This website compiles all the related information, guidelines and articles on (1) Gated Community (GC) Scheme... and (2) Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) Scheme, for your knowledge. Many so-called "Gated Communities" are in fact not formal GCs at all.
Know the differences between 'GATED COMMUNITY' (GC) ...and 'GUARDED NEIGHBOURHOOD' (GN) schemes in Malaysia?First and foremost, gaining entry into "private property" such as formal gated communities or condominiums... is different from gaining access to "public property" or informal GnG residences. People need to know the difference.
Licensed security guards on duty at "formal gated communities" have the right to ask visitors for identification for record purposes only. However, security guards at "informal gated communities" do not. In the first place they have no right to block anyone from access to any "public property" residences.
(For example, MBPJ guidelines only allow the security guards at informal "GnG" to take down the vehicle's registration no - that's all). Ethical RAs will follow "the rule of law" but corrupt ones will not as they have their personal agenda. People who are not aware of their rights or the laws will be bullied.
As for informal gated communities (non private property), they have no right to ask for your IC or driving license. (They have no right to stop you from gaining access to a "public property" in the first place - it is illegal for non-strata properties to block roads).
All "informal G&G residences" under "individual-title" are categorized as under public property and not private property. (Examples here would be all the double-storey link houses in Setia Alam and Bandar Bukit Raja). Most of the informal 'gated community' schemes here are actually just 'guarded neighborhood' schemes. They are not legal gated community schemes at all. However, the RAs do not follow the guidelines.
Know your rights - the security guard cannot stop you from entering an informal GnG residence (public property), or ask any resident to register each time they want to go home even if they do not join the RA's questionable scheme. They also have NO right to ask the public for their MyKad or driving licence when they want to enter any public property such as an informal gated residence. (That's why it's being termed as "public property" - it belongs to the public, no need for MyKad).
[Only security guards on duty at "formal G&G residences" can ask for your MyKad or driving license. They have the right to do so at "private property" or "strata-titled properties" such as condominiums and formal gated communities. They can ask for your identity for the sole purpose of recording your particulars and then returning it immediately, if you want to gain access to visit your friends or family there. They also cannot retain your MyKad or take a picture of it. (Examples of formal gated community here would be Setia Eco Park).
(No one can ask for your MyKad or driving licence except for officers of the government on duty such as the police, customs, immigration, military, etc. under Peraturan 7 - KDN) You can report this offence to PDRM.
*[Peruntukan Peraturan 7 Peraturan-Peraturan Pendaftaran Kebangsaan 1990 memperuntukkan bahawa hanya seorang pegawai pendaftaran, pegawai polis, pegawai kastam, pegawai tentera atau pegawai lain yang diberi kuasa bertulis oleh Ketua Pengarah Pendaftaran sahaja yang dibenarkan untuk meminta dan memeriksa identiti seseorang dengan mengemukakan kad pengenalan.]
*[Pengawal keselamatan yang bertugas di kediaman awam "G&G" tidak formal - tidak dibenarkan meminta dokumen identiti seperti MyKad ataupun lesen memandu daripada pihak awam. Mereka hanya dibenarkan meminta dokumen identiti pelawat (bagi tujuan rekod butiran) di premis persendirian sahaja seperti di kondominium dan komuniti berpagar yang formal.]
(Terimakasih & Penghargaan kpd KDN)
http://www.moha.gov.my/images/maklumat_perkhidmatan/pekeliling_agensi_persendirian/pekeliling_4.pdf
"Syarikat Kawalan Keselamatan hanya boleh meminta dokumen identiti pelawat semata-mata bagi tujuan semakan dan rekod kemasukan ke premis dan kemudian mengembalikannya kepada pelawat selepas identiti mereka direkodkan" - ini hanya dibenarkan di premis persendirian sahaja dan tidak termasuk kediaman awam seperti komuniti berpagar yang tidak formal. (Sila ambil maklum)*
Justeru, pengawal keselamatan hanya boleh meminta dokumen identiti pelawat yang hendak memasuki premis persendirian sahaja (seperti di kondominium dan komuniti berpagar yang formal sahaja). Pengawal keselamatan tidak dibenarkan meminta dokumen identiti di kediaman awam.
**************
Many RAs have been blatantly flouting the laws implementing "formal gated community" schemes on their own even though they are only "informal gated communities". Are these RAs corrupt or are they incapable of following the rule of law?
How the RAs claimed to have obtained the approvals from the authorities is anyone's guess. Or perhaps they did not get the necessary approvals at all. Most of the time the requirements are not met. Some of the RAs went ahead to implement GC schemes despite only obtaining approval for a GN scheme. Some don't even know what scheme they can or cannot implement.
Not sure whether they are acting dumb or they are really so. Some are bullies and some are linked to syndicates and gangsters. Whatever it is do not trust them so easily and do not sign any papers to give them any type of consent. They will sweet talk you initially but they will start to coerce others later when they have sufficient numbers. You might be giving them the license to collect money from the neighborhood.
They will make you feel as though you owe them if you don't participate or pay them. Many residents did not know what they were getting into initially when they sign the consent letters... only to regret later on. It's high time the communities and the authorities put a stop to this.
Why are the residents so easily fooled and bullied by them? Is it because information on this is hard to obtain so no one really understands these things? So far, there isn't a "one-stop resource-center" on the internet for anyone to refer to... until now!
________________
Now let us go into the details. There are only 2 types of schemes available - Gated Community (GC) scheme ... and Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) scheme. A "Gated & Guarded" (GnG) Community scheme is basically a "Gated Community" (GC) scheme.
