Emails to Arkitek LYS by another house owner and more.

                                                           A stitch in time saves nine

On 22.12.2022 I decided to email PAM giving them details as promised in my email to them on 15.10.2022. This is a lengthy email for those interested in the details. PAM did not respond.

Dear Sirs,

I refer to my previous emails to you.

As promised to you in my email dated 15 October 2022 I now have more details from a study of the original development plan and as-built survey received from DBKK and Amended development plan obtained from LPPB.

The original development approved by the authorities, DBKK, was not adhered to. Road heights and platform heights were changed and fabricated as-built survey plans and amended development plans were submitted to the authority for obtaining occupancy certificates.

Here are emails to and from a house buyer and the architect.

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 10:35 AM sheh george <stoney8899@yahoo.com> wrote:

    Let me begin by giving you a brief summary of the ordeals that I am encountering upon the purchase of the above mentioned house.

    I started my renovation in December 2021 and the 1st thing that I need to do is the ramp leading to my unit. It is so steep that a normal saloon car cannot be driven up and must park on the roadside.

    The contention here is as an architect who plans and designed the DP failed to realise that the ramp has a big flaw that it is absolutely not suitable for small saloon cars. Is your design complying with the building by laws set by the authorities? I hope to receive a reply from your firm on my question.

    Yours Sincerely 

    George Sheh

Following is the reply from the architect:

From: "Arkitek LYS" <arkiteklys@gmail.com>

To: "sheh george" <stoney8899@yahoo.com>

Cc: "Topwira Corporation" <topwiracorporation@gmail.com>

Sent: Mon, 19 Sept 2022 at 10:16

Subject: Re: Hse No 2A Taman Puncak Vistana

Good Morning,

Please be informed that we had been appointed by the Developer, Topwira Corporation Sdn Bhd, and our appointment is subject to the Architect Rules 1996. As such, please submit any queries / renovation updates / accusations directly to the Developer.

 For your information, all finish levels were indicated in the Development Plan as approved by the Local Authority and was built accordingly as shown in the as-built survey prepared by the Licenced Land Surveyor.

George Sheh then replied:

From: "sheh george" <stoney8899@yahoo.com>

To: "Arkitek LYS" <arkiteklys@gmail.com>

Cc: "Topwira Corporation" <topwiracorporation@gmail.com>

Sent: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 at 14:14

Subject: Taman Puncak Vistana

Thank you for your reply.

Now I would like to bring your attention to clause (q) (iii) in the Sales and Purchase Agreement. For your easy reference, I append below the same paragraph as stated in the S&P.

(q) (iii) in the event of any dispute arising as to whether any defect falls within the scope of this clause but without prejudice to the right of the Purchaser to seek legal redress the developer’s architect and engineers shall assist in determining the dispute.

So as a Professional appointed by the developer, you are still not discharge from your responsibilities. 

Therefore, we urge you to look into our grievances.

Appreciate your early reply.

Thanks 

Fr: George Sheh 2A

Fr: Chong Chooi Teng 17

Fr: Wing See Kheng 21

 

Following is the response from the architect:

From: "Arkitek LYS" <arkiteklys@gmail.com>

To: "sheh george" <stoney8899@yahoo.com>

Cc: "Topwira Corporation" <topwiracorporation@gmail.com>

Sent: Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 11:00

Subject: Re: Taman Puncak Vistana

Good morning,

 

Your email refers.

You have referred to what appears to be an extract from a clause in a sales and purchase agreement, likely between your goodself and the developer, to which we are neither promisor nor promisee. As such, please refer your issues / report defects / raise disputes in regards to defects directly to the developer for their processing / action / fulfilment as per the agreed contract conditions.

Thank you.

c.c – Topwira Corporation Sdn Bhd

 

As mentioned in my earlier email to you, I do understand and appreciate that the developer is ultimately responsible for development. However, I also feel that the professionals involved should also bear responsibility especially when they have falsified documents to obtain occupancy certificates.

I have found it strange that the architect at Arkitek LYS did not respond to my emails.

I mentioned to you that I don’t understand how or why a court case on late delivery charges has anything to do with construction or design defect, be that as may be, the following are my rebuttals to the reply from the architect’s email above.

An architect is the all-seeing, all knowing, building professional.

The most interesting question to me is to what extent an architect and client have a responsibility not just to the client’s narrow interests but to the broader interests of the public.  Clearly, the public has some interests that are recognised legally. 

But is there a public interest beyond what is legally required?  I believe an architect has an ethical duty to the public.  An architect has an obligation to society.

Architect’s responsibilities should include controlling projects from start to finish to ensure high quality and functional design. Many of the driveways at Vistana Heights are neither of high quality nor functional.

In terms of public interest and safety the Architect should consider the needs and stipulation of his Client and the effects of his work upon the life and well-being of the public and the community as a whole.

LYS Akitek had originally designed the driveway that would have been easy to drive up to the porch. Why did they subsequently alter the design? The S&P states that any change to the design should be agreed in writing by the purchasers. Why was this not adhered to by the architect?