THE debates concerning guarded and gated communties have resurfaced among interested parties. There are many issues and questions that have been raised with little or no answers from any relevant authority.
Developers often use guarded communities as a marketing point to enhance the image and value of their properties. House buyers are asked to sign an agreement on the terms of upkeep of the gated area. Unfortunately this “facility” comes with a fee called monthly security and maintenance. Sadly, more often than not, such services deteriorate over time and many residents opt not to continue payments as they do not see the consistency in quality of the service. The initial phase is normally run by the developers but after awhile it is handed over to the residents’ associations (RA) and that’s when things go wrong.
From a legal perspective, all houseowners in gated and guarded communities are independent subjects and are not governed by the in-house rules made by the residents’ associations. The individual owner does not become a signatory to any rules by default just because the RA sanctions it. Now the question that needs a legal clarification is – Can security guards ask for the details of a visitor or even owners coming into the housing area? Under what laws are they allowed to check a person’s ID?
Even the government advises the public to ask for an enforcement officer’s identification card before revealing more details to them, even if they are in uniform. What makes security guards immune. The irony of all this is that the security company waives all liabilities of theft or burglary if it happens within the community citing that it is agreed by the RA. Then why are the owners paying a monthly security fee? And as for the maintenance and upkeep of any residential area, isn’t it the responsibility of the local council as we all pay taxes to them and there is no exception to the rule or discount granted for gated and guarded communities?
It is time the relevant agencies formulate a standard protocol for gated and guarded communities which is legally accepted and gazetted at the council level at least. The current practices are just too “cow-boy” styled and do not conform to the minimum legal requirements. The RAs must be made legally responsible and use monies collected prudently and not increase the monthly fees unilaterally without the consent of state governments.
In the last year itself, the RA in my housing area increased its monthly charges from RM30 to RM50 citing increased cost for security. This exorbitant rise of nearly 67% is unacceptable by any standards and this was immediately imposed as soon as the RA took over responsibility from the developer. Surprisingly a large amount collected from the previous year was spent on social activities. This is daylight robbery. All social activities under the RA must initiate a different collection drive as this is not even mentioned in the agreement. Then why are monies collected as “security and maintenance” used for the few who attend such functions? Only those who would like to participate pay the extra and it should not apply across the board.
These are just the few of many other grouses shared by people in the same predicament. In this difficult economic times, RM600 a house annually is unjustified. There are nearly 600 houses within the community and even if 80% pay up, that amounts to a whopping RM288,000 collected anually. That is lots of money to pay for security.
No comments:
Post a Comment