Jul 26 2017, 09:05 PM
QUOTE(ALaN- @ Jul 26 2017, 08:07 PM)
Hi LuckyOne,
What do you think when you try so hard to follow as much as possible to maintain the uniformity (inclusive of spending additional money to do up the frosted door inside the grill even though the contractor insisted that doing outer will be much easier) and after when you start moving in, you noticed all kind different door, like beautiful external glass door (if the cost of installation are the same) and dismantle of grill to install security door etc etc. You've mentioned that you personally agree to maintain uniformity and how do you feel when the management think otherwise? Who will be the one who want to talk to them if you claim the majority vote is not able to obtain? There are more such owners who've moved in with problem like this, and they've actually PMed some of us to express their disappointment. You were mentioning about rules. What if the developer tells you " it's ok, no submission needed, all security door also can, as long as it is white in color". When you ask about the wall is not full height, they said " it's ok, a lot of people doing it, just do.". When you ask about grill that the back attached together with a window will cause security issue and they said " it's ok, you cal seal up the wall, partially, or remain them or separate it out". What do you think? Human is full of imagination. These are only few of them. So what will be next?
The Pro Tem has constantly keeping in touch with EWRC, and was requested by EWRC themselves to send them an official letter of the set up of Pro Tem, and the 1st meeting has conducted on the 15th July 2017. If the amount of the number of people in the group is insufficient, why EWRC requested the team to set up a Pro Tem Committee? EWRC should have their number of VP unit and they should know best who to work with to set up a Pro Tem Committee. Although the Pro Tem has not has the authority to approve, don't they think it would be the best to allow more discussion on the approval? Moreover, 50% of the units back then were allocated for stafff / associated etc. The Pro Tem, in fact has requested EWRC to inform more members to participate, so that in the event if someone is more suitable to take over the job, the team are ready to handover it to the future JMB team so long as the team are ready to fight for the rights of the overall precinct. Mind you, while in the midst of accumulating people through the Wall in EWRC Apps, they claim the server down and all the wall post were deleted and we are not able to inform the others about the existence of the group. The team do not mind to merge (if there is) to any larger group and discuss whatever issue together for the best interest of the overall Cradleton.
The purpose of the Pro Tem is not only for complaining or stopping other people's reno but it serves as a preparation for the take over of the JMB which is taking place on Jan 2018, is that too far away for that? Is that not right to check on the arising issue like security, maintenance, reno approval, common area defects etc before it's too late? All these are for the benefit of everyone and I'm quite surprise why do people question on the purpose of Pro Tem. The Pro Tem has been briefed by EWRC to allocate the Organization Chart with different scope of work, which already mutually agreed that the decision will take place after a discussion with the group members. I think these are all sequences that will do good for all parties. Even if it's not for Pro Tem, what's wrong when 70 owners wanted to write a letter to the management to demand for an explanation of the approval sequencing? Is that too much to ask for when the facade has all kind of unexpected design? I remember quite clearly we are buying Strata Landed Property and we did received a DMC. Are the group of people wrong to ask for a valid explanation on the leniency of approval for the facade?
That been said, there are mutual agreement from EWRC and with the group of the members on the establishment of the Pro Tem and the Pro Tem is only trying to fight for the best interest of the group of people, be it 100 200 or 300. Let's not put this issue personal but a definite resolution is needed for the future of Cradleton which is why the team and the people around is trying to communicate with EWRC. I hate to spread rumours; and I ain't want to elaborate further here. In fact, there is no reason for me to explain unless there are Cradleton purchaser asking about our validity even if they reluctant to speak out in the whatsapp group. We would to insist here that the team and a lot of the residents love Cradleton ( their own home ) a lot and do hope that what has been created by the developer (stratified landed property) is not been damaged because of their negligence in approval of whatever facade alteration.
As for now, I will stop replying on concern of the validity of Pro Tem etc as we have more things to worry on the alteration of the facade. I'll assume that we have mutual understanding that the group of owners that love the precinct a lot wanted to preserve the beauty of the uniformity and all decision made are through the decision of majority. Ig any clarification is needed, let's just solve those issue in a properly channel and not an open forum like this. I do not wish to create more ambiguity and misconception by the others. It does not do anyone of us good here, and same goes to EW. Thank you
Thanks ALaN,What do you think when you try so hard to follow as much as possible to maintain the uniformity (inclusive of spending additional money to do up the frosted door inside the grill even though the contractor insisted that doing outer will be much easier) and after when you start moving in, you noticed all kind different door, like beautiful external glass door (if the cost of installation are the same) and dismantle of grill to install security door etc etc. You've mentioned that you personally agree to maintain uniformity and how do you feel when the management think otherwise? Who will be the one who want to talk to them if you claim the majority vote is not able to obtain? There are more such owners who've moved in with problem like this, and they've actually PMed some of us to express their disappointment. You were mentioning about rules. What if the developer tells you " it's ok, no submission needed, all security door also can, as long as it is white in color". When you ask about the wall is not full height, they said " it's ok, a lot of people doing it, just do.". When you ask about grill that the back attached together with a window will cause security issue and they said " it's ok, you cal seal up the wall, partially, or remain them or separate it out". What do you think? Human is full of imagination. These are only few of them. So what will be next?
