Luqman's musings

  Here is the letter from Messrs Ronny Cham & Co dated 30.11.2022. (Written without prejudice) Our clients have issued you a letter on 28.11.2022 stating the conditions upon which they will convene the said meeting. Besides the conditions stated in our clients’ letter, we have our clients’ further instructions to state that you shall also be responsible for our clients’ costs in engaging our clients’ project architect, engineer, surveyor and the M&E engineer to attend the said meeting. If you are not agreeable, our clients will not guarantee their attendance.

                                         The above is probably only for public consumption. I recently saw a Facebook post about the Bangkok tower collapse from a month ago, but as usual, such posts are shared without follow-up. I've been vocal about the lack of accountability among Sabah's civil servants, particularly regarding unanswered emails about a housing project in Kota Kinabalu. In the Vistana Heights case, I’ve accused the developer, Topwira Corporation Sdn Bhd, and the architect, LYS Architect, of using a fabricated as-built survey. As a former manager at a Licensed Surveyor’s office with over two years of experience, I can read drawings and stand by this claim. The professionals involved—engineers, architects, and surveyors—seem to escape accountability for what I consider gross negligence.

I received another letter from Ronny Cham dated 30.11.2022. Unlike previous letters, this was marked ‘without prejudice’. What does ‘without prejudice’ mean? ‘Without prejudice’ has specific legal implications, primarily in the context of dispute resolution and negotiations. It cannot be used in court as evidence. This fosters candid discussions aimed at resolving issues. This protection only applies to communications genuinely aimed at settling a dispute.

  In my blog post yesterday , I discussed a letter from LPPB dated November 23, 2022, which stated, “We sincerely hope there will be a solution for both parties from the meeting with TCSB and their respective consultants.” However, I received an earlier letter, dated November 16, 2022, from Ronny Cham & Co., signed by Cham Ngit Shin @Ronny Cham, addressed to Puan Rosemary Ahping, LPPB’s General Manager. This letter referenced a meeting on November 16, 2022, at 10:30 a.m., attended by Topwira Corporation Sdn Bhd (the developer), LPPB, project consultants, and senior officers. It noted LPPB’s suggestion that Topwira meet with affected house buyers to resolve issues amicably, but Topwira insisted that buyers attend with their solicitors, architects, engineers, and surveyors to ensure a productive discussion.

  On 23.11.2022, I received a letter from The Commercial Development Architect, Mohamed Andy Osman of LPPB, stating the following: 1.      This letter is to update you with regards to our meeting with Topwira Corporation Sdn Bhd dated 16.11.2022. TCSB has assured LPPB that they are willing to meet with the relevant residents to resolve matters amicably, especially with the incorporation of architects, C&S, M&E engineering consultants for their inputs and assistance in the settlement of matters 2.      Therefore, please contact TCSB directly or TCSB’ lawyer*, Mr. Ronny Cham to arrange a date and time for the meeting. 3.      We sincerely hope there will be a solution for both parties from the meeting with TCSB and their respective consultants. ** 

  The following is my email to Arkitek LYS, now forwarded to Datuk Masiung Banah. Dear Puan Suzi (Suzilawati is PA to Masiung Banah), This was an email I wrote to the architect of Vistana Heights and copied to Puan Rosemary. Please share this with whoever in LPPB can shed some light on this matter. Regards, Luqman michel   ----- Forwarded message -----

  I was scrolling through X on April 14, 2025, when I stumbled across Dr. Mahathir Mohamad’s post about U.S. tariffs. Under the headline “HIGH TARIFFS,” he admitted he’s no financial guru or economist but still shared his take: Trump’s high tariffs mean hefty taxes on goods and services entering the U.S. Reading that, I felt my blood boil. Here’s a former prime minister weighing in on global economics while I can’t even get a reply from Sabah’s civil servants about a dangerous situation in my neighbourhood. So, I fired off a response, and let me tell you why I’m fed up.

