FACTS TELL

[JEFF LAM YUET]

My dear CC friends,

After all these years in serving our community and estates in Tung Chung, I realise that not everyone claims to be owners' representative that really represent owners. Some people drive internal conflict to gain his support by giving up estate and owners' overall interest. Some people work with management office to gain admin support, some people use one-sided misleading information and dirty tricks to limit the fair communication, and most people quietly see the story, but now is time to take action, to have better say in our estate management. JAN will be the big date in estate improvement if you can also join us to take action.

We support reasonable cost cutting that doesn't affact residents' living standard. Ph II pool should not be closed in winter, cos the 2009 budget already approved to have the pool all year round. However, due to the over spending of MO and blind OC friends of them in lack of financial monitor, MO closed the pool right before the discussion of 2010 budget while they propose to increase the management fee from $1.55 to $1.6. With help from the pro-MO friends in CC, they successfully mislead people by saying that the pool can be reopen ONLY IF the increased fee budget gets approved.

The pool costs us only 1.5million extra for the winter when our CC overal budget is over 100 million annually while the 5 cent increase in management fee drives up MO's spending power over 3 million, the year-start budget also already approved to have the pool opened, where is the rest 1.5 million gone? why they have to close the pool to gain fee increase support? Is it all dirty tricks?

Why MO over spend $ but only cut costs on us residents' costs, and everything they try to cut costs affact our living standard here. Why can't they cut their own office cost? Why can't open more transparency in tendering so better competition drives better price? Why must turn off our lobby lights and make the wole building dark? Why bad mouth the PH I & III good OCs to cover their own poor management and mistakes?

Why some OCs from ph 246 always speak for MTR? Why Mr. TAM objected my proposal of chasing the full amount of capital fund MO commission with interst returned to us? Why mr. TAM suggest to let MTR to count in their own way then return to us based on their way while I clearly said that we are lawful to get the full refund plus interest? Why Mr. POON objected my proposal to chase back the full amount of the pre-operating expense plus interest by saying he doesn't know the details and legal case? Mr. POON as a member of DOC, he is welcome to vote objection but why did he affact others' voting and stop the resolution process simply cos his own lack of knowledge in legal matter and estate finacial background? Who is beneficial in this case when some of the MTR friends are speaking for big owners instead of us small individual owners? I would like to ask Mr. TAM and POON if you two also need to pay management fee? Is this the reason that MTR always help you guys to run anonymous meeting to remove people you and maybe they don't like too from the committee position? Is this also the reason MTR suddenly open up PH VI committee and Mr. POON suddenly became Ph VI carpark chairman several days right after he loss the PH III election in June, while there was no PH VI committee for many years?  

Last week Mr. POON delivered a paper say "WE DON'T MIND TO PAY MORE" when PH I & III OC worked very hard to force MO not to increase fee and agreed by MO already. I asked who the "WE" they represent and finally they admit ph 2,4,6 OCs have this view. I don't mind to pay more too if it is worth and everything has been done to save cost, and if we are getting the value service. We can certainly afford a bit more but do we really NEED to pay more while there are a lot of room to improve the estate financial situation. Seaview Crescent, where I also a committee member, is the smallest estate in the area with only 1500 units, but their one-year surplus is more than our 8 year total surplus, they can REDUCE management fee to $1.48, why can't Caribbean Coast do the same? Cos we have pro-MO people in OC that stopping us from cut real cost, from chasing owners' money back from thief, from unite owners to protect their own rights?

These MO friends in OC and CC always try to divid us into groups to gain their loyal support, POE case, suttle bus case, swimming pool case, etc. We all are CC residents and owners, we should act together to improve our estate in all aspect. My friends in CC, please don't get divided, please boycott the misleading and defamtion message delivered by MO friends. Last year we had 4 million deficit, we only have 2 million since the good PH III new OC taken place in June, and we aim to have surplus next year if we can have your support. Please join us to fight the people hurting our rights and pocket. Please support the new candidates in the coming PH II election in JAN. It is time to bring real change to CC. By support the smal owners' canadidate, we can correct the wrong path that the big owner represnetative lead CC to.

Finally, I wholehearted seek your support in our future action for owners, residents interest and justice. Thanks again.

Warm regards,
Jeff Lam

[JEFF LAM YUET]

Dear PH II owners,

Now is the time to REMOVE those non-performing OCs. Please kindly support candidate number 2, 6 and 7 in the coming OC election on 8/1, 8pm. Please authorise those you can trust to represent you by 6/1 6pm if you cannot attend the meeting by handing the proxy form to the Management Office.

