Imagine moving into a newly built residential complex. Construction is finished, the keys have been handed over, and everyone is settling in. At the first residents’ meeting, someone raises the question of who will manage the property. The builder is there too.
“I can handle it for a while,” he says. “I already know the place inside out.”
It sounds reasonable. He knows where the pipes run, which valve shuts off what, and who installed the elevator. The residents barely know one another, and nobody is particularly eager to take on the responsibility. So the person who built the place becomes the person who runs it.
At first, everyone is happy. Something goes wrong, someone makes a call, a tradesperson shows up, and the problem gets fixed. Nobody has to worry about the details.
Then the expenses start to grow.
The water pump gets replaced. The roof needs more work. A maintenance job comes with a substantial bill. At a meeting, someone asks:
“Wasn’t that just done?”
“It was, but this is a different issue. It’s technical.”
Someone else asks to see the invoices.
“I have them. Don’t worry, I’m taking care of it.”
Another resident suggests getting a quote from a different company.
“Bring in someone who doesn’t know this place, and you’ll end up paying more.”
Each answer might have a reasonable explanation behind it. A different problem really may have come up. His usual tradesperson may do better work. The expense may be entirely necessary.
But the residents have no clear explanation, no records to review, and no alternative quote to compare. All they have is the builder’s word.
Eventually, the questions change. People who once asked, “What work was done?” start asking one another, “What’s actually going on here?”
That is how suspicion grows.
Nobody knows whether anything improper has happened. That uncertainty is precisely what makes people uneasy: they have no way to tell whether things are being handled properly.
Meanwhile, the builder resents the questions.
“After everything I do for this place, you’re asking me to justify myself?”
But asking where your money goes is a perfectly ordinary thing to do when you pay maintenance fees. You shouldn’t need to become a plumbing expert to understand what is happening in the building you live in. Needing an explanation doesn’t make your questions any less legitimate.
The builder is also in a difficult position. Is the roof leaking because of his original work, or has something happened since? Who should cover the cost? Who should carry out the repair? Who decides whether it has been done properly?
If the same person answers all those questions, the residents are being asked for a great deal of trust: trust in the work itself, and trust in that person’s assessment of it.
This arrangement doesn’t protect the builder either. Even a necessary expense becomes something he has to defend. Documents he didn’t share at the time may do little to reassure people later. A cost that could have been explained in a few minutes becomes an accusation in the residents’ group chat months afterward.
Eventually, the builder starts to take it personally.
“Whatever I do, it’s never enough.”
Perhaps he abandons an idea for improving the garden. Perhaps he no longer asks a tradesperson he knows to help out. He stops making the extra effort he would once have made willingly. Things he genuinely wanted to do for the residents fall away with his enthusiasm.
The residents see his withdrawal as indifference. He sees their complaints as a lack of appreciation. They talk less and complain more. The familiarity that once made everything easier becomes a source of frustration on both sides.
A lack of transparency can wear down goodwill too. Residents begin to feel uncomfortable asking questions, while the builder hears every question as an accusation. Work on the property starts to depend on how hurt or resentful people feel.
This is why responsibilities need to be separated. Knowing the building inside out is valuable. That knowledge can help everyone make better decisions. Keeping records, sharing quotes, and having someone else review the accounts gives everyone a sound basis for trusting those decisions. When accountability is a routine part of managing the property, every question no longer has to become a personal test of trust.
Yes, things may sometimes take a little longer. Someone gets another quote. A reason for an expense is written down. Questions are answered at a meeting.
But every unexplained decision leaves something behind too. It gets discussed in the hallway, passed between neighbours, and brought up again when the maintenance fees rise. The time saved at the beginning is later spent trying to rebuild trust.
A sound building needs more than strong columns. It also needs a way for residents to ask questions, get answers, and see how their shared money is being spent.
The builder may know every corner of the place.
The people who live there have a right to know what is going on in it.