would someone explain the construction and grammar of the following
sentence: “During the year, the Company
entered into various lease agreements with tenants for the lease of the
commercial spaces at the residential area.”
Various suggests more than two in common language usage. Then lease is
singular suggesting that there is one lease for the two commercial spaces.
The last part of
this note discusses future minimum rental income. Since many documents have been refused in
violation of Section 74 of the Corporation Code and Board meetings are private
& secret, we have not witnessed meetings and have not seen the contracts
for the leases. So going by what is
written, the wording seems to suggest when trying to squeeze some answer out of
the scant information that lease fees were ₱330,000 for one year. But, the second statement, “Due more than one
year but no more than five years”, would suggest that only ₱467,500 is the lease
fee agreement divided between four years.
And who is
reading all this on the Board for clarification much less full information for
members, Unit Owners, of Soho Central Condominium Corporation? Yes, Corporation not generic “Company.” Was this on those CPA exams?
No comments:
Post a Comment