Well said. Good on you.
Anne
------ Original Message ------
From: "Wu Hua" <WuHua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "Minh Hua" <cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "sc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <sc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
"raj.strathfield@xxxxxxxxx" <raj.strathfield@xxxxxxxxx>;
"cpactiongroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <cpactiongroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Kim Wee"
<kimhockwee@xxxxxxxxxx>; "Jacqui Thorburn"
<Jacqui.Thorburn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Wu Hua" <wuhua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, 23 Mar, 2017 At 1:14 AM
Subject: [cpactiongroup] Re: Fw: Fw: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue
Intercom/door bell system malfunction
Minh Hua,
We read your email and we feel that it is important to address various
untruth you had told to the cc parties and you should answer to some
serious issues concerning your reply.
You are telling us that the burnt power supply resulted from the
blackout caused the faulty intercom and you knew it 2 weeks ago. This
called to question why didn't you tell us that then when we sent you
multiple emails prompting you to respond.
One possible answer was that the building manager told us throughout our
unpleasant engagement with the issue, the reason behind the faulty
intercom was due to someone cutting a line that supports the intercom
system. A reason that is radically different to what the strata manager
is claiming now. In fact, he proposed that the builder was the culprit
of this and this is a reason behind why we composed our email to the
strata manager on the 13th of March.
On the 22nd March morning, the building manager instructed us to send an
email to the builder to ask them to resolve the issue. Setting aside
from the issue of terrible service and attitude from the building
manager in asking the owner to deal with the builders which should've
been the strata or the building manager's responsibility, this
inconsistency in your report raises serious concern about possible
deceptions against the owner.
In fact, at 11:22 am on the 22nd March, nearly one and a half hour after
your reply to Kim, when a technician finally arrived at our property
since the 19th of February, so you were already telling untruth in
claiming our problem was attended to, the technician whom we presumed
is Jimmy, told us he was not sure if the problem is caused by the burnt
power supply and he can only sure when all the parts are available next
week. He also responded in the negative when we asked him if any test
had been done to ensure the burnt power supply is the cause of our
intercom's defect. We provided phone records to show that the
technician's visit had indeed been after 10:06 AM in the attachment. How
then, does the strata manager have the gall to send your 10:06 AM email
insisting strongly that our issue had been attended to and it is due to
a burnt power supply caused by the blackout?
Perhaps the most damning evidence for some serious issue on the part of
the strata/building manager behaviour in the email was the fact that the
blackout in Homebush occurred on the 24th of February after we initially
discovered the defective intercom (as evident from the beginning of
this email chain). What does this mean about your assertion? Did the
strata manager fabricated facts just to placate the parties involved
when the issue had been raised to som third parties? This behaviour is
beyond the realm of mere incompetence, but indicative of some conscious
decision to deceive the Owner Corporation.
Your exhibition of zero inclination to deal with the owners promptly and
honestly and your preference to shirk from your duties as
strata/building manager cast doubt on our mind at how the strata can
function properly in the current condition. It is time you answer to
these queries.
Yours faithfully
Hua Wu
From: Minh Hua <cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, 22 March 2017 10:06 AM
To: Kim Wee
Cc: Jacqui Thorburn; sc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; cpactiongroup;
raj.strathfield@xxxxxxxxx; Wu Hua
Subject: RE: [cpactiongroup] Fw: Fw: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue
Intercom/door bell system malfunction
Hi Kim,
Wu Hua problem actually attended, when I send Jack to check. Problem due
to burn power supply caused by electric surge and black out. Jack ask
contractor Epsilon to and attend and quote repairs as need to deal with
insurance but Epsilon has been slow to response and I ask Jimmy to fix.
There is problem of ordering part as Jimmy get only 3 last 2 weeks ago
and today got some more. I have forwarded wuhua email to Jack and Jimmy
so that they are aware of owner concern of repairs urgently. Noted
there 6 units burnt due to the black out.
Minh
On 22 Mar 2017 09:50, "Kim Wee" <kimhockwee@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:kimhockwee@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
Minh Hua
I support Wu Hua complaint about your very selective strategy in
response to the issues being raised by owners to your attention and
action. A few of my emails sent to you for improvement such as Income
and Expenditure Financial Report, you have never replied so far. Frankly
speaking, owners got more equally respect from previous strata managers.
You should acknowledge that the current OC has not been functioning
since last EC meeting dated 14/04/2016, the only two EC members can’t
represent owners until next SC is elected. The agenda of AGM should have
reflected all owners’ concerns and should not be exclusively Strata
Management’s Agenda. The location and time schedule of the meeting is
not reflected all owners’ demand, of cause, we know who is the initiator
with your good cooperation.
Look forward to your improving in this regards.
Kim Wee
From: cpactiongroup-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpactiongroup-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[mailto:cpactiongroup-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpactiongroup-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ] On Behalf Of Wu Hua
Sent: Tuesday, 21 March 2017 10:49 PM
To: cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: cpactiongroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cpactiongroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [cpactiongroup] Fw: Fw: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue
Intercom/door bell system malfunction
Minh,
It is truly disappointing that you did not deem it necessary to even
respond to our query. This issue had been persisting for nearly two
months now. There had been no adequate reporting of the fault or
attempts of actual repair. It is atrocious that the strata and the
building management did not even deem the owner important enough to
respond to.
In this matter particularly, every action taken by the strata management
require us to prompt you more than once. Even then, the strata
management deem a single sentence referral to someone else is a
sufficient response. It is not. It is insufficient to service especially
in light of the steep strata fee we are paying as the owners. We are not
receiving even a fraction of the strata levy's worth in service.
In fact, we will go so far as to say even the older strata company had
been more effective. A problem such as this would have never been
allowed to continue for nearly two months without any resolution or
proper explanation. We are sure this is not the perception what your
company want the owner corporation to have, of your competence,
diligence and ability to care about the owners.
