• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Family with 4 cars refused entry into their Hillington Green home

Watchman

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Mar 12, 2009
Messages
13,160
Points
0
Wed, Apr 14, 2010
The New Paper

20100412.171500_disputeovercarparklotscopy.jpg


Family with four cars unhappy they have only one lot


By Ho Lian-yi

ONE night, when returning to their condominium home, they were stopped at the entrance by security guards.

The Lims, who live at Hillington Green in Bukit Batok, own four cars and insist on parking all of them there, though the condo rules no longer allow this.

The guards told them they could not park that car there.

The Lims reacted by stopping their car in front of the gates, blocking the entry and exit, around 11.30pm on March 15.

They refused to move their car and the police had to be called in to resolve the issue.

It was only an hour later that the Lims moved their car, after the security guards agreed to let them park it in the basement.

Recent changes in the condo rules had allowed them only one carpark lot.

The new rules do allow two carpark lots for those who have more than one car, but they lose the extra lot if they sell their car and buy a new one.

The Lims bought the new car in December after the rules came into effect, so they lost their extra lot and now have only one lot.


Yet, they continued to park all four cars in the condo carpark.

Mrs Lim, 44, a businesswoman, said the reason they had bought their penthouse in the Bukit Batok condominium for $1.2 million in 2002 was that they could park their four cars on the premises.

She claimed her family had been permitted to park three of the cars in the basement carpark, and one on the surface carpark.

But the situation changed after the condo's annual general meeting (AGM) last September.

Mrs Lim is unhappy about the new rules and is worried that they might have problems selling their unit if the potential buyer has more than one car.

In addition to the $300,000 Mercedes S-Class they were driving that night, the family owns a Mercedes SLK, a Jaguar and a Ssangyong.

A police spokesman said the police advised the parties involved to resolve the matter amicably.
 
Last edited:
Warning letter

20100412.171500_disputeovercarparklots2copy.jpg


In addition to her Mercedes S-Class being clamped, Mrs Lim has received several warning letters (above).


Before the incident, on March 9, Mrs Lim said the management had issued her a warning letter saying that if they didn't remove the car, its wheels would be clamped on March11.

The Lims are not the only residents affected.

Another resident, a sales consultant in his 50s, said he had to park his second car at his father-in-law's condominium, which is nearby.

"We are one of those pioneers who live here, they should entitle pioneers to two cars," he said.

"If at the beginning, the rule was one family one car, I wouldn't have bought the condo."

Another resident, Mr Tong Wai Chong, 73, a retiree, claimed there is plenty of parking space available at the open-air carpark.

Mr Tong said there are more than 400 parking lots available at the property.

According to the Hillington Green website, there are 480 apartments in the condo.

The condominium's management council did not respond to The New Paper's queries.

But other property management agents said that if the new rules were passed properly at the AGM, the residents have to abide by them.

They also said that parking issues are not uncommon in condominiums here.

Most condos have rules for the number of cars that each household is allowed to park on the premises.

Bigger units like penthouses may be entitled to more lots since they pay more in maintenance fees and have more 'share value' - that is, the share that an owner has in the common property of an estate.

But bylaws could override that, if there is a shortage of parking lots.

Mr Vijayen Nair, managing director of Philip Motha Property Management, said condominiums in less high-end areas may allow people to park more cars, as there may be fewer car owners among the residents.

But not so in more upscale residences.

He said the family could try to find if there are any households who are willing to give up their parking lots. They could then try to work out a compromise.

He said the management council could also charge the Lims a monthly fee for each additional car they parked.

Mr David Tham, managing director of Dawson Property Management, said: "The question is, why must you have four cars there? You are taking over a common area that also belongs to (others)."

He said in many newer developments, there is only enough parking space for one car per household.

In the Lim's case, he said that if the bylaw has been passed properly at an AGM, the Lims have to abide by it.


[email protected]

This article was first published in The New Paper.
 
"If at the beginning, the rule was one family one car, I wouldn't have bought the condo."

Tell this bastard don't talk cock lah. I do believe neither did the by-laws state that each unit can have more than 1 car to be parked there legally.

It's the same to those bastards in my condo. 1 of the council member is insisting that those subsidiary proprietors who have more than one parking lot/decal for their excess vehicles are permanently entitled until they no longer own their excess vehicles. I told him to go fuck himself.

During the next AGM, I'll insist that priority will be given to those with first vehicle. Any excess lots will then be considered to be awarded to those with second or more cars, and it will be on a first-in, first-out basis. Parking lots for first car owners cannot be at the mercy of those with second or more cars. This is plain common sense.
 
Want to park 4 cars? Buy a GCB!

I am a socialist. I support egalitarian measures. Every owner only 1 lot. Those who want more, have to secret ballot for the rest or buy from those who want to sell.
 
Tell this bastard don't talk cock lah. I do believe neither did the by-laws state that each unit can have more than 1 car to be parked there legally.

It's the same to those bastards in my condo. 1 of the council member is insisting that those subsidiary proprietors who have more than one parking lot/decal for their excess vehicles are permanently entitled until they no longer own their excess vehicles. I told him to go fuck himself.

During the next AGM, I'll insist that priority will be given to those with first vehicle. Any excess lots will then be considered to be awarded to those with second or more cars, and it will be on a first-in, first-out basis. Parking lots for first car owners cannot be at the mercy of those with second or more cars. This is plain common sense.

No. Some bigger unit allocated 2 parking lot as in the purchase agreement. So all have to live by the contract/rule.
Check 1st before u mess up.
All extra lot hope that management will rent out each $150/month. And the money will going to sinking fund to be fair to all resident. Because extra lot is belong to all the resident.
 
They should go and buy a mansion with a huge compound which allows them to park 10 cars.
Then they should go and buy 6 more cars.
 
the MCs also anyhow implement policies. basically penthouse should get 2 spaces and the rest is by ballot.
 
This is what our men in blue will do whenever you approach them for help!

I'm not trying to defend the men in blue but to be fair to them, there is nothing much they can do about it as essentially this is a domestic civil dispute to be resolved through certain proper channels. The police were there because they have been summoned. Unless a fight/fracas breaks out etc, no crime has yet been committed.
 
Back
Top