Tribunal rejects residents' claims
2 posters
Page 1 of 1
Tribunal rejects residents' claims
2008/12/24
Tribunal rejects residents' claims
KUALA LUMPUR: The Tribunal for Consumer Claims yesterday rejected a claim for compensation of RM20,000 by 31 flat dwellers of Taman Sentul Utama who alleged that the developer had failed to provide satisfactory maintenance services.
Rungit Singh, in his decision, said that residents had not paid all the maintenance fees required.
"After examining the statements and documents, I find that the problem has been going on for seven years.
"The court finds that the developer has been professional in this matter such as providing a claims statement, police report and notice to the residents.
"Their actions are justified and orderly and I reject the residents' claims," he said.
On Nov 17, 31 flat residents filed a claim to the tribunal naming the developer, Sentul Murni Management Sdn Bhd, as the defendant.
In the claim, the residents asked for half the maintenance fees paid from November 2005 to June 2008 to be refunded to them.
They also wanted exemplary compensation worth RM20,000 from the developer for failure to provide satisfactory maintenance services.
Copyright 2007 NST Online
Tribunal rejects residents' claims
KUALA LUMPUR: The Tribunal for Consumer Claims yesterday rejected a claim for compensation of RM20,000 by 31 flat dwellers of Taman Sentul Utama who alleged that the developer had failed to provide satisfactory maintenance services.
Rungit Singh, in his decision, said that residents had not paid all the maintenance fees required.
"After examining the statements and documents, I find that the problem has been going on for seven years.
"The court finds that the developer has been professional in this matter such as providing a claims statement, police report and notice to the residents.
"Their actions are justified and orderly and I reject the residents' claims," he said.
On Nov 17, 31 flat residents filed a claim to the tribunal naming the developer, Sentul Murni Management Sdn Bhd, as the defendant.
In the claim, the residents asked for half the maintenance fees paid from November 2005 to June 2008 to be refunded to them.
They also wanted exemplary compensation worth RM20,000 from the developer for failure to provide satisfactory maintenance services.
Copyright 2007 NST Online
JMC- Posts : 47
Join date : 2008-11-12
Service Charge & Sinking Funds
The reasons their claim was rejected due to most of them do not pay their service charge.
For our condo if we pay the service charge & Sinking Fund, the developer may use them up for their defective and outstanding works. At the end we end up with nothing if the developer bankrupt due to too many defective work & work done not spect. At present the Visitor carparks were obmited amd change to normal carpark and offering for sale as this is an offence. The formal maintainence manager is doing all the defective work and not the condo maintaining work, but we do not know his salary is it charge to our service account? as so far no financial account have been shown?
If we don't pay, they will have no monies to spend for the maintainnence work. But sooner or later we still have to pay these fees as it is conpulsory for a condo.
I think we batter don't pay now and wait until our JMB form, but we will not qualify for as a menber for JMB? For my case, I pay one of the unit, and the other unit I don't pay. Is it suitable?
For our condo if we pay the service charge & Sinking Fund, the developer may use them up for their defective and outstanding works. At the end we end up with nothing if the developer bankrupt due to too many defective work & work done not spect. At present the Visitor carparks were obmited amd change to normal carpark and offering for sale as this is an offence. The formal maintainence manager is doing all the defective work and not the condo maintaining work, but we do not know his salary is it charge to our service account? as so far no financial account have been shown?
If we don't pay, they will have no monies to spend for the maintainnence work. But sooner or later we still have to pay these fees as it is conpulsory for a condo.
I think we batter don't pay now and wait until our JMB form, but we will not qualify for as a menber for JMB? For my case, I pay one of the unit, and the other unit I don't pay. Is it suitable?
John Lin- Posts : 30
Join date : 2009-01-10
Re: Tribunal rejects residents' claims
Say what you like.
Pay or Not To Pay.
The decision is yours.
The article posted is for you to understand the happenings around so that we the OWNERS will not be caught OFF GUARD, should we want to proceed on any claims in future.
We must be RESPONSIBLE OWNERS towards a HAPPY LIVING ENVIROMENT HERE.
Pro-tem Committee.
Pay or Not To Pay.
The decision is yours.
The article posted is for you to understand the happenings around so that we the OWNERS will not be caught OFF GUARD, should we want to proceed on any claims in future.
We must be RESPONSIBLE OWNERS towards a HAPPY LIVING ENVIROMENT HERE.
Pro-tem Committee.
JMC- Posts : 47
Join date : 2008-11-12
Similar topics
» 5th Residents' Meet
» Company asks residents to pay outstanding bills before demanding for maintenance services
» Company asks residents to pay outstanding bills before demanding for maintenance services
Page 1 of 1
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|