KUALA LUMPUR: Forty two flat owners at Fadason Park in Jinjang Utara, Kepong, are seeking help from the Housing and Local Government Ministry to provide a lawyer to represent them in a High Court case here on Sept 29.

The flat owners were brought to court on June 28 this year by the developer despite a judgment in mid-2003 by the Tribunal for Home Buyers Claims (TTPR) that the developer should compensate them for late delivery of the flats.

"If the Ministry does not respond by July 11 to the flat owners, on July 12, I will try to arrange an appointment for the flat owners to meet the Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting," said MCA Kepong public service and government affairs bureau chairman Yee Poh Ping yesterday.

The problem started when Fadason Holdings Sdn Bhd failed to meet the completion and handover date of 2001. The home owners received their flats in April, 2003.

"In mid-2003, 507 home owners pleaded their cases with the Tribunal and won the case against Fadason. They were awarded compensation ranging from RM1,000 to RM4,000," said Yee.

K.H. Chia, one of the flat owners, said Fadason was directed by the Tribunal to compensate him with RM4,813.15 in two payments in March and April this year.

"Instead, Fadason took me and other flat owners to court," said Chia, a businessman from Kepong.

Yee said as a result of the long wait and the High Court case, only 42 home owners remained to fight for their rights.

"Some settled for less than 70 per cent of the awarded value in an informal meeting with Fadason, and few others got the full award from Fadason. There are some who have given up on the matter, and the Tribunal," said Yee.

"Failure to comply with an award set by the Tribunal amounts to committing an offence under the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act 1996 which carries a fine not exceeding RM5,000 or
imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both. However, there are too many loopholes in the Act."

Fadason is arguing its case on the grounds that the liquidated ascertained damages (LAD) claimed by the home owners for late delivery does not reflect what was stated in the sales and purchase agreement.

Also, Fadason is arguing that the home owners did not get consent from the banks for the initiation of any action in any court or tribunal, as such consent is required when one borrows from the bank.

At the High Court hearing on June 28 this year, the judge had to push the hearing to Sept 29 as there was no lawyer representing the 42 home owners.

Yee said the home owners had assumed that the tribunal or the Attorney-General's Chambers would send a lawyer as the both were also named as defendants in the High Court's letter asking the home owners to make themselves present for the hearing.

"It's troublesome. I had to make six trips to the tribunal to make my complaint and wait a year for their reply.

"Furthermore, they did not arrange for appointments and I've been turned away before because the officer concerned wasn't around, gone for lunch or attending a meeting or a course," said another of the home owners, Lim Choong Sin, 33, a planning manager from Kepong.

"I've also had to take days off, much to the chagrin of my boss, to make visits to the tribunal. And now, we are asked to hire our own lawyer. Even if I win the compensation, I doubt the money will be enough to cover the lawyer's costs."

Lim said each home owner had to pay RM20 for the tribunal's paperwork each time, and this happened at least twice.

Besides asking the Ministry to provide them a lawyer for the High Court case on Sept 29, Yee said the 42 home owners would also like the Ministry to amend the Act to cover the loopholes for the protection of all house buyers.