A Facebook response to my post on the architect of Vistana Heights

 

On 7.4.2023 I read a post by an architect on FB based on what I wrote about the architect of Vistana Heights. Here are some of his points and my rebuttal.

4. Driveway too steep? That is the scope of the Civil and Structural Engineers (C&S) to conform accessibility from the road levels into the driveway including the general platform levels. Again, Architect is at fault?

My rebuttal: We all know that it is the C&S engineer who is responsible for road levels and driveway.

What this FB member does not realise is that my complaint is basically on the manufactured Amended Development Plan submitted by the architect to obtain the occupancy Certificate. It is prepared and signed by the architect. On what basis did the architect prepare his Amended Development Plan?

5. Architect did not respond? Foremost, there is a privity of contract between home owners and developer, not the Architect. How do you wish him to response? The Architect is right to refer any complaint back to the developer. He owes the homeowners no contractual obligation.

My rebuttal: My main question was on the driveway – what is the maximum gradient allowed for a driveway? The internet says it should be no more than 12%. Does the architect have to get permission from the developer to answer a technical question such as this?

The Sales and Purchase Agreement states that the developer’s architect or engineers shall assist in determining disputes. The developer did not respond to my emails and I turned to the architect to help resolve matters raised.

6. Writing to the PAM Pertubuhan Akitek Malaysia or PAM Sabah Chapter instead of the board? The institute is a ‘social club’ for architects, not a ‘complaint department’. The Board of Architects (Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia LAM) is a ‘complaint department’. How do you wish the ‘club’ to answer you?

My rebuttal: PAM could have answered and said that they are not the body for complaints. Instead of that they replied that they cannot make any comment as there is a court case between the purchaser and the developer. My question on what has a court case between the purchase and the developer on Liquidated Ascertained Damage (LAD) got to do with construction defects was not replied.

I am a lay person and like many would not know which body of architects to complain to. PAM could have directed me to Lembaga Arkitek which would have saved me a lot of time.

Note: Now, my readers know that if they want to complain about architects they should complain to Lembaga Arkitek and not to Pertubuhan Arkitek Malaysia. 

Further thoughts: The following are my thoughts on the above: If there are no amendments required by the authority there will be no amended development plan. Upon completion of the project, the surveyor will do an as-built survey to confirm or otherwise if the development had gone according to plan.

 Assuming there are amendments required and instructed by the authority, then I guess the architect will get a survey done and plot his amended development plan.

 A separate survey will be done by the appointed surveyor to do an as-built survey independent of the survey done by the architect or engineer or whoever.