Let's work together to get the new faces into our committee so they can work for us. We don't need anymore MTR representatives, but we need to select the real small owners' representatives. No more OC yelling to increase management fee to up to $1.71, but we need to choose people to monitor MTR spending and reduce deficit without cutting our service quality and living standard. Please support those who can really repsent you and wholeheartedly work for our estate. Number 2, 6 and 7 need your help to fight this battle of all of us. Thanks.

Warm regards,
Jeff Lam Yuet

[Zorro]

Jeff,

You have valid points but people get sick of your bleating.

I gave up on the Owners Committee when they decided to renew the shindler lift contract as it was the most expensive by a long way. The owners committee did not even have the ability to understand the other competing bids were just as qualified as well as just as insured to do the job... I dont think they understood that the lift operators make most of their proft from service contracts. I dont think the owners committee even went back to Shindler and asked them to reduce the bid to that of the lower tenders etc...

In other words if the owners committee are going to make such fundamental mistakes as they did by promoting the most expensive tender for the lift contract then there is no hope for them.

Yes you have done a great job getting the fees at the other estate down to 1.5. I have in the past asked why we can not get our fees down here as well and the answer was that it colsts more because it is a bigger estate... The OC are so ignorent they dont even understand that with economies of scale we should be able to have a lower monthly fee than the other estates in the area... o well I suppose the owners committee members have never studied basic economics....

[Poppet]

Agree, I'm sick of hearing from this guy and his self promoting posts.

[JEFF LAM YUET]

Jeff,

You have valid points but people get sick of your bleating.

I gave up on the Owners Committee when they decided to renew the shindler lift contract as it was the most expensive by a long way. The owners committee did not even have the ability to understand the other competing bids were just as qualified as well as just as insured to do the job... I dont think they understood that the lift operators make most of their proft from service contracts. I dont think the owners committee even went back to Shindler and asked them to reduce the bid to that of the lower tenders etc...

In other words if the owners committee are going to make such fundamental mistakes as they did by promoting the most expensive tender for the lift contract then there is no hope for them.

Yes you have done a great job getting the fees at the other estate down to 1.5. I have in the past asked why we can not get our fees down here as well and the answer was that it colsts more because it is a bigger estate... The OC are so ignorent they dont even understand that with economies of scale we should be able to have a lower monthly fee than the other estates in the area... o well I suppose the owners committee members have never studied basic economics....

from your experience and disappointment, it shows how important if a good committee different from a bad one. The current PH I & III OC are doing their best to maintain the management fee without cutting our services, Since the new PH III OC being elected, our estate deficit reduced by half in half a year cos the last OC spent half of our overall surplus in 1.5 year time.

About the tendering, it was those pro-MTR OCs to always vote for expensive bids. However, I also respect residents' own choice, just we cannot let certain pro-MTR people to hold things like 50%voting power to determine everyone's life by the proxy they collected, or collected by MTR for them.

Since PH I and III already have a much better OC now, to make real difference in CC, we must act together to remove the non-performing OC and replce them by candidates who really can work for us. Now, PH II will be a turning point to the good estate management!

In this PH II OC election, candidates number 2,6,7, most of them have actively involved in meeting that we conduct for estate management improvement, number 2 candidate Mr. Chan even helped me in the pre-operating expense court case against MTR, and he also won another case to force MTR to disclose OUR financial data. Now, let us work together to put the right people into our committee to do the right things, that rightly represent us small owners instead of those fake OC always speak and act for the big owner, MTR only. Your help is needed now for the estate's future as well as our management fee 2010 and onward, our service quality and living standard, for the transparency of tendering and contracting, the peaceful of our estate (no more conflict if everyone is speaking and acting for us owners and residents), etc.

[JEFF LAM YUET]

Agree, I'm sick of hearing from this guy and his self promoting posts.

There is no self promotion, as I am not one of the candidates, but I am certainly one of the residents who wants better estate management, better service quality, better fairness, better transparency, and better OC. I am sure PH II OC candidate number 2, 6 and 7 are the same in terms of serving our residents. If there are people speaking and acting on behave and for the interest of the developer, MTR, or any interested party that affacting we owners' rights, I will not be sick of fighting them till the end, and there is improvement so far since PH III has a new OC from June. They are working for owners now, plus the existing good PH I OC, we have half the members in DOC I believe that they are wholeheartedly working for residents now.

PH II election on 8/1 will be the turning point to remove any non-performing or non-representing OC members, and replace by people who can really deliver results with hearts, then we will have a peaceful and efficient DOC/OC in CC to work for residents on the same channal of owners' interest.  Thanks.

[Poppet]

Jeff so what was with the post concerning you on TV if not self promoting???

