Clamped for parking in own condo
A HOUSEWIFE has been slapped with a $4,000 bill after her husband's BMW 730i was clamped for illegal parking in a condominium.
What is unusual about this case is that her family are residents in the condo.
The pregnant woman had lent the car's parking label to a friend who was running errands for her.
The unusually high charges was for 20 days of 'illegal parking' at the Water Place condominium in Tanjong Rhu Road.
The absence of a parking label had made it seemed that the BMW belonged to a visitor - hence the clamping for parking in a resident's lot.
Mrs June Li, 36, who is five months' pregnant, said her husband had been away on business since 1 Sep.
As she was not fit to drive, she had no idea their car had been clamped since 21 Oct.
Under the condo's rules, a fee of $200 is imposed for each day the car is clamped.
Property management firm Knight Frank, which runs the management committee (MC), removed the clamp on Monday after Mrs Li agreed to place the parking label back on her husband's car.
But her troubles are not over as it has not waived the clamping fee.
Mrs Li, whose family is from Shanghai, said she had been stressed by the chain of events, which started when one of her units was broken into on 24 Aug.
The family owns two 1,200 sq ft units in Water Place where they have been living since 2006. They bought the second unit last year so their extended family members could stay there during visits.
On the break-in, Mrs Li said: 'I was on holiday when it happened and I had to cut my trip short because of it. I was so stressed that I had a bleeding incident on 1 Sep.'
The police told The New Paper that a television worth $4,000 and a laptop were missing from Mrs Li's unit, and investigations are ongoing.
Mrs Li, who has two daughters aged 7 and 2, was hospitalised for five days and advised to remain in bed after being discharged.
To make it easier for her family friend, Mr Lennon Chng, to take her elder daughter to school and back, she let him use the parking label on her husband's car.
She said: 'My husband is often overseas for business and he won't be back till December. So I thought it would be convenient for Lennon so he wouldn't have to fill up a visitor's form each time he comes here.'
She said the MC had called her before clamping her husband's car, asking her to replace the missing label.
'I explained my immobility and the burglary to them. I also explained this was why I had lent the label to my friend.'
She claimed the caller told her they would meet her later on this matter but they did not follow up.
She said she knew about the clamping when the MC called her on 21 Oct, but still did not meet them on the matter, citing her immobility.
'I know I flouted the condo's rules by transferring the label to my friend. But they shouldn't clamp my husband's car since they know we're residents.'
Parking label confiscated
On 28 Oct, Mr Chng was driving Mrs Li's mother and maid into the condo when a Knight Frank staff member confiscated the parking label.
Mrs Li got her lawyer, Mr Joseph Chen, to write to Knight Frank, demanding an explanation and requesting that her husband's car be released. The firm explained that the label was taken from Mr Chng's car as it did not tally with his licence plate number.
Mr Pragas Krishnan, a facility manager at Water Place, told The New Paper the situation arose because of Mrs Li's failure to act promptly.
'We have a bylaw which states that the clamping fee will accumulate if action isn't taken. If Mrs Li had returned the label to her husband's car immediately, she would just have to pay the flat fee of $200,' he said.
'All Mr Chng has to do is to fill up the visitor's form when he comes. He doesn't need the label as he never parks overnight here.'
As for Mrs Li's claims that no one from the MC turned up to discuss the matter, Mr Pragas said: 'There's only so much we can do. It's the residents' responsibility to ensure their cars display the labels and to come to our office to resolve such issues.'
So the clamping fee dispute remains unresolved.
'I just hope the committee can understand my situation and reconsider the fee,' Mrs Lee said.
This article was first published in The New Paper on November 15, 2008.
A HOUSEWIFE has been slapped with a $4,000 bill after her husband's BMW 730i was clamped for illegal parking in a condominium.
What is unusual about this case is that her family are residents in the condo.
The pregnant woman had lent the car's parking label to a friend who was running errands for her.
The unusually high charges was for 20 days of 'illegal parking' at the Water Place condominium in Tanjong Rhu Road.
The absence of a parking label had made it seemed that the BMW belonged to a visitor - hence the clamping for parking in a resident's lot.
Mrs June Li, 36, who is five months' pregnant, said her husband had been away on business since 1 Sep.
As she was not fit to drive, she had no idea their car had been clamped since 21 Oct.
Under the condo's rules, a fee of $200 is imposed for each day the car is clamped.
Property management firm Knight Frank, which runs the management committee (MC), removed the clamp on Monday after Mrs Li agreed to place the parking label back on her husband's car.
But her troubles are not over as it has not waived the clamping fee.
Mrs Li, whose family is from Shanghai, said she had been stressed by the chain of events, which started when one of her units was broken into on 24 Aug.
The family owns two 1,200 sq ft units in Water Place where they have been living since 2006. They bought the second unit last year so their extended family members could stay there during visits.
On the break-in, Mrs Li said: 'I was on holiday when it happened and I had to cut my trip short because of it. I was so stressed that I had a bleeding incident on 1 Sep.'
The police told The New Paper that a television worth $4,000 and a laptop were missing from Mrs Li's unit, and investigations are ongoing.
Mrs Li, who has two daughters aged 7 and 2, was hospitalised for five days and advised to remain in bed after being discharged.
To make it easier for her family friend, Mr Lennon Chng, to take her elder daughter to school and back, she let him use the parking label on her husband's car.
She said: 'My husband is often overseas for business and he won't be back till December. So I thought it would be convenient for Lennon so he wouldn't have to fill up a visitor's form each time he comes here.'
She said the MC had called her before clamping her husband's car, asking her to replace the missing label.
'I explained my immobility and the burglary to them. I also explained this was why I had lent the label to my friend.'
She claimed the caller told her they would meet her later on this matter but they did not follow up.
She said she knew about the clamping when the MC called her on 21 Oct, but still did not meet them on the matter, citing her immobility.
'I know I flouted the condo's rules by transferring the label to my friend. But they shouldn't clamp my husband's car since they know we're residents.'
Parking label confiscated
On 28 Oct, Mr Chng was driving Mrs Li's mother and maid into the condo when a Knight Frank staff member confiscated the parking label.
Mrs Li got her lawyer, Mr Joseph Chen, to write to Knight Frank, demanding an explanation and requesting that her husband's car be released. The firm explained that the label was taken from Mr Chng's car as it did not tally with his licence plate number.
Mr Pragas Krishnan, a facility manager at Water Place, told The New Paper the situation arose because of Mrs Li's failure to act promptly.
'We have a bylaw which states that the clamping fee will accumulate if action isn't taken. If Mrs Li had returned the label to her husband's car immediately, she would just have to pay the flat fee of $200,' he said.
'All Mr Chng has to do is to fill up the visitor's form when he comes. He doesn't need the label as he never parks overnight here.'
As for Mrs Li's claims that no one from the MC turned up to discuss the matter, Mr Pragas said: 'There's only so much we can do. It's the residents' responsibility to ensure their cars display the labels and to come to our office to resolve such issues.'
So the clamping fee dispute remains unresolved.
'I just hope the committee can understand my situation and reconsider the fee,' Mrs Lee said.
This article was first published in The New Paper on November 15, 2008.
