On Friday, the 18th instant, between 6.15pm to 6.35 pm the contractor responsible for this renovation, approached the affected party (this time, the lady of the house) as she came back from work, alighted from her car and was opening her main gate.

The contractor told her that they were almost completing the job and asked when can they be allowed to come in to plaster and paint the two walls.

The affected party responded by saying that if you want to plaster the wall you must demolish the covered up wall first. And added that it was dark and no longer airy. However, the contractor said that once you let us do, and painted it will be brighter. He also said that it was airy.

Since the response from the affected party was not a favourable one, he finally walked away. 

On seeing this, the affected party opened his front door, came out of his house to water the plants. The parties outside continued talking. The contractor concerned was heard talking on a raised tone. The affected party was not invited into the discussion and went inside his house.

Just close to 1pm, MBSA called the handphone of the affected party and asked him to come over to Jabatan Bangunan of MBSA for a meeting at 2.30 pm. 

The affected party (a couple) arrived before 2.30 pm and waited for the officer. Just around 2.30 pm the officer came out and led the affected party into the conference room.

The affected party thanked the officer for seeing them and proceeded with the discussion. The affected party were told that MBSA has also invited the Chinese family and the contractor concerned to attend the same meeting as well. They were no where to be seen and was later informed that they will be late.

The affected party went ahead with the discussion. They told the MBSA officer that they have never been approached by the two parties lately to allowing them to enter their compound to demolish the walls. Instead, they (the two parties) has approached the affected party weeks ago to allow them to enter their compound and plaster the walls at their side. The affected parties has so far refuse to allow them to enter their compound and plaster the wall as it may be and can be seen or interpreted that they (the affected party) agree with their actions.

The affected party also told the officer that they have no objection whatsoever if the two parties concerned are entering their compound to demolish the illegal 'cover-up' wall. But, insisted that the demolition work should be carried out first before proceeding to plaster the wall that was built to replace the existing perimeter fencing.

After this was made clear to the officer at the MBSA, the affected party left around 3 pm. The two parties concerned were still not seen. Looks like, who are the bigger bosses in this case?    

Meanwhile, later in the same afternoon, a Alam Flora truck was seen removing the rubbish bin which was placed earlier for the contractor concerned to dump his rubbish. What does this means? Why was action to remove the rubbish bin happen so co-incidentally? Where are they going to dump the broken bricks of the 'illegal' and 'ugky' wall later?  Is there any sincereity to carry out the demolishing as instructed by MBSA? Lets keep our fingers crossed.

MBSA confirmed in writing that a Notice No. 095549 under article 133 Section 70 (1) was issued on the 24th of June 2008. The Chinese family was given 14 days to demolish the wall as it was not approved, does not comply or was done not in accordance with the conditions or guidelines set by MBSA.

However, what really happened is that during this stipulated period, the 'covered-up' open space has been plastered and painted on the side of the Chinese family's house by the contractor. Mind you, please bear in mind that this was done despite knowing very well that what they (the Chinese family and the contractor concerned) are doing is actually going against the instruction issued by MBSA. Does this prove to you that they are really 'very arrogant people?'  

The other letter from MBSA was the 'Notis Amaran' 095549. This Notice was wrongly issued to the affected party instead of the Chinese family by MBSA. It is a genuine mistake or was it mischeviously addressed to rub salt into the wounds by some very crooked people?

On the morning of Tuesday, the 8th instant, the affected party went to MBSA to highlight the wrongly addressed 'Notis Amaran' at 'Jabatan Bangunan'. The officer responsible for this area said that they will cancel this 'Notis Amaran' and will issue another one with the correct address. The 14 Day Notice had already lapsed and what will a new Notice mean to this Chinese family in this case, except on record purpose? 

With regards to the question of demolishing the 'covered-up' ugly wall by MBSA, the officer said that they do not have the authority to demolish the wall. They can only issue a summon to them. And told the affected party that they can file a case in court and get the court to issue an order to demolish the said wall.

So, it looks like nothing is actually done for the affected family by MBSA. The Chinese family has covered up, plastered and painted on their side of the illegal wall. And it now looks like that the affected family will now have to cough out money from their own pockets to engage a lawyer to seek justice from the court. Do you think that the affected party has been very badly bullied and victimised by all those concerned?

With the above, to be fair to both parties, it is best that you form your own opinion on this yourself?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wu-gHm_xxbs

The affected party is really upset and is disappointed with the very slow pace of action being taken by the authorities to resolve these outstanding issues.

Meanwhile, how would you rate such an ugly neighbour?

Is it just because of their foolish 'pride' or 'ego' that they refuse to heed the warning from MBSA? Or, is it being just plain 'stubborn' prople? No matter what, their arrogant act, by covering-up the open air space of a common wall separating two car porches has generated a lot of attention and concern for the affected party in the neighbourhood.

The nasty work is finally sealed and done. Is the Authorities going to act on this illegal structure? Is it against the Law? Is it a potential fire hazzard as well?

Please proceed to read my first post 'An Ugly Act By An Ugly Neighbour' for better comprehension on what yours truly is talking about.

Leaving all the legal implications aside; to say the least, it now looks like the affected party is being denied of some very basic human rights.

Firstly, 'The Right to Light.' I mean, how can someone just to satisfy his and her own selfish pride just simply cover up a common wall and forcibly deny or deprive the affected party from having sufficient sunlight into the affected party's house? Would you do such a thing?

Again, the affected party is being denied of another very basic human right. 'The Right to Air.' The open air space is actually meant to improve air flow into the houses and consequently better ventilation. With it being blocked now, the hot air is trapped, the hot air cannot escape and ventilation into the house must be pressumably very bad. In short, the affected party is again being forcibly denied and deprived of proper ventilation. Many thanks to this insensitive and selfish Chinese family that lives a few doors away. 

Furthermore, the affected party is also being denied of another very basic human right. 'The Right to View.' When the open air space was not covered up, all neighbours have a clear view of each others compound. Now, this view is blocked and the affected party cannot see what is happening outside to the neighbouring houses. Neither, the others can view what is happening inside the affected party's house any longer. Is'nt the affected party is again being forcibly denied and deprived of enjoying this privilege to view? This goes to show just how inconsiderate this so called highly educated Chinese family is.

Is'nt this Chinese family arrogant? Is'nt such an ugly act pure stupidity and selfish? And last but not least, I am of the opinion that this Chinese family is suffering from an attitude problem? Does it also seem to you that this Chinese family have complete disregard for our Country's Building Laws and the MBSA's renovation guidelines and Building By-Laws to say the least? And if I may add, it seems that they have no respect at all for the Authorities in this Country? Is he really that very influential, powerful and can get things done his way without abiding by the Building Laws and By-laws of this Country?

Much worse, with that open air space being completely covered up it will now be a hazzard if there is a fire. Where can the affected party escape if someone intentionally or mischeviously set up a fire at the front door? Who can now notice if a fire is being started? Thinking allowed, is this part of a grand plan to finish the affected party by this powerful Chinese family living a few doors away? You possibly cannot discount it judging by this Chinese family's arrogance, attitude, actions and deeds.

On the other hand, can't the contractor who undertook this job advise this Chinese family that it is actually illegal to seal or cover up that open air space? Mind you, there were neither prior applicaion for permit nor approval for the renovation from MBSA in the first place. But, the contractor dares to proceed with the sealing up of the open space which had been very specifically provided by the Architect and Housing Developer in the first place. The overall housing plan upon submission for approval must in the first place meet with and in compliance with the requirements of the relevant governing Authorities. If so, who is then behind this very powerful contractor? Who can simply change such a very basic building requirement? Or, who are their connections that has empowered them to act above the laws passed by our Country's lawmakers?

MBSA cannot practise selective approval. A lot of concerned parties are watching how MBSA is going to respond to this issue which was lodged just a matter of days ago. Mind you, MBSA is now awarded ISO standards there are steps and procedures to be followed. MBSA have to be firm. Action must be taken and seen to be taken by MBSA immediately to restore the original design of the affected party's house and penalise this arrogant, inconsiderate, insensitive and last but not least selfish Chinese family and the powerful contractor concerned if what they did is deemed illegal and unlawful.

Lets see if justice is done and seen to be done in this case.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Updated on Tuesday, 1st of July 2008.

A formal complaint had been lodged with MBSA on the 23rd of June 2008 by the affected party.

Two men from MBSA arrived at the Chinese family's house on the afternoon of the 24th instant and it seems that a 14 Day 'Stop Work Order' was given on the same day to this Chinese family. However, renovation work still carried on and the workers did not turned up only since last Friday. But, today the workers are back at work again.

The affected party checked with MBSA yesterday and were told that there were still no permit issued for the renovation yet. 

Meanwhile, do you permit your neighbours to do such a thing without consulting you? Do you condone such an action? Do you think that they have gone overboard?

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Updated on Thursday, 3rd of July 2008.

The affected party telephoned MBSA yesterday to follow-up on the progress of their complaint and were told that a MBSA personnel went to the site to view the complaint on Tuesday, the  6th instant.

The MBSA personnel told the Chinese family that the wall had to be demolished. The guy agreed but said that 'the affected party did not allow his workers to go over to demolish the 'cover-up''.

Finally, the affected party was told that MBSA would fix a date and call both parties to attend a meeting and have a date set to demolish the 'cover-up'.

On the 1st instant, a member of the affected party was inside their house. They have to close the windows because they tried to minimise dirtying their house due to the renovation carried out next door. The door bell outside is confirmed working and they are sure that nobody pressed the doorbell on that day. Moreover, MBSA have the contact numbers of the affected party as well. Besides, should'nt MBSA inform the affected party of their intention to visit their site so that they can be present, show MBSA the predicament they are in and allow their grouse to be heard?

On the other hand, the affected party confirm that the Chinese family had not approached them lately to 'demolish' the 'cover-up'. However, the affected party had in the past been approached by the contractor on several occassions and the Chinese family once on plastering the back of their walls. The affected party had turned them down and refused to allow their workers to enter the affected party's compound to carry out their work.

To say the least, is'nt it the right of the affected party not to allow their workers to enter the affected party's compound to carry out any work?