 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issue |
 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issues |
 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issue |
 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issue |
 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issue |
 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issue |
 |
| srorwa letter dated 10.8.10 to builder on outstanding issue |
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 11:37:04 +0530
Cc: sharad Narain Singh (M) 9810309952<oa.sharad@gmail.com>; <cmd@starrealcon.com>; <anilsharma@supertechlimited.com>
Subject: Re: Rameshwar Orchid
Dear Mr. Garg
The residents have read your email with lot of interest. However, the residents wish to reiterate their decisions regarding ducting in basement as articulated in our earlier emails. It is really frustrating to observe that despite our written objections to these illegal activities, you and your company are still continuing with the same in residents' basement without even discussing with them which clearly shows that you and your company do not have any regard for the laws of this country. We have already mentioned that you and your company are doing all these illegal actions on residents' properties without taking any permission from the residents. In our civilized society, we regard this as 'goondagardi'; and you are talking about considering residents' interest? How will you feel if the residents intrude your home and install ducts on the ceiling over your head and tell you that we will keep your interest in mind so that you do not have any inconvenience in moving within your house? Please note that we still have rule of law in our country. Are you testing the patience of all residents? As already communicated, the residents will take a decision on this weekend as to how and at what level the matter will be taken up with the District Administration if such trespass is not immediately stopped. The responsibility solely lies with you.
As regards installation of cables and pipes etc catering to residential areas, we have already written to you several times in the past that such lower height has to be corrected by your company which you have never responded to. In any event, since the area belongs to the residents, they are free to allow such installations catering to residential areas and this cannot, in any circumstances, be taken as a license to SML for free use of the area for any other purposes whatsoever. We hereby ask you as to on what basis you want a right to use our basement solely belonging to the residents for any commercial purpose? What charges you and your company propose to pay to RWA for grant of such usage by the residents? What security deposit amount SML is prepared to pay to RWA towards safety of residents' vehicles and damages to the basement as such? What amount of indemnity SML would agree for any loss/damages to be cause to the residents and the entire building arising out of such illegal usage of basement? Please also let us know what amounts you are charging from all commercial occupants for usage of our basement and other residential common areas and how much money SML is making by allowing such usage of the property sold to the residents?
The residents also wish to convey to SML that they have lost all faith and trust in you and your company long back and, hence, please do not make a false statement that SML cares for the interest of residents. This is very clear from the arrogance and the manner in which SML management and staff come across the residents. If SML really cares for residents' interest, then why it never talks to the residents before taking decisions or actions affecting the lives and properties of residents? Can you please show us a single email/correspondence where you/SML on your own have proposed a meeting to resolve any problem being faced by residents?
Regarding the independent issue of maintenance charges, we ourselves had come forward to help SML improve the services and had countless meetings with your management wherein many decisions were taken and your management had agreed (everything is documented) to implement a whole list of long pending items along with transfer of agreed degree of control to RWA based on which it was agreed to consider revision of charges. However, you have cleverly chosen to implement only one decision that is to increase power backup charges from Rs 8 to Rs 12 per unit. On the other hand, your have always very conveniently not even acknowledged so many emails/correspondence reminders sent by RWA on other items leave aside implementation of same. Now you have again unilaterally tried to further increase power back up charges by 70 paise without holding any discussion with the RWA which is unacceptable to the residents for the reasons already explained in our earlier email and we expect you to immediately issue corrected invoices.
You are also aware that the Ganga Water supply to SRO was disrupted for last 7 months because of metro rail work being carried out by DMRC and the RWA had made repeated requests to the management of your company to get the water supply restored. However, your company, which is solely responsible for the management and maintenance of all water supplies to SRO, did not act at all at any point of time nor did it ever respond to RWA requests in this regard. Ultimately, the residents themselves did all running around and follow up with numerous authorities like DMRC, GNN, GDA, District Administration and GNN Contractor etc for past 3-4 months and got the water supply restored very recently on 11 August 2010. Can we ask what kind of "services" you are providing to us for which you are asking maintenance charges? Further, in the above entire process for restoring water supply, the residents have incurred huge amounts of time costs, resources and money. How do you and your company propose to compensate the residents for such costs incurred by them?
The residents reiterate that in view of all the above reasons payment of maintenance charges to SML without any service is a huge loss to them. The timeline of further 30 days given to SML to correct its way of working is also running out fast.
Independently, we have already informed you that a meeting of all residents of SRO was held few weeks back wherein detailed discussion had taken place inter alia on all issues relating to the countless issues/problems being faced by the residents as well as the issue of revision in maintenance charges. In the above discussion, the residents were of the following views unanimously:
1. That all residents are absolutely displeased by the fact that you have not addressed/resolved even a single item out of countless matters/complaints referred by RWA/residents from time to time during 4 years.
2. That the conclusions arrived at by the core committee in its report on joint study are very rational and based on scientific approach and hence the recommendations made therein must be adopted and implemented with immediate effect.
3. That the residents do not agree to pay for any losses purportedly being incurred by SML owing to its own inefficiencies/deficiencies/theft/defects in its own working systems as the residents do not have any control over the affairs of SML nor do the residents agree to pay for any unnecessary costs (having regard to usual commercial prudence) being incurred by SML which are of no benefit to the residents.
The residents also wish to state that the rate of maintenance charges of Re. 0.81 per sq ft/pm arrived at in the aforesaid core committee report should be taken as final subject to the following further adjustments:
1. Deduction on account of interest income being accrued to SML on the present value (after taking into consideration normal FD interest rate of SBI) of the aggregate amount of maintenance security deposits given by all residents at the time of taking possession of their flats. This is for the reason that we are now discussing revision of the maintenance agreement.
2. Deduction on account of justified allocation of all revenues being generated by SML/Supertech from all advertisements/billboards/signboards displayed at all areas (including rooftop) of the SRO residential complex.
3. Deduction on account of charges/costs at mutually agreeable rates in respect of usage of common/other areas of SRO residential complex for all installations/facilities/other usages catering to commercial complex/mall and Yashoda Hospital.
4. Addition of 10% on the final rate as arrived at above towards SML management charges and other costs etc.
We have also delivered a detailed letter dated 10 August 2010 to your staff at SRO. A scanned copy of the acknowledged letter is attached with this email. The residents expect immediate action of SML on the points raised in the attached letter.
Thanks
Rajan D Gupta
General Secretary - SRO RWA
Sir,
With reference to your mail regarding ducting in the basement of the complex, we like to inform you thatthe services of the apartment is also running through the basement at many places on 6".10' heights thereforeit is not possible for us to maintain 8" height at all level in the basement and we are trying our best to maintainminimum 7" height of ducting so that resident can park their vehicle without any hindrance. We are always withthe society members and their interest will always be considered.
We further like to draw your kind attention towards the cost of maintenance of the society. We are submitting ourdetails of monthly expenditure in each meeting but till date no conclusion has been arrived. We are regularlyincurring heavy losses every month and in spite that society members are not satisfied with services of service provider's.
The Company has its own limitation and It is not possible for the company to bear huge losses every month. Thereforeplease consider our request and take some action in this regard. We request you to please plan the total monthly budgetof the expenses of the society and accordingly decide the ideal cost of maintenance. We are ready to cooperateyou in all manner but please also consider our losses.
Thanks & Regards
For Surya Merchants Ltd.N.K.Garg
No comments:
Post a Comment