Yes, the council members of PPAH has called for the 4th AGM to be held on Sunday October 16, 2011 at 3.00 pm at Block A Community Hall. I suggest all residents read the Circular and the accompanying documents thoroughly as there are items therein that raise the ire of fair minded owners and residents of Anjung Hijau Apts.
If you have not spotted these items, allow me to give you some of the important highlights and the analysed reasons why these items are in the agenda and/or the resolutions sought.
- The Proposed Resolutions under the Agenda
- Agenda No.5 - The PPAH is now finally trying to adopt a new set of House Rules to take effect from 1 November 2011. This is after the recent Court of Appeals ruling that the previous House Rules was ultra vires the Strata Titles Act. Please read the House Rules properly. Everything you do can be policed by PPAH with a fine and penalty ranging from RM50.00 to such penalty as the Management may in its absolute discretion impose! No warning needs to be given! No reasons need to be evaluated. See House Rules 2.5(d), 2.6(c), 2.7(e), 3.6(b), 4.6(a) etc
- Do all of you want these fines and penalties to be implemented immediately? Even the government gives a reprieve and educate the public before implementing any fines and penalties. What about those who has been penalized before 1 November 2011? The fines and penalties paid to PPAH ought to be refunded since it is held to be invalid!
- Agenda 6 - Special Resolution is even worse. It is asking for retrospective effect of the House Rules Item 7.1 (iii) for enforcement. It is generally inequitable to pass rules that are retrospective and PPAH is doing just that.
- Please refer to the Balance Sheet - be aware that there is a total sum of RM826,090 under Current Liabilities that the present PPAH owes under trade and other payables. Under the notes, Trade payable amounted to a whopping RM806,431! Why is there such a huge amount owing and what constitute the money owing? Whereas under Current Assets, FD and cash and bank balances adds up to only RM511,127 showing a big cash deficit in our accounts! Assuming PPAH collects all the trade and receivables amounting to RM262,395, the current deficit still amounts to a NEGATIVE (RM77,868) as at 30 June 2011!
- Again why is there such a big sum of RM262,395 that has yet to be collected by PPAH? Please note that in their previous Minutes of 3rd AGM, the 4(c)(1) wherein George, the accountant, boasted that the collection averages 98%. Please see Income Statement under total income for 2011 amounted to RM1,092,070. Anyone can calculate that the amount receivable amounted to more than 20% of total income! Therefore collection cannot average 98%! This is misleading!!
- Please check the Cashflow Statement.under Cashflow from investing activities. There is a negative (RM255,300) in the Maintenance Fund. How is this accounted for? Another (RM99,069) has been spent for purchase of property and equipment. Under the notes RM83,179 accounted for plant and equipment. What plant and equipment that were purchased costing almost RM83,000? Was there approval by owners via special resolution in AGM or EGM for this amount to be spent? Were you and I, as owners and payees of our Maintenance and Management Fund informed of this expenditure? Where is the transparency and accountability of this money spent?
- Under Reserved Fund, a sum of RM497,545 has been utilized! Where, when and whose approval was sought and given to the council members to utilize such a huge sum from the Reserved Fund?
- Detailed Statement of Income and Expenditure - There has been an increase in almost all spendings under the Maintenance Contract such as Cleaning, Lift & Escalator Maintenance and security services but no reasons were given for these increases! Under Building Maintenance, despite the huge painting contract that was done, the building and painting works still accounted for RM28,568 in 2011. Maintenance of tools and equipment has also gone up whereas new expenditures of RM7,386 (fire protection) and RM12,100 (repair of drainage & road) were recorded in 2011 compared to nil in 2010.
- Under Admin Expenses - there is still a casual labour of RM30,787 on top of an increase in Salary, Overtime and Incentives, transportation and upkeep of office equipment! If there are salary increases and new staff employed, why is PPAH paying for accounting fees of RM24,000 per annum? Shouldn't the admin staff be competent enough to keep the set of accounts? Other than that, what baffles most was why and how a whopping amount of RM98,990 was spent on legal fees? Who approved this expenditure? Was there a special resolution table to and approved by all owners made to spend this amount? Why should PPAH be made to bear this amount if it is due to the negligence of one or more members of the council? We, the owners and residents of Anjung Hijau demand an explanation!