We will really appreciate it if the strata management can give a proper
response o our 13th March email and resolve the intercom issue quickly
with the building manager.
Yours faithfully
Hua Wu
From: Wu Hua
Sent: Monday, 13 March 2017 11:37 PM
To: Minh Hua
Cc: cpactiongroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:cpactiongroup@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Fw: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue Intercom/door bell
system malfunction
Hi Minh,
We are composing this email as a follow-up and clarification of the
issue of the intercom. The problem appears to have persisted beyond the
bound of what is reasonable and we have now veered into the realm of
the absurd by waiting more than five weeks for this issue to be
resolved. We had contacted Jack multiple times about the issues and
would like some verification from both of you.
1) Jack first informed us in the week following our second email sent on
the 19th of February that the strata had contacted a technician (or some
person who are capable of such repair) to check the issue and conduct
the preliminary repair. There was an alarming mention of a large bill
sent to the strata for what appears to be an obviously unsatisfactory
job. We would like the strata's verification that such attempt to
repair/inspection had occurred. If it had, we will need assurance that
the strata had dealt with the issue of this bill appropriately - where
since no satisfactory repair had occurred, the correct course of action
is for this technician to finish their job.
2) Jack informed us last week that the fault arises from some greater
structural issue that recently occurred in the complex. We will like
some verification and clarification on this. An indefinite allowance
for repair time is unacceptable regardless of how 'great' the fault that
causes the intercom system is, especially now we were not given any
details on the problem. We will like a definite time all the repairs can
be finalised and when we can use our intercom, especially since we are
stripped of the use of an integral facility to our property for already
more than a month. We will also like to see the strata finding out who
caused this fault in the system and make that person pay for the repair
as oppose to letting the owner corporation footing the bill.
This issue had continued long enough. We find it no longer acceptable
for the strata management to send a one sentence email forwarding our
grievance to the building manager and then have both parties engage in
radio silence for a week until we email you our further grievances. We
find it incredulous that we as the owner has to constantly probe and ask
the strata and the building manager for any morsel of information. We
also find it offensive that our query is being passed back and forth
between the strata and the building management. It is time for the
strata and the building manager to take up the initiative to resolve the
intercom problem promptly and in the process actively inform us the
repair progress by email.
We do expect a more substantial reply from the strata management this
time. It is not our duty to chase up the building management.
Yours faithfully,
Hua Wu
From: Minh Hua <cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx> >
Sent: Thursday, 23 February 2017 12:43 PM
To: Jin Jack; Wu Hua
Subject: Fwd: Fw: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue Intercom/door bell
system malfunction
Hi Jack,
Please arrange fixing.
Best regards,
Centenary Park Management Pty. Ltd.
Minh Hua
3 South Parade Auburn NSW 2144
Mob: 0419231100
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wu Hua <WuHua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:WuHua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
Date: Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:38 AM
Subject: Fw: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue Intercom/door bell
system malfunction
To: "cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx> " <cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx> >
Hi Minh,
It had been nearly a week since we had sent our follow-up email on
Sunday. You still had not given us a response yet; nor had Jack
contacted us. The delay is now unreasonably long.
It should be the strata management's responsibility to chase up the
building manager when prompted by owners, especially when the building
manager does not respond to the owners' request. The current level of
service we are being provided with is anathema to the level of levy we
are paying to the strata and the strata are paying to the building
manager. We should be at least notified of the progress of our repair.
This is not the only aspect of the property management we are
dissatisfied with. The cleaners never wash the duplexes' waste bin. It
had resulted in an odorous and hazardous environment.
We would really like a response to the two enquiries we made today. We
are at the limit of our patience in waiting for an answer that never
come.
Regards,
Hua Wu
From: Wu Hua
Sent: Sunday, 19 February 2017 11:06 AM
To: Minh Hua
Subject: Re: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue Intercom/door bell
system malfunction
Hi Minh,
We had reported the intercom system problem and Jack came to check the
outdoor set well over a week ago. There had been no follow-up after that
even though we were supposed to be contacted for when and who are going
to fix the problem. In fact, we had sent the building manager a direct
text enquiring the issue during the weekdays.
We feel this delay is unreasonable as the entire builder corp is still
on premise. We are certain it should take no more than a week to
organise someone to contact us about a repair. Even if no repairs are
being finalised, strata should inform us about the delay and give us an
approximate date when it can be done. We feel we are owed this much for
the levy we are paying.
We will greatly appreciate it if you or Jack can give us a definite date
for repair via email ASAP.
Kind Regards
Hua Wu
From: Minh Hua <cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx> >
Sent: Tuesday, 7 February 2017 11:36 PM
To: Jin Jack; Wu Hua
Subject: Fwd: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue Intercom/door bell
system malfunction
Hi Jack,
Please check
Best regards,
Centenary Park Management Pty. Ltd.
Minh Hua
3 South Parade Auburn NSW 2144
Mob: 0419231100
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wu Hua <WuHua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:WuHua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
Date: Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 9:59 PM
Subject: Duplex 13 81-86 Courallie Avenue Intercom/door bell system
malfunction
To: Minh Hua <cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx
<mailto:cpmanagement.strata@xxxxxxxxx> >, Wu Hua <wuhua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:wuhua_9@xxxxxxxxxxx> >
Strata manager,
We are the owner of duplex 13 in Centenary Park. We are composing this
email in regards to a complete failure in our duplex's intercom system.
When visitors press the call button on our intercom system, there are no
responses in our indoor modules. The outdoor module also flashes a
yellow light.
We will greatly appreciate it if the strata can fix the issue as soon as
possible.
Kind Regards
Hua Wu
