Oh ya, last weekend when I went to the sales office, I overheard an owner ask about the space for air-cond compressor.

She asked why there is such a space. Then, she said that she's paying for that space and it is used for compressor. The SA told her that the space is provided FOC by the developer <--- any comment?

Only type A units got doubts on the sq.footage accuracy? how bout other types? u checked?

Don't forget the carpark space and balcony. S&P has provided clause on allowable marginal error (can't remember the %) but beyond that, dev has to compensate (if lesser). If the other way, we don't have to pay for more space produced in the error. These all can only be looked at on the real unit once VP. For landed property, we can usually hire external contractor to record at all the defects and dimension (if it is according to the agreed S&P). Some may do so for condo/apt too.

Hi Zestians! 

Wow this is a cool thread. I got a unit in block A , mine is type A also.

Just noticed that the entrance to type A unit does not have any space for shoe rack. 
Go check out the model layout at the showroom and you will see what i mean.
Even as you enter the unit there will not be any space to put one.
 
This planning is not good. Where to put shoes next time? 

All the other types have enuff space for a designated shoe rack.

Any comments from you guys who bought type A about this matter? We should all collectively insist that they
allot some space for this basic and necessary purpose. 

alan, ur request got approved eh? what did you say to them? was thinking of relocating some pipings as well. from lrt and ramps to banking till web hosting now shoe rack. you guys are persistent... i think the zest is gonna be a fun place.

you mean KONE right?

Write to LRT authorities to remind them?? , no worries.. Trinity Tower and LRT builder already had a few rounds of discussion about the construction way back few months ago.. They will take care of the planning..

Dont forget the track also need to build over the existing ramp that goes into BK5..  Hopefully its the same planning..

If i may step up and offer some legal opinions (dun worry, i am all rounded one, time has left a lot of tresures on me...)

The Defect liability Period had lapsed.

The owners CANNOT sue on breach of ctt.

The correct action to be taken is under TORT.

Owners has to sue the dev within 6 years from the problem being discovered.

NOW, a consequential problem for ZEST:-

1. If the owners win the suit and the dev ordered by the High Court to compensate, where u think the money from?

-------------------------------------------

The sub sale price for Heron & Zest hinges on how fast this video spread and how good people's memory is

My dear friend,

Your knowledge on structure sounds sufficient but not abundant.
On the other hand, your legal knowledge (on the consequental damages) is seriously lacking of fundamental.

Please read the above in a friendly mode.

---

Added on September 21, 2009, 3:03 pm

Just a general view (to avoid defamation suit)

The principle defendant will be the Dev, whereas the contributer like Arc and Eng may be held as Co-Defendant.

Depending on the Court's finding, a wrongdoer/tortfeasor may be liable to 1. General Damage; 2. Specific Damage; 3.Punitive Damage; 4. Consequential damage.... as far as it is not remote.

Alamak my dear friend,

I already ask u to read me in friendly tone. I only read into substance and your real ID it is not the issue at all!

The popping is really "popping" popping, which is highly unusual, couple with the deep rift in the slab, and compare with YSMN, i said yours is sufficient but not abundant... Sufficient means Good, Abundant means perfect...

see u again

Who is YSMN? AND what he wrote? http://www.realestate.net.my/forum/viewtop...r=asc&start=575

ysmn
Joined: 19 Sep 2006
Posts: 1937
Location: Terris
PostPosted: Sun Sep 20, 2009 11:28 pm    Post subject:  Reply with quote

Without looking at the architectural & structural plan i'm just guessing that while it's structurally sound including piling, the architectural finishes are not adhering due to excessive structural deflection.
This is quite common when structural engineers rely solely on computer models, and architects do not appreciate structures.
For non engineers and non architects, at a risk of oversimplifying, it's likely that the structure and foundation are sound.
Usually any structure will have a certain degree of flexibility/deflection which is necessary in order that it does not snap.
However architectural finishes need a certain level of structural stiffness, otherwise the finishes will buckle under too much bending of the structure resulting in lifting of the floor finishes. Of course how much rigidity required depends on type of finishes system selected.
For example, if the slab and joints are more flexibile, then the finishes need to be less rigid.
You would appreciate this better if you paid attention, understood and remember your form 5 add maths and physics.
I'm not saying this is what happened at Heron, but it is probable if the engineer relied on computer modelling without much human skill & judgement nor appreciation of architectural finishes, and/or the architect didn't have a good understanding of how structures affect the selection of finishes; and the developer/contractor had not employed really good guys or did not allow them to do their jobs.
It makes a good case study for academic research but is no fun for owners and end users.
Most likely cause is too much structural deflection for the system of finishes selected.
To simplify, a timber finish on timber would be ok with higher structural deflection, but not a more rigid floor finish on a cement:sand screed base.
So a structure may be sufficient for the type of foundation and loads, but yet may not be rigid enough for the type of finishes selected.
This is also the next big headache for another project in KL that has been delayed for quite sometime which I mentioned earlier.
As Cannot Tahan very correctly wrote, one could seek damages in Tort, but the process could be more complicated than plaintifs might be willing to pursue.
Very interesting academic case study for the observer and researcher (architectural, engineering & law) but no fun for those directly affected.
I cannot say the same will happen with Zest, but the Developer should have learnt from experience by now.
_________________

how come i missed opportunity to buy Zest?

and got people in 'heated discussion'. Haha

actually i missed buying Saville, Old Klang Road also. cause i thought Metro Kajang quality was crap. Too late now.

hey guys, i just dropped by the sales office on my way back frm work just now. had a short chat with the SA and he told me that they're moving their office to the new location on 10/10 but the showroom will apparently not open on the same date as they need some time to prep things up wor. he said they'll contact the buyers moving forward, to inform them of the showroom opening date... 

anyone else can confirm abt this?

Visit them n give some pressure and bring up the issue on heron ma..
BTW anyone from Block B know when is the first disbursement from bank?

Looks like the showroom is coming up nicely. Lets be patient and hopefully TT will come out with an acceptable show unit when its ready.

btw guys, on the tiles issues, pls note that it is the BUYERS responsibility to ensure that all the hollow tiles are removed and replaced upon CF and BEFORE the DLP is over. Remember that developer can still hold their main con accountable to fix these problems before DLP is over, but not after.

After DLP, we r on our own. Its sad but this a flaw in the system and this happens in million dollar condo's as well.

haha, thanks to Kim "jie" then

Actually few friends of mine also bought Tower C, we now waiting for the showroom to open for public, can't wait neh ~~

Really tired of waiting... keep on delay only.
still no exact date on when show room will be ready?