Another letter from Ronny Cham and Co.


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.

The ‘without prejudice' rule isn’t absolute. Courts may admit such communications in specific circumstances, such as in the case of fraud, misrepresentation or undue influence. If the communication isn’t part of a genuine attempt to settle, courts may disregard the label.  

Was the letter a genuine attempt to settle? I let you be the judge of it.

This letter refers to a letter from Topwira Corporation Sdn Bhd (TCSB) dated 28.11.2022 (Also with the tag ‘without prejudice’). The letter stated that they would like to fix a meeting on 22.12.2022 at a venue to be announced, provided I confirm that I will be accompanied by a (a) lawyer; (b) an engineer; (c) an architect and a (d) surveyor.

The letter further added that it is my responsibility to invite relevant parties, such as DBKK. Ministry of Local Government and housing etc.

In addition, it stated, if the above conditions are not acceptable to you, please instruct your solicitors to write to our lawyer to deal with the matter in the court of law.

The above does not look like a genuine attempt to settle and was simply stonewalling. 

Tomorrow we shall look at the letter from Messrs. Ronny Cham and Co.

To be continued….

Location: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bad experience with Sabah architects

Image
The lady in the photo above is 5 feet 2 inches. The as-built survey plan says the height difference between the road height and the house platform height is 1 foot. Are the architects blind? I refer to the views expressed by the Chairman of PAM (Sabah chapter) in Forum on 2.3.2025. The Chairman stated that the Daily Express report on over-certifying projects unfairly generalized architects and risked damaging the reputation of the entire profession.  
Read more

Are architects liable for fabricated documents submitted to authorities

Image
In 2020, many of my well-meaning friends told me that I have no course of action against the professionals involved in obtaining the Occupancy Certificate for Vistana Heights project with fabricated as-built survey plan. I believe all those involved, including DBKK senior officers, LPPB (Lembaga Pembangunan Perumahan Dan Bandar) and its GM Rosemary Ahping, Arkitek LYS, Lembaga Juruukur Sabah etc. will be answerable for how the Occupancy Certificate was issued. Hopefully, my complaint to SPRM (MACC), LJS, DBKK, Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia will be looked into.
Read more

SPRM (MACC) and Vistana Heights

Image
  Someone asked me how the MACC is involved in the Vistana Heights case if I don’t have any proof that corruption is involved. That is an excellent question. We all assume that corruption is only when a bribe is involved. However, a closer look at the brochure from the MACC shows the following:                                                                                                                   Please click on the image above. ...
Read more