Just because you have an opinion on something doesn't  make you right or give you the right to tell everyone who they should vote for or what they should do. I understand now, why you had to resign/ where fired from the committee you think the only was is your way and anyone who disagrees is wrong. You clearly have designs on being in politics and use this sort of thing to try and get yourself noticed and for your CV.

[JEFF LAM YUET]

Jeff so what was with the post concerning you on TV if not self promoting???

Just because you have an opinion on something doesn't  make you right or give you the right to tell everyone who they should vote for or what they should do. I understand now, why you had to resign/ where fired from the committee you think the only was is your way and anyone who disagrees is wrong. You clearly have designs on being in politics and use this sort of thing to try and get yourself noticed and for your CV.

The TV program is to encourage people to concern about our water resource. And that's from another post. People respect each other so everyone, including me, has the right to discuss issues. Also including you to oject something. Take it easy but not so personal then life will be happier.

The resignation from PH III OC is to prove my heart by action that I am not someone who just want to gain power. In contract, the people/group behind all dirty tricks that tried to remove me and take the seat are the real probelm of the community who placed residents at risk to gain his own persoanl goal. It is well proved now that MTR plays together with them to host an illegal meeting, and they are speaking for MTR all the time. My second concern about my resignation is trying to stop this meaningless argument in the estate when someone is specifically targetting me, which affacts the committee operation with their meaningless argument in all meetings I attend that MR. TAM and POON always conduct. If my resignation can stop them from troubling the meeting, committee, and hurting our estate rights, I am happy to give up my position in exchange of their the stopping of bad practice.

Everything is clear now and more facts will be disclosed to public. I am sure, by the bad practice of those people, our well-educated residents can know the truth and give more support to our future action for owners' benefit. I am also taking legal action to charge them defamation. I hope you are just someone expresses your personal opinion with respect to the others here just like me, but not "one of the pro-MTR fans" try to defend your/their betray-owner behaviour. Thanks.

[JEFF LAM YUET]

OUR FUTURE RELIES ON OUR CURRENT ACTION. PLEASE JOIN US TO FIGHT THE BATTLE OF FAIRNESS AND JUSTICE IN OUR COMMUNIPMTY. PLEASE HELP TO SELECT THE GOOD OC MEMBE/RS WHO CAN REALLY REPRESENT OUR OWN RIGHTS INSTEAD OF MTR OR DEVELOPER OR , ESTATE MANAGER. PH II OC ELECTON ON 8/1, 8PM. CANDIDATE NUMBER 2, 6 & 7 NEED YOUR HELP. EACH VOTING CARD CAN TICK 3 NAMES. DON'T WASTE YOUR POWER TO CHANGE A BETTER ESTATE MANAGEMENT AND COMMITTEE.  I SEE YOU THERE. PLEASE SIGN A PROXY ONLY TO "THOSE YOU CAN TRUST" INSTEAD OF THOSE ALWAYS GET SUGGESTED BY MTR, TO REPSENT YOU IF YOU CANNOT ATTEND THE MEETING, AND HANG TO THE MANAGEMENT OFFICE BY 6PM 6/1, REQUEST THEM TO STAMP ON IT THEN GIVE YOU A PHOTOCOPY SO NO TRICKS CAN BE PLAYED IN VOTING. THANKS ALL!

[charles]

you should use more capitals, that's the way to go!

can we have an ignore function please?

[mango on the run]

in a way politician is also a businessman with the ability to judge the public sentiment, good politician judges it correectly, bad politician does not. But again, the triad operated brothels in Monkok or the clinic in the cc bazarr are also in business too Or can a parallel drawn to a man in Kowloon who is not a cop but has a strong desire to be a cop. So what he did was to carry with him a toy gun and "patrol" the street

[giantsean]

I was also pretty outraged about the lift contract, considering the difference in cost and the slimey marketing-cum-fear campaign by the incumbent... especially as it helped result in a fees increase.  I wonder does MTRC get a piece of that action?

I also wonder why if there are MTRC plants in the OC, why we don't just call the ICAC on them?

Finally, if MTRC does have a plant in the OC, how did they get there in the first place, why only Phase II, and what's to prevent them from getting new plants?

[JEFF LAM YUET]

I was also pretty outraged about the lift contract, considering the difference in cost and the slimey marketing-cum-fear campaign by the incumbent... especially as it helped result in a fees increase.  I wonder does MTRC get a piece of that action?

I also wonder why if there are MTRC plants in the OC, why we don't just call the ICAC on them?

Finally, if MTRC does have a plant in the OC, how did they get there in the first place, why only Phase II, and what's to prevent them from getting new plants?

