SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY ACT IN RELATION TO SECURITY SERVICES IN CONDOMINIUMS

Abstract

There have been numerous counts of what the author submits are unfair liquidated damages being imposed on security firms of condominiums. The practice of levying liquidated damages is meant to incentivise security service providers to not breach the security services agreement and to set out a pre-agreed genuine loss suffered by the Management Corporation Strata Title (“MCST”) if there is a breach in the agreement. Union and industry leaders have opined that levying liquidated damages is frequently abused as fines to regulate the behaviour of security guards, or to get them to do tasks which are beyond their job requirements. Often, the liquidated damages serve as fines rather than actual reimbursements for loss suffered. Such practices are usually a “misuse” of liquidated damages to “govern behaviours of agencies”. Incidences of security firms suffering losses seem to be rather common since the liquidated damages are greater than the sum of the contract. Examples of a common unfair clause are those that gives the Managing Agent (“MA”) full authority and power to control the officer’s actions , and is commonly used to get leverage over security officers to carry out non contractual tasks like accompanying fogging contractors, landscaping duties or to check the working condition of the facilities in the MCSTs– which are typically part of the MA’s job scope. This dissertation seeks to come up with a framework to propose how liquidated damages for security services should be calculated and how they are to be meted out in various scenarios for security agencies in condominiums.