  From:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk To:Rosemary.Ahping@Sabah.gov.my Cc:Della.Sinidol@Sabah.gov.my,topwiracorporation@yahoo.com,arkiteklys@gmail.com,zlsemsb@gmail.com,zaidunleengsabah@yahoo.com Mon 14 Apr at 13:23 Dear Puan Rosemary Ahping, I am writing to follow up on my email dated 31 October 2022, regarding critical safety concerns at Vistana Heights Phase 1, specifically the absence of a retaining wall behind houses S10 to S1, where there is a steep drop exceeding 20 feet. Regrettably, I have not received a response to that email, and the matter remains unresolved, prompting this urgent request for clarification and action.

  Arkitek LYS became a limited company, on August 1, 2023. Under Malaysian law, this transition transforms the business into a separate legal entity, distinct from its owners or directors, granting the Sdn. Bhd. its own legal identity. According to their website (https://arkiteklys.my/), this change marked a transformation in 2023 from a Sole Proprietorship to a Body Corporate Architectural Consultancy Practice. The website frames this shift as aligning with a “vision for long-term enduring excellence,” suggesting a deliberate business strategy rather than a reaction to external pressure. This claim may be taken with a pinch of salt due to the timing. 

I am collating what I have written over the last few years to hand over to my lawyer in June. The situation at Vistana Heights, with a 20-foot drop behind the houses and an unbuilt retaining wall despite assurances from the now-deceased developer, raises significant concerns, especially given the lack of response from Dewan Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu (DBKK), the Housing and Urban Development Board (LPPB) as landowner, and LYS Architect. The architect’s apparent lack of worry about my threatened legal action is curious, considering the discrepancies I have noted. 

  I’ve been mulling over two frustrating matters while weeding in my garden—two situations where people seem to dig in rather than deal with the issues at hand. First, why aren’t the developer and architect in the Vistana Heights case taking the easy way out by buying back my property at market value instead of dragging this to court? Second, why is Lions Clubs International (LCI) not acting against the Lions Club of Kota Kinabalu Centennial Club when I’ve openly pointed out their failure to hold an election meeting, which violates the LCI Constitution? The same question applies to District Governor Annie Ho, who has thrown up hurdles to stop PP Chin Chee Thau from meeting for the Club Dispute Resolution Procedure (CDRP). Let’s unpack these one at a time, exploring how stonewalling, the backfire effect, and a stubborn refusal to think might be at play.

  To: Pertubuhan Akitek Malaysia (PAM) Re: Architect’s Responsibility Under Sabah Building Regulations (2019)   Dear Sir/Madam,   I am writing to seek clarification regarding the responsibilities of architects under the building regulations applicable in Sabah in 2019, particularly in relation to the Occupancy Certificate (OC) issued for Vistana Heights on October 2, 2019. The building regulations in Sabah at that time—likely the Sabah Building By-Laws 1964 or its amendments—governed the process, outlining architects’ responsibilities in plan submission and compliance certification. These by-laws were tailored to Sabah’s local context but shared similarities with the Uniform Building By-Laws 1984 in terms of professional duties.   

  Following is the reply from Mr. Mok, the chairman of PAM (Sabah). On Sunday, 23 March 2025 at 06:27:43 GMT+8, Arkitek Mok JY <arkitekmokjy@gmail.com> wrote: [STRICTLY WITHOUT PREJUDICE] Subject: Response to Your Enquiry on Retaining Wall and Land Stability Concerns Dear Mr. Luqman Michel, Thank you for your email and for referencing my article in the Daily Express on 2 March 2025. I appreciate you reaching out with your concerns regarding the development project.

  On March 11, 2025, Mr. Mok Juang Yu, the chairman of PAM (Sabah), visited me at Vistana Heights. He mentioned that his purpose was to inspect the driveway I had highlighted in my Daily Express article, which was a response to his own published statements. He proposed discussing potential solutions with Architect LYS of Vistana Heights and the developer to address the driveway issue. Mr. Mok suggested expanding the driveway, similar to what the neighbour across the street had done. I expressed concern that extending the driveway onto the road, as my neighbour had, might cause issues with DBKK.