I respect owners' choice in the lift contract, just the way the winning company and MTRC seduces owners isn't that fair, for example, the existing lift company post a mail to every single mailbox of ours and used a comparasion format to show data, but they failed to give data of their competitor. In this case why they have to compare when everything about their competitor they said "unknown, not sure". Please don't compare if you don't know. This one-sided, and selectively displayed information mislead people to think the lower price company is unsafe. MTRC also issued a notice to recommand the more expensive company when they have conflict of interest to earn more profit by having the more expensive company chosen.

YES, MTRC does get share to all contracts, every dollar we spend/they spend, MTRC gets 10%, that's 10 cents, and that's what we can see only and I hope there is nothing happened under the table, so for something like 20 million dollars, they get 2 million NET PROFIT, cos their employee, I mean their own employees' salary plus all office expenses are all on our account. Consider running a business, you have salary as your own cost, but MTRC does run a NET PROFIT businss in estate management. 2009 and 2010 they helped us to spend over 200 millions of our blood $, it means they are earning over 20 millions net profit in these 2 year time.

There were some OCs speak for MTRC and troubling us from chasing the $ back to owners, helping and encouraging to increase management fee, etc. these are facts already that nobody can deny. PH I and III already changed OC and the current PH I & III OCs are speaking for owners. Good and new candidates in PH II now & PH IV & VI in the future need your support.

How they get there in the first place. Maybe the story of PH VI can explain. We joinned and won the PH III OC election in June. There were 8 candidates in total and 4 new candidates won the 4 old ones. It happened on 12/6/09, all the suddenly MO helped to run PH VI OC and the previous PH III Chairman Mr. POON became the PH VI OC Chairman and back to DOC member position. PH VI is the carparks under PH II, III, IV, when there was no PH VI existing over the past years, but we won PH III on 12/6 and PH VI OC has been created on 24/6 right after "them" loss position in PH III. And this Mr. POON did stop me from putting DOC resolution to chase back us owners' $ from MTRC in the DOC meeting on 25/8, together with his follower MR. TAM, a formal PH III OC too, who stopped me from chasing the capital MR $ back from MTRC to in the same meeting. These may explain a bit how they work together, and why they always work together. Luckily we didn't give up and we used media power and we went to Kowloon Bay MTRC head office to protest late on, together with legal action taken place before which I am an applicant to put MTRC to court and we won the legal grounds, so MTRC agreed to provide full refund plus interest back to estate accounts later on.

PLEASE, please support the good candidates, we don't need guns, but we need your support, the bad OCs over spend 6 milions of our 8 million surplus, that means we save 8 year $, and they spent 75% of our money in 1.5 year time alone, leaving us at risk of increase maangement fee or have no surplus, or have extra fee collection for special project, etc. I don't want to see such a nice new estate run out of capital fund and surplus on the bad guys' hands, so by choosing the good OC, they are number 2, 6 and 7 in this PH II OC eleciton, your voting power can change the estate management quality, the estate financial position and transparency, fairness of our community. PLEASE, please join us to stop the MTRC plant and anything affacting our rights. Every single vote counted in this battle to protect our interest, to chase back our $, to prevent bad practice in our estate manangement. I HEREBY THANK YOU ALL SINCERELY AND WHOLEHEARTEDLY!

[JEFF LAM YUET]

forgot to mention, in addition to PH VI, "they" also were the first time OC member when MO first setup PH II & III OC before. And in the last year, all the major contracts passed, including cleaning, clubhouse, security, lift, and the coming suttle bus, so far all have gone for more expensive options, totaling about 200 million dollars, they in charge for 1 or 2 years but spent 75% of our total surplus saved for 7 or 8 years. They in charge for 1 year but fix all 3-year expensive contracts. Who should thx them for all these.............................

FACTS TELL.

[JEFF LAM YUET]

DOUBLE STANDARD:

Candidates number 2, 6, 7 tried to distribute their information to residents on 1/1 but stopped by MTR and security and MTR called police for this. In contrast, MTR uses our estate resource to distribute information of candidate 3, 4, 5 into each single mailbox of PH II by our security staff on 2/1. What a double standard, and let's ask our heart that why MTR is so helping "their" OCs and make trouble to "our residents'" potential OCs.  

During this election period, either both side have rights to provide information to owners, or none of them can do it, making the rule fair, but just like every tender, MTR always uses its admin right and our common resource to help ONE SIDE, so let us help the other side on our own, the resident side. Please vote candidate number 2, 6, 7 on 8/1, use our vote to bring in the people who really speak and act for us. Thanks all!