Message from JMB Silverpark Resort to RMS owners run by Teruntum Project Management Sdn Bhd
Reference is made to the two posts purportedly by one Miza in bukit email@example.com through the yahoo group email yesterday.
The Post “Notes to RMS Participants” dated 6/12/2013 (“the Notes”) and “Sequence of events for Maintenance & Sinking Fund” which is undated (“the Sequence”) is referred.
The said posts are clearly aimed at “poisoning” the minds of some owners just before the AGM. It must be from the Developer and posted through its ardent sympathizer.
It must be looked at in the context of the following facts:
a) The Developer and its related companies-including the RMS organizer- Teruntum Property Management Sdn Bhd (“Teruntum”) owes your JMB a total of approximately RM 250,000 in Maintenance and other charges. In other words, Teruntum is like a free loader sucking the blood of the ordinary owners without paying for the services.
b) The documentary evidence in our possession shows that the Developer’s Ahmad Nizar Safian had been paying into his own personal Bank account RMS cash collection from RMS operations. This is although the Teruntum Bank account is in the same Bank. It is therefore clear that such action is in serious breach of the RMS agreement and also a fraud on the RMS participants.
c) The statement in the Notes that the Court order in the Clubhouse case “…only cover the Clubhouse matter and nothing else. It does not cover the RMS matter…”.That is untrue of the self-serving unqualified legal view of the Developer and or its sympathizer. On that, as advised by the JMB lawyers who drafted the order (and approved by the courts), Court orders No: 4 (iv), (v) and (vii) are relevant:
(iv) The First defendant (Developer) and /or 2nd defendant (Frasers hill Development corporation) are not entitled to enter, use or stay in Clubhouse or an common property for carrying out any operations and/or manage and/or carry outany personal commercial activity without the approval of the JMB (Emphasis supplied).
(v) The First defendant and or 2nd Defendant (Frasers Hill Development Corporation) or their servants, agents (Teruntum is clearly covered), nominees, privy and /or officers are prevented from encroaching continuing to occupy or entering the said Clubhouse and/or carrying on any activity, commercial or otherwise in the said clubhouse or any other place or area of building earmarked as “common property” under the Sale and purchase agreement, STA 1985 and BCP 2007 (Emphasis supplied);
(vii) The First Defendant and/or 2nd Defendant or its employees, agents, nominee, privy and/or officers are prevented from interfering with or obstructing or attempt to interfere with the plaintiff, prevent, annoying the Plaintiff directly or indirectly in the performance of statutory obligations under the BCP 2007 (Emphasis supplied).
As such lest it be contempt of court order, the RMS owners had been advised by the JMB not to carry on participating in the RMS scheme run by the Teruntum (which is not even an owner) in breach of the House Rule 3.1 which was unanimously approved and adopted by all owners at the at the last AGM.