The handover of a new strata building is one of the most consequential moments in a development's lifecycle. How well — or how poorly — that handover is managed often shapes the financial health and operational culture of the scheme for years to come. At the centre of it all sits a document that is too often treated as an afterthought: the Initial Maintenance Schedule.
New legislation coming later this year will standardise Initial Maintenance Schedule (IMS) requirements across NSW, bringing long-overdue clarity to a process that has historically produced wildly inconsistent results. For developers, strata managers, and owners corporations alike, now is the time to understand what's changing — and why it matters.
What is an Initial Maintenance Schedule?
Under Section 115 of the Strata Schemes Management Act 2015 (NSW), developers are required to provide an Initial Maintenance Schedule to the owners corporation at handover. It is more than a checklist — it is a foundational document that sets out:
- What common property needs to be maintained
- How frequently maintenance should occur
- The estimated cost of that maintenance
- Supplier and contractor contacts, warranty details, and service instructions
A well-prepared IMS gives the owners corporation a clear financial roadmap from day one. It informs levy estimates, drives capital works planning, and — critically — establishes accountability between the developer and the incoming owners.
Why IMS quality has been so inconsistent
The short answer is legislative ambiguity. While Section 115 of the Act creates the requirement, Section 29 of the Strata Schemes Management Regulation 2016 has provided limited guidance on what level of detail is actually required. As a result, some developers satisfy the obligation with a general operations and maintenance manual rather than a structured schedule — leaving owners corporations with unreliable cost data and confused maintenance responsibilities.
The consequences are predictable: levy estimates that don't reflect real costs, gaps in maintenance planning, disputes at the First AGM, and buildings that enter their operational life underfunded. This pattern has been a consistent source of pain across NSW strata for more than a decade.
The incoming legislation will introduce a standardised IMS format, making it far easier for owners, managers, and regulators to assess whether a schedule is genuinely complete — and giving developers a clear benchmark to meet.
When should the IMS be prepared?
This is where the biggest gains can be made. Although Section 115 requires the IMS to be provided before the First AGM, waiting until that point is already too late. Levy estimates — which are typically set shortly after scheme registration — need to be grounded in realistic maintenance costs. If the IMS arrives after those estimates are locked in, the numbers rarely align.
Best practice is to treat the IMS as a live document that evolves alongside the project:
- Begin drafting during the planning or DA stage, when the building's systems and materials are being designed.
- Update it as construction progresses and specifications are confirmed.
- Finalise it before the occupation certificate is issued — not after.
Developers who build this process into their project delivery programme consistently produce more accurate levy estimates, experience fewer disputes at handover, and carry less legal exposure once the building is operational.
How the IMS protects the developer
A strong IMS is not just a handover obligation — it is a risk management tool. Under Section 115(4) of the Act, the IMS can be used as a defence in defect-related claims where issues arise from a failure to maintain the building properly. It also supports developers in demonstrating that initial levies were based on documented, reasonable assumptions — which matters considerably if levy adequacy is ever challenged.
In a regulatory environment where NSW Fair Trading is being given stronger enforcement powers over maintenance obligations, having a clear and credible IMS in place is increasingly important.
What a complete IMS should cover
At a minimum, the IMS should address the core building systems and elements of common property. In practice, a thorough schedule will include:
Building fabric & structure
External walls, roofing, waterproofing, drainage, and structural elements — including estimated inspection and maintenance cycles and any known warranty periods.
Building services
Fire safety systems, electrical, hydraulic and mechanical plant, HVAC, lifts, and security and access systems — with service frequency, nominated contractors, and cost estimates.
Common facilities & shared spaces
Landscaping, car parking, pools, gyms, and shared amenities — often overlooked in early-stage schedules but significant contributors to ongoing operational cost.
Technology & cabling
Communications infrastructure, smart building systems, and any embedded energy networks — increasingly important in modern mixed-use and high-density developments.
What this means for owners corporations
If you are an owners corporation receiving an IMS as part of a recent handover, it is worth reviewing the schedule critically at your First AGM rather than simply filing it. Ask whether it covers all common property systems, whether cost estimates appear realistic, and whether the maintenance intervals reflect the actual condition of the building.
Under Section 106 of the Act, owners corporations have a clear legal obligation to properly maintain and repair common property. An inadequate IMS does not reduce that obligation — it simply makes it harder to meet. The incoming standardisation reforms should make it easier to identify where a schedule falls short and what needs to be addressed.
The IMS is not a document to file away. Used well, it is a roadmap, a risk management tool, and the foundation for a well-run building from the very first day of operation.
Sky Planning Academy
Strata Training for Managers & Committees
Our training programs cover the planning and legislative dimensions of strata management — including handover obligations, maintenance approval pathways, and what the incoming IMS reforms mean in practice.
Find out more about our training ›Our perspective
At Sky Planning, we work with developers throughout the DA and construction phase — which gives us a clear view of how handover planning is (and isn't) integrated into project delivery. The Initial Maintenance Schedule too often arrives late, is prepared under time pressure, and reflects what someone could find quickly rather than what the building actually needs.
The incoming legislative reforms are a genuine opportunity to lift standards. For developers, getting ahead of the changes means less risk at handover and a stronger relationship with the owners corporation from day one. For strata committees, it means entering your building's operational life with the financial clarity you deserve.