The Pro Tem has constantly keeping in touch with EWRC, and was requested by EWRC themselves to send them an official letter of the set up of Pro Tem, and the 1st meeting has conducted on the 15th July 2017. If the amount of the number of people in the group is insufficient, why EWRC requested the team to set up a Pro Tem Committee? EWRC should have their number of VP unit and they should know best who to work with to set up a Pro Tem Committee. Although the Pro Tem has not has the authority to approve, don't they think it would be the best to allow more discussion on the approval? Moreover, 50% of the units back then were allocated for stafff / associated etc. The Pro Tem, in fact has requested EWRC to inform more members to participate, so that in the event if someone is more suitable to take over the job, the team are ready to handover it to the future JMB team so long as the team are ready to fight for the rights of the overall precinct. Mind you, while in the midst of accumulating people through the Wall in EWRC Apps, they claim the server down and all the wall post were deleted and we are not able to inform the others about the existence of the group. The team do not mind to merge (if there is) to any larger group and discuss whatever issue together for the best interest of the overall Cradleton.
The purpose of the Pro Tem is not only for complaining or stopping other people's reno but it serves as a preparation for the take over of the JMB which is taking place on Jan 2018, is that too far away for that? Is that not right to check on the arising issue like security, maintenance, reno approval, common area defects etc before it's too late? All these are for the benefit of everyone and I'm quite surprise why do people question on the purpose of Pro Tem. The Pro Tem has been briefed by EWRC to allocate the Organization Chart with different scope of work, which already mutually agreed that the decision will take place after a discussion with the group members. I think these are all sequences that will do good for all parties. Even if it's not for Pro Tem, what's wrong when 70 owners wanted to write a letter to the management to demand for an explanation of the approval sequencing? Is that too much to ask for when the facade has all kind of unexpected design? I remember quite clearly we are buying Strata Landed Property and we did received a DMC. Are the group of people wrong to ask for a valid explanation on the leniency of approval for the facade?
That been said, there are mutual agreement from EWRC and with the group of the members on the establishment of the Pro Tem and the Pro Tem is only trying to fight for the best interest of the group of people, be it 100 200 or 300. Let's not put this issue personal but a definite resolution is needed for the future of Cradleton which is why the team and the people around is trying to communicate with EWRC. I hate to spread rumours; and I ain't want to elaborate further here. In fact, there is no reason for me to explain unless there are Cradleton purchaser asking about our validity even if they reluctant to speak out in the whatsapp group. We would to insist here that the team and a lot of the residents love Cradleton ( their own home ) a lot and do hope that what has been created by the developer (stratified landed property) is not been damaged because of their negligence in approval of whatever facade alteration.
As for now, I will stop replying on concern of the validity of Pro Tem etc as we have more things to worry on the alteration of the facade. I'll assume that we have mutual understanding that the group of owners that love the precinct a lot wanted to preserve the beauty of the uniformity and all decision made are through the decision of majority. Ig any clarification is needed, let's just solve those issue in a properly channel and not an open forum like this. I do not wish to create more ambiguity and misconception by the others. It does not do anyone of us good here, and same goes to EW. Thank you
You got my point, no one is blaming the formation of Pro Tem. I in fact appreciated the effort you all put in. My only concern is the representativeness of feedback collected by Pro Tem. As you pointed earlier, there were 116 residents invited to participate in the e-survey. So, how about the rest? What if the rest hold different view from what you are getting?
Again, I'm NOT objecting the formation of Pro Tem, but rather want to stress that EWRC should be in a better position to facilitate input collection from ALL residents in order to generalize the finding to whole precinct. The finding will be more convincing as it is representing more than (at least) simple majority view.
Hope you don't take things personally as I'm not condemning nor spreading negative rumours.
This post has been edited by LuckyOne: Jul 26 2017, 09:07 PM
Quote
Glad if this statement genuinely came from EW. What I'm worry is the claim were from competitor cybertroopers 
0.0720sec
0.15
7 queries
GZIP Disabled