My reply to Ronny Cham & Co's email.

 

Ronny Cham & Co replied to my email dated 20.1.2023 and said that they had no further instruction from their client Rosemary and Della of LPPB.

I replied their email with the following on 30.1.2023 and resent it on 16.2.2023 and have not heard from them. 

This is for record purposes to be included in my next book. 

luqman michel <luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk>

To:legal@ronnychamco.com

Cc:aduan.lppb@sabah.gov.my,topwiracorporation@yahoo.com

Mon, 30 Jan at 14:16

Dear Mr. Ronny Cham,

I refer to my email to you dated 20.1.2023 and your response dated 26.1.2023.

You said that you have no further instructions from Rosemary Ahping and Della Sinidol.

You have not answered as to whether both the above named had indeed instructed you in the first place.

 

I would be grateful if you could please respond to the questions below that you have not previously answered.

In the extracts enclosed, you included the following articles:

i.                     Intrigued by Messages on Twitter from David Zyngier re: Summer Howarth.

ii.                   My discussion with Stephen Krashen and his team

iii.                 SICC and my email to ROS and their response.

Please tell me, Mr. Ronny Cham, in what way are the above three articles even remotely connected with your clients or Vistana Heights? Let me remind you of your letter on Locus Standi.

Further questions on the above are:

i.                     Was that instructed by Rosemary and Della?

ii.                   Is this your privilege as a solicitor to harass me on my blog posts that have no relevance to your client?

In your 30.11.2022 letter to me, you said that you are acting on behalf of Topwira Corporation Sdn. Bhd. Are you still acting on behalf of Topwira? If you are, why have you not responded to questions pertaining to Topwira?  

I copy paste below, a few of my earlier questions for your ease of reference when answering.

You further mentioned that ‘the development of the said Taman Puncak Vistana was under the jurisdiction of the Housing Controller Sabah of the Housing and Local Government Ministry, and in accordance with the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Enactment 1978 and the rules made thereunder’. Could you please let me know where you got this notion from?

Mr. Cham, the original development plan was approved by the approving authorities (DBKK). Were the alterations made instructed by the Appropriate Authorities?

Mr. Cham, the rules above clearly state that no change or deviation from the approved plans shall be made without the consent in writing of the purchaser. Have you seen the consent from the purchasers?

Good workmanlike manner in accordance with plans and specifications will include driveways that are accessible by standard Malaysian cars. However, this is not the case with the development at Puncak Vistana. What is your view?

Mr. Cham, it is now 3 years since the occupancy certificate was issued. Do you have any idea why the Appropriate Authorities have not taken over the infrastructure?

Mr. Cham Nyit Shin, with the above and more infringement how dare you have the audacity to state that the development of Taman Puncak Vistana is in accordance with the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Enactment 1978 and the rules made thereunder?

The surveyor and architect of Topwira Corporation Sdn. Bhd, have fabricated the as-built survey drawings and the amended development plans to obtain the occupancy certificate. What is your stand on this?

To have a development plan approved by fabricating survey plans is a serious offence.

Your response will be appreciated as I will be posting this email and your response for the benefit of my readers who are eagerly waiting to see the progress of my complaint against Topwira Corporation Sdn. Bhd.

Yours faithfully.

Luqman Michel