My emails to and from Mr. Mok Juang Yu, the chairman of PAM (Sabah) (Part 2)

 

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.

When we met last week on the 11th of March, we discussed your concerns about the car porch ramp and your request for the developer to repurchase your property. Subsequently I conveyed the developer’s offer to improve the ramp, which they agreed to, though they declined the buyback. You indicated that without a buyback, you have no interest with improvements to the ramp. The slope stability and retaining wall issues you’ve now raised were not part of our discussion.

As my term as Chairman of PAM Sabah will conclude shortly, I will no longer be in a position to extend further assistance into this matter. For clarity on the slope stability, retaining wall, or land safety concerns, I would like to suggest directing your inquiry to the developer, LPPB, or DBKK, who may have access to more information. Please be advised, PAM Sabah primarily serves our members within its Constitution only. I wish you the best in resolving this matter and trust you’ll pursue it through the appropriate channels.

Warm regards,

Ar. Mok Juang Yu

Chairman, PAM Sabah Chapter

2024-2025

 

I replied as follows:

 

From:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk

To:Arkitek Mok JY

Mon 7 Apr at 06:58

Hello, Mr.Mok,

I’ve reviewed your response to my email, and I strongly disagree with your assertion, which risks misrepresenting the situation.

You stated, “You indicated that without a buyback, you have no interest in improvements to the ramp.” What I actually said was that if the ramp extends onto the highway, mirroring the actions of the neighbor across the street, I cannot accept it. Such an extension would violate DBKK rules and regulations and obstruct traffic flow.

Your reply—that you’ll secure approval from DBKK—doesn’t address my concern. I pointed out the instability of relying on an approval: what happens when the current officer, who might greenlight this extension, retires and a new officer takes over?

Since I’m proceeding with legal action upon my return from West Malaysia in June, I demand clarity on this matter. To be absolutely clear, I reject any plan to extend the ramp onto the road, as the opposite homeowner has done.

Regards,

Luqman Michel