However, there are many GC schemes out there that are not formal GnG schemes but they are just informal ones (also called as guarded neighborhood schemes). But most of the time corrupt RAs would flout the laws and guidelines here, illegally blocking roads, asking for ID and some using card access system that is prohibited.
One simple way to know if your residence is a formal gated community or not is... if your residence does not have any private facilities such as swimming pool, gym and clubhouse, then it is not a formal gated community.
Another way to know is... if your residence's amenities such as garbage collection, streetlights and grass cutting are maintained by the local municipal council, then your residence is not a formal gated community. (It is only an informal gated community or a guarded neighborhood scheme).
All "Strata" title developments will have to implement a "Gated Community" (GC) scheme to manage all its shared facilities, security and common areas under the Strata Title Act 2007. (An example here would be "Eco Ardence", which is also classified as a "private property" residence).
Normally, only Strata title developments (that comes with clubhouse, swimming pool, carpark and other shared facilities) which are categorized under "private property" can apply for a Gated Community (GC) scheme.
However, in a "non-strata" title development ("Individual" title) property/ residence, if the RA wants to implement a "Gated Community" (GC) scheme, then it has to apply from the Land Office to change its land status to "Strata" title first.
The implications here will be serious and detrimental to all its residents - all maintenance works (such as garbage collections, drains, roads, landscape, streetlights, etc) will stop, and no longer come under the responsibility of the local council MPKlang.
These facilities and services will then have to be privately funded and managed by the RA as if it is a "private property". (MPKlang will not render its services to "private property" residences.)
(All Sime Darby Bandar Bukit Raja double-storey link houses here are categorized as "Individual" title properties. They are also categorized as under "public property"). Therefore, no Gated Community" (GC) scheme can be implemented here legally.
In actual fact, all "Individual" title developments (like ours here in Bandar Bukit Raja) can only apply to implement a 'Guarded Neighbourhood' (GN) scheme via their RA obtaining the necessary consent and approvals from the Local Council and the District OCPD, to hire private guards to patrol their residence.
We hope that upon reading and digesting the contents here, you would be better informed and would make the right decisions for all your neighbours. Right now the residents concerned have very little awareness or knowledge on this issue. Know your rights. We have to put a stop to this unscrupulous practice right now.
Anyway, we are beginning to see that there are more residents who are rising up against this sort of scheme. They are beginning to realize and aware that this is nothing more than a money-making scam in the name of "neighbourhood security". There are more residents who are against these than you know.
Even though clear guidelines have been published by the relevant authorities, residents have been taken advantage of by unscrupulous residents associations (RA) some believed to be linked to syndicates. Providing "security services" seems to be very lucrative and easy money for these gangs.
The implementation of such schemes have been highly questionable including the laws and legality of it, getting enough consent and approval from the authorities, the monthly fees, the hiring of qualified licensed guards, using card access system which is prohibited, and the barring of non-paying residents from entering (harassing, bullying and coercing the non-paying residents into paying).
Residents were being told to set up their own RA to implement Gated Community (GC) or Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) scheme even before checking with their local police district OCPD (PDRM) on whether their residence sits on a "high crime zone".
This looks like a classic case of unscrupulous people trying to take advantage of the situation or trying to profit from people's lack of information/knowledge.
For those residents who feel insecure without having a gated & guarded community here, it is better that they move to a more exclusive "GnG" neighbourhood like Eco Ardence. They would feel much safer and secured in such private properties.
And for those who think that the non-paying residents are like "parasites", then those who consented to these illegal schemes in the first place, are like "the biggest tumour any cancer has ever seen".
Anyway, despite the ongoing schemes around the neighbourhood, crooks were still able to penetrate into the residences and break into houses. Stopping cars at the guardhouse won't prevent any thief (burglers or robbers) ...from sneaking in on foot or climbing over the fence from multiple compromised locations!
Anyways, if you happened to be one of the unfortunate residents whose house being broken into and things stolen, the RA is not going to compensate you one sen even though you subscribe to their scheme. (In insurance, if you pay the premium you get to claim). Is this fraud or what?
To all home owners/residents of landed properties (Non-Strata title), do not be fooled by your RA into joining any of the above mentioned schemes blindly. They cannot force it upon you.
The Registrar of Societies (RoS) should and must audit the accounts of the RAs that take in cash payments every month as the amount paid by each household to their RA far exceed the "Assessment Fees" and "Quit Rent" payable to their local councils!
The implementation and the hiring of "security services" are also highly questionable. Most of the rules and regulations provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs on the hiring of security guards by the RA are NOT followed. Also they hardly comply to the guidelines and circulars as required by the State Housing Board. Know your rights! Say no to unscrupulous residents associations (RA) and non-certified GC schemes at non-strata developments.
The Ministry of Home Affairs (MoHA) or Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) should also investigate if the "private security guards" are licensed and hired according to the laws and regulations (SYARAT-SYARAT LESEN DI BAWAH SEKSYEN 3 AKTA NO. 27/71 UNTUK MENGURUS AGENSI PERSENDIRIAN KAWALAN).
In view of the multiple problems, complaints and the blatant breaking of laws, guidelines and regulations by the respective residents associations, we want the RAs to stop operating illegally with immediate effect. Instead, we want our Polis DiRaja Malaysia (PDRM) back. It's time to leave these security matters back to our local police to do their jobs.
To all other home owners/residents of Bandar Bukit Raja, please DO NOT be fooled by your RA into joining the scheme as this entire development is NOT categorised as a "Gated and Guarded Community" by both the developer and the local council. Do not subscribe to illegal non-certified GC schemes!
**********************
RAs Taking Matters Into Their Own Hands Flouting The Laws
Many so-called gated communities (GC) are in fact, not exclusively gated, as the common areas such as