Posts

Part 6: Limitation Law and Foreclosure

Image
  Disclaimer: This article contains personal views and analysis on matters of public interest. It is not legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified lawyer for advice on their specific circumstances. From Sivadevi to Thameez and the Question of Sabah ’s 60 ‑ Year Horizon In Part 5, I exposed the inequity: borrowers in the Peninsula lived under a 12 ‑ year horizon, while borrowers in Sabah faced a 60 ‑ year horizon. The same default, but radically different consequences depending on geography. That inequity could not stand unchallenged. Courts revisit their own decisions, and when they do, the consequences ripple across the federation.

Part 5: Foreclosure Inequities – When Borrowers Live Under Different Horizons

Image
In Part 4, I wrote about leadership — how silence and deflection erode trust when institutions fail to act. But leadership failures are magnified when the law itself is unequal. That is the inequity I confront here: borrowers in Malaysia do not all live under the same legal horizon. Different statutory regimes mean that the very rules of foreclosure are not applied uniformly.

Part 4: When Leadership Must Answer

Image
                                                             Disclaimer: This article contains personal views and analysis on matters of public interest. It is not legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified lawyer for advice on their specific circumstances. In Part 1, I wrote about silence . In Part 2, I wrote about technicalities . In Part 3, I asked whether every injustice must be dragged through the courts before it is acknowledged. Each of these reflects a failure of institutions . But behind every institution stands leadership . And when leadership fails, the consequences are magnified.

Part 3: When Justice Requires a Lawsuit

Image
                                                                    Disclaimer: This article contains personal views and analysis on matters of public interest. It is not legal advice. Readers should consult a qualified lawyer for advice on their specific circumstances. In Part 1 , I wrote about silence . In Part 2 , I wrote about technicalities . Both are ways institutions avoid responsibility. But there is a third, more troubling reality: that citizens are often left with no choice but to take matters to court.

Part 2: Sabah Development Bank - When Technicalities Replace Justice

Image
  This is a continuation of Part one you can read at LINK In Part 1, I wrote about silence — the long, unbroken quiet that follows when citizens raise legitimate concerns with institutions meant to serve them. Silence itself is damaging, but sometimes it is broken. And when it is, the words that arrive often do not resolve the matter. Instead, they deflect.

When Promises Outlast Silence

Image
Introduction Contracts are more than ink on paper — they are promises meant to endure. Yet what happens when those promises are ignored for decades, only to be challenged after circumstances change? This is the story of agreements signed nearly twenty years ago, left unquestioned until a divorce and loan settlement brought them back into dispute.

When a Debt Is Settled but the Title Is Still Held

Image
  The Guarantor’s Burden in Sabah For more than two decades, a guarantor’s property has remained encumbered by a charge, even though the principal debt was fully settled in 2004. This situation raises serious questions about fairness, equity, and the role of state ‑ owned institutions in serving the public.   The Bank’s Reply On 15 December 2025, Sabah Development Bank Berhad , through its solicitors Jayasuriya Kah & Co., replied to my queries. Their letter acknowledged my correspondence and set out the Bank’s position: