Jump to content

Court rejects condo MC's bid to clear shoe cabinet from corridor


Mkl22
 Share

Recommended Posts

Court rejects condo MC's bid to clear shoe cabinet from corridor

Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 29 Oct 2019
Author: K.C. Vijayan

The management corporation at The Infiniti in West Coast Park claims that the cabinet reduced the width of the common corridor available for fire escape.

A shoe cabinet outside an apartment's front door is arguably a common sight in condominiums.

But for the management corporation (MC) at The Infiniti in West Coast Park, it was a big no-no for one unit, with the owners taken to court for refusing to remove the cabinet.

However, District Judge Lim Wen Juin ruled that it was a case of yes-and-no, making it a test case about placing personal items in a common corridor and the extent to which an MC can intervene.

The judge said: Yes, placing the shoe cabinet along the common corridor broke the condo's by-law. But he added: The MC is not getting the court order that will require the unit's owner to remove the cabinet.

Such an order would be a "disproportionate" response to the by-law breach, because the cabinet does not obstruct movement in the corridor nor intrude on any person's rights but to the "most negligible degree", he said.

"There is no real harm caused by the presence of the cabinet and thus no real benefit to be had by anyone in its removal," he added.

In decision grounds issued earlier this month, the judge also took issue with the MC's conduct, which he found "unreasonable and objectionable".

The cabinet, placed beside the apartment's front door, is 1.06m long and 0.36m wide.

The MC argued, among other things, that it breached two provisions of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Act as well as various by-laws prescribed in the Building Maintenance (Strata Management) Regulations 2005.

It also breached additional by-laws set by the MC, it added.

But its submissions and evidence failed to convince the judge.

One of the MC's claims is the cabinet reduced the width of the common corridor available for fire escape. Evidence failed to bear it out.

The defendants' lawyer, Mr Raymond Lye, pointed to the Singapore Civil Defence Force's practice code for fire safety precautions.

It prescribed a minimum width of 1.2m for corridors in high-rise buildings.

As the 0.36m-wide cabinet reduced the corridor width to no less than 1.44m, it satisfied the code.

"I can think of no reason in principle why there should be different standards for public and private high-rise housing," the judge said.

The case eventually turned on one issue - a broadly phrased additional by-law that prohibits storing, leaving or discarding personal belongings in common areas and staircases, regardless of the size, nature and whether the object obstructs people's path.

It is so widely couched that it could be a breach to leave even small items such as a flower pot or a pair of shoes in a common corridor, the judge noted.

In not giving the MC the court order it sought, the judge referenced a 2005 High Court decision and said the issue entails balancing the benefits and burdens to produce a fair result.

He chided the MC for not being even-handed in enforcing its by-laws, as photographs showed many other owners had left personal belongings in the common corridor outside their units, thus breaching the same by-law.

The MC said it targeted the shoe cabinet as it was the newest and largest of the offending cabinets and that it would go after the rest after it succeeded in this case.

The judge said: "Even if the cabinet is the 'newest', I do not see how that is a reason to single it out - if anything, I would have thought the 'newest' object presents the least prolonged breach and hence the least compelling case for enforcement to be taken."

It was "not at all obvious" the cabinet was the largest object, he added.

The judge also had doubts the MC intended to take any steps against the other owners.

"It seems to me that in making this application, the MC is attempting to secure the cabinet's removal without having to risk the ire of the other offending subsidiary proprietors by asserting an intention to enforce the additional by-law against them too, and I do not think it is right and proper for the MC to do that," he said, adding its conduct made it unjust to grant the order.

The MC is appealing against the decision, said its lawyer Leo Cheng Suan. Meanwhile, the shoe cabinet remains outside the unit.

The flat's co-owner, Mr Charles Tay, 61, told The Straits Times they contested the case with "reluctance", as they appreciated the MC members' efforts and work as volunteers in looking after the estate.

Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Permission required for reproduction.

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 6
  • Shocked 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Hamburger said:

This set a precedent. 

 

It's okay to leave the shoe cabinet outside which I would continue to do so. Thank you. 

Many people will be adding shoe and other cabinets so long as it can pass fire safety rules. I am adding a few more to lower my psf pricing. 😂

  • Praise 2
  • Haha! 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Mkl22 said:

MCST funds being wasted on personal vendetta.

the residents should be incensed that their money is being used for such a frivolous lawsuit !! 

sometimes I wonder. It's an irony that in a way - residents pay MCST to use own money to sue ownself. HAHAHA

Many similar problems in most condos lah. Residents in the council think they are King and queens. And many residents dun bother to attend any AGM or events, leaving all to the council + MC. Then when anything happen, KPKB and asked why weren't they consulted..... 

  • Praise 6
  • Haha! 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of these council members oso damn one kind. Every year AGM coming, will go to every unit bad mouth the other camp running for council seats and asking for proxy votes. Pui....

 

 

  • Praise 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Xers007 said:

Ho sey liao... time for condo folks to place whatever on the corridor... 

Lai lai....time to follow the famous pasir ris hdb jungle corridor liao

Screenshot_20191029-155945_Gallery.jpg

  • Praise 2
  • Haha! 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Othello said:

the residents should be incensed that their money is being used for such a frivolous lawsuit !! 

sometimes I wonder. It's an irony that in a way - residents pay MCST to use own money to sue ownself. HAHAHA

Many similar problems in most condos lah. Residents in the council think they are King and queens. And many residents dun bother to attend any AGM or events, leaving all to the council + MC. Then when anything happen, KPKB and asked why weren't they consulted..... 

ego problem at work............the Managing Agent usually controlled or aligned with certain factions of residents probably got elected to the Management Committee or Council.  then this faction will think they are the boss and they interpret the rules and run things in the condo best.  but they don't usually realise or agree they are bigoted.  they will start any sort of action against other residents they deemed not living or subsisting in the best interests of the condo......and they always use the by-laws as their tool to carry out their misguided acts of governance.

i have seen too many of such people....my own condo, my colleague's condo, my brother's condo....

  • Praise 8
  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Acemundo said:

ego problem at work............the Managing Agent usually controlled or aligned with certain factions of residents probably got elected to the Management Committee or Council.  then this faction will think they are the boss and they interpret the rules and run things in the condo best.  but they don't usually realise or agree they are bigoted.  they will start any sort of action against other residents they deemed not living or subsisting in the best interests of the condo......and they always use the by-laws as their tool to carry out their misguided acts of governance.

i have seen too many of such people....my own condo, my colleague's condo, my brother's condo....

power crazed people.

this case really sets a precedence. if not the courts time, will be wasted on such frivolous law suits.

  • Praise 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Acemundo said:

ego problem at work............the Managing Agent usually controlled or aligned with certain factions of residents probably got elected to the Management Committee or Council.  then this faction will think they are the boss and they interpret the rules and run things in the condo best.  but they don't usually realise or agree they are bigoted.  they will start any sort of action against other residents they deemed not living or subsisting in the best interests of the condo......and they always use the by-laws as their tool to carry out their misguided acts of governance.

i have seen too many of such people....my own condo, my colleague's condo, my brother's condo....

Why some of these council ppl so desperate to be 'powerful' ah? No pay one 

 

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Hamburger said:

This set a precedent. 

 

It's okay to leave the shoe cabinet outside which I would continue to do so. Thank you. 

it could be a bad 1.

maybe the judge see only 1 shoe cabinet and he thought its stupid to ban this.

i am not sure if this particular unit got another unit opposite.

if got 1 opposite and imagine both rows start putting shoe rack of the same size outside. i am not sure how much smaller will the corridor become🤔

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote

The judge said: Yes, placing the shoe cabinet along the common corridor broke the condo's by-law. But he added: The MC is not getting the court order that will require the unit's owner to remove the cabinet.

Such an order would be a "disproportionate" response to the by-law breach, because the cabinet does not obstruct movement in the corridor nor intrude on any person's rights but to the "most negligible degree", he said.

Judge trying to siam responsibility to make decision ? If not Court Order then what ?

Anyways, this is a bad precedence set, so now everybody can install fixtures on common corridors so long as there is 1.2m ? 

Corridors are for access and also fire safety and should be clear at all times. Wait kena fire then we see the consequences. Enough said. [lipsrsealed]

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Soya said:

Why some of these council ppl so desperate to be 'powerful' ah? No pay one 

 

Because they can supply or get who they want to supply to the condo lah. 

My side every time change council, sure got things need to change, and cfm new Managing agent will be appointed and new supplier come in. 

Almost never fail.

First one to go is always Managing agent, then security agency, follow  by cleaning company. Once even pool side tables and chairs also all changed.  That one is their pay lor..[laugh][laugh][laugh]

Edited by Tianmo
  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Blueray said:

Judge trying to siam responsibility to make decision ? If not Court Order then what ?

Anyways, this is a bad precedence set, so now everybody can install fixtures on common corridors so long as there is 1.2m ? 

Corridors are for access and also fire safety and should be clear at all times. Wait kena fire then we see the consequences. Enough said. [lipsrsealed]

I am quite surprise by the decision from the judge.

Cos some of these by-laws were derived from BCA rules and SCDF rules. If the shoe cabinet is allowed, all hell will break loose and it will be very difficult for MCST to enforce other by laws. 

A lot of new condos have narrow corridors....some main doors are even L shape to each other. If one of the owner put a shoe cabinet outside, surely it will somehow block the entry of the other unit even though it may not block the main walking corridor. I foresee more neighbours will be fighting with each other (and MCST will not care since they may not win) if anyone can just out a shoe cabinet outside especially in new condos.

 

 

Edited by Icedbs
  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Othello said:

the residents should be incensed that their money is being used for such a frivolous lawsuit !! 

sometimes I wonder. It's an irony that in a way - residents pay MCST to use own money to sue ownself. HAHAHA

Many similar problems in most condos lah. Residents in the council think they are King and queens. And many residents dun bother to attend any AGM or events, leaving all to the council + MC. Then when anything happen, KPKB and asked why weren't they consulted..... 

Yah, I am one of those, never attend even once, dont even know who my councils are. 

But I got so fed up, I rented out the unit and moved back to HDB EA, and my children were all so happy...[laugh][laugh][laugh]

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Acemundo said:

ego problem at work............the Managing Agent usually controlled or aligned with certain factions of residents probably got elected to the Management Committee or Council.  then this faction will think they are the boss and they interpret the rules and run things in the condo best.  but they don't usually realise or agree they are bigoted.  they will start any sort of action against other residents they deemed not living or subsisting in the best interests of the condo......and they always use the by-laws as their tool to carry out their misguided acts of governance.

i have seen too many of such people....my own condo, my colleague's condo, my brother's condo....

aiya bro, all got agenda one lah. If not you think they all so free do work for the estate meh...[laugh][laugh][laugh]

↡ Advertisement
  • Praise 3
  • Haha! 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...