Ever since my last piece dropped on October 17 (Jaya One’s Quest For Justice, A Celebration and Closure), the feedback has been incredible! Your responses have been like rocket fuel, propelling this interactive space to become the go-to hub for us Jaya One owners. No more confining discussions to alleys and coffee shops—this platform is our dynamic, new playground for vibrant interaction.

Referring to feedback provided within the article by a contributor using the pseudonym “Legal Eagle,” I took deliberate steps to conduct additional research into the corresponding legal aspects. I extend gratitude to this individual for their insightful contribution.

Legal Eagle referenced two court cases regarding Pearl Suria Residences in KL and Springtide Residences in Penang. In these cases, judges ruled in favor of multi-tier management fees. They stated that charging varying maintenance fees for distinct property components aligns with Section 60 (3) (b) of the Strata Management Act 2013.

In my quest to comprehend the rationale behind management companies implementing multi-tier charges, I delved into past articles within the Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association (REHDA) online archives. The attached article (download it here) sheds light on this issue. It highlights the serious concern raised by five prominent professional bodies – The Malaysian Institute of Property and Facility Manager (MIPFM), National Home Buyers Association (HBA), Association of Valuers, Property Managers, Estate Agents and Property Consultants (PEPS), and Building Management Association of Malaysia (BMAM). These organizations, akin to formidable third-party lobbying groups, expressed unease regarding the inequitable nature of single-tier maintenance charges and the reasons behind it.

The crux of my concern revolves around our legal endeavors challenging the multi-tier rates. I’m apprehensive not just about potentially overturning landmark cases that favored these rates but also the overwhelming influence wielded by strong professional lobbying groups advocating for them. I’m eager to hear your perspectives on this intricate matter.

Please input your views and feedback on the space given below. Your anonymity is assured.

18 thoughts on “DECODING MULTI-TIER RATES: LEGAL PURSUITS, LOBBYING PRESSURES, AND COMMUNITY DIALOGUE”
  1. Makes sense. I think it is only fair for owners to pay according to the services they benefit from. This is more fair and we cannot expect other to pay for service that they don’t have access to like swimming pool and etc.

  2. I think the title is a little bit harsh and a clickbait. We forget that the stakeholders in this matter are not only the associations but also us property owners. Look at the mixed development in Sri Hartamas consisting of hotels, shops and homes. You cannot expect home owners be paying for the 24 hours air conditioning of the hotel, electricity and other services not relevant for them to pay. Vice versa too. Right?

  3. Sometimes lawyer will ask us to do this and that. All just for the sake of untung. I just hope we keep our head above water and analyze real deep from every angle. Don’t just buta-buta take action without looking at all possible implications.

    1. Yes the sole purpose of this platform is to address those concern you mentioned. We try as much to be objective and provide facts not hearsay.

    1. Beats me. I suggest that our focus to be the details of our legal action first. I am in the midst of obtaining all the legal documents that I can and will post it up for all to see here. Hopefully in my next posting onwards.

  4. Not fairlah to burden certain property owners. Why must I take on financial burden that is not supposed to be mine. Single rate will strongly encourage conflicts among us. Need a rocket scientist to figure this out?

  5. Guys, I wonder how our neighbor, Singapore does their services rate calculation for same type development like us? Admin, you got this info?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *