K Residence Developer Brought To Court For Failure To Establish JMB

K Residence Developer Brought To Court For Failure To Establish JMB

K Residence unit owners are suing Tan Sri Yap Yong Seong, the chief executive officer of DutaLand Bhd and developer KL Landmark Sdn Bhd for allegedly failing to set up a joint management body (JMB) within 12 months of delivery of vacant possession, misconducts in condominium management and misuse of maintenance funds.

Widely known as Duta Yap, Yap is a director at Olympia Industries Bhd which fully owns KL Landmark.

City Properties Sdn Bhd including the company’s director Yap Wee Sean, who also happens to be Yap Yong Seong’s son, were also named as defendants to the case.

According to the 37 unit owners, KL Landmark failed to establish a JMB within the period provided under Section 4 and 5 of the Building and Common Property (Maintenance and Management) Act 2007.

They claim that delivery of vacant possession was made on 1 July 2008, while the JMB was only set up on 15 June 2018, reported The Edge Markets.

The defendants allegedly utilised the management funds and managed the condominium in a way that suit their own interests.

“The plaintiffs further plead that the third and fourth defendants (Yap and Tap), personally benefited from the manner in which the condominium development was managed, prior to the setting up of the JMB,” read their statement of claim.

The plaintiffs claim that KL Landmark also permitted the Embassy of Morocco to lease two triplex units at the condominium that were owned by Leong Li Nar Realty Sdn Bhd (LLNRSB), a company owned by Yap’s wife and his two sons, Yap Wee Chun and Yap Wee Sean.

Yap and his wife also serve as directors of LLNRSB.

KL Landmark allegedly acted under Yap Yong Seong and/or Yap Wee Sean’s instructions when it allowed the embassy to lease the condo units.

The plaintiffs claim that the presence of the embassy has reduced the prestige of the property, which was marketed as a luxury condominium, due to the removal of CCTV cameras on level 42 at the embassy’s request and the excessive number of visitors.

Read more: What’s The Difference Between SoHo, SoFo, And SoVo?

In fact, the development registered a total of 718 visitors from 2 November to 23 November 2017. The influx of visitors reduced the level of security within the development, they said.

Aside from these, the embassy was also granted 18 access cards – a disproportionate amount than what is reasonably required for a residential unit.

Meanwhile, about 45% of the total maintenance funds collected between 2008 and 2018 were used by KL Landmark to pay utility bills to City Development.

“The said utility charges comprised of chilled water charges, common electricity and refuse collection. Between 2009 and 2018, the first defendant paid the second defendant the sum of RM12.11 million for these utility charges. There were originally no supporting documents to support such payments,” noted the plaintiffs.

Moreover, the fifth and sixth floor office units were also fraudulently transferred to City Development, added the plaintiffs.

Represented by Messrs Goh Wong Pereira, the plaintiffs are seeking damages, an annual interest of five percent on any judgement sum, costs and other relief that the court deems fit.

Check out these properties in Kuala Lumpur

 

Image source from PropSocial

 

Check out these new properties in town! Start your search today and check how much the banks will loan you using our ‘Home Loan Pre-Approval’, with a 99.9% accuracy! Click here.

Our goal is to create a safe and engaging place for users to connect over interests and passions. In order to improve our community experience, we are temporarily suspending article commenting