Addressing Non-Responsiveness of Public Authorities: Challenges in Engaging DBKK and the Integrity Department

 

Here are two emails, one each to the Director General of DBKK dated 16.6.2025 and one to an officer at the Integrity Department dated 17.6.2025. I have yet to receive a response.

What can ordinary citizens like us do when even the Integrity department does not respond to emails? 

Rujukan DBKK : SR252069 (21/02/2025)

luqman michel

From:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk

To:MALISSA BINTI SAMIN

Cc:JULIAN JOSEPH,LINA BINTI MOHD. AMIN,SALVIA BINTI YUSOP

Mon 16 Jun at 06:28

Dear Mr. Lifred Wong,

I requested you several times about the retaining wall at Vistana Heights.

Item 3.2 said: Rekod kelulusan Pelan Tembok Penahan untuk pembangunan ini hendaklah diperiksa bagi mengenalpasti jika ada cadangan penyediaan tembok penahan di bahagian belakang Lot S9 untuk makluman dan rujukan dalam mesyurat akan datang.

It was for the action of the engineering department as well as the planning section.

This was not addressed by either one.

Please confirm if there was a retaining wall behind the whole of SD 1 to SD 18 (Now renumbered D17 to D18).

Please forward the minutes of the meeting on 11.6.2025 as soon as possible.

Thank you and kind regards,

Luqman Michel

From:luqmanm2002@yahoo.co.uk

To:SITI FAIRUZ BINTI AG MOHD HUSSIN

Tue 17 Jun at 04:05

Good morning, Puan Siti Fairuz,

 

Thank you for your email dated June 16, 2025.

I obtained the as-built survey for Vistana Heights from DBKK on November 15, 2022, and received a duplicate from LAM on March 21, 2023. I presented this copy to Mr. Lifred Wong during the DBKK meeting on June 11, 2025, and Mr. Rayner from DBKK confirmed it matched his records.

The minutes from the May 5, 2025 meeting indicate a 2.76 ft difference between the platform height of Lot S9 and the interpolated road height from the 2018 development plan. When Mr. Lifred asked if I agreed with this figure, I stated the height difference exceeds 4 feet. At the June 11, 2025 meeting, Mr. Lifred referenced a height of 31.05m (101.87 ft), resulting in a 4.38 ft difference (106.25 – 101.87). I disputed the figure 31.05m as it does not appear on the as-built survey. I continue to question whether the as-built survey was altered to secure the Occupancy Certificate.

Additionally, I raised a concern noted as point 3.2 in the May 5, 2025 meeting minutes regarding the Retaining Wall Plan approval for this development. I requested a review to determine if a retaining wall was proposed at the back of Lot S9. The engineering department and planning division were tasked with this, but no updates have been provided. This question is important as the developer Ms Jessie Lee told my son that a retaining wall will be built.

Since 2022, I have repeatedly asked DBKK, and recently Mr. Lifred via emails on May 5, May 29, 2025, and again on 16.6.2025 whether a retaining wall was mandated. I am still awaiting a response.

Further questions I have raised with Mr. Lifred, which remain unanswered, are as follows:

 

i.                    The Development Plans (DPs) dated 1995, 2007 (approved in 2011), and 2018 indicate a 9-foot drainage reserve behind houses D18 (previously S1) to D17 (previously S18). However, this drainage reserve does not exist on-site.

 

 

ii.                  The As-Built Survey (ABS) also depicts this non-existent drainage reserve. An ABS should accurately reflect the actual site conditions.

 

iii.               The ABS shows the boundary of the back wall of unit S8 as shorter than that of S9, with units S7 to S3 being even shorter than S8. This difference is not reflected in any of the DPs, including the latest DP dated 2018.

Best regards,

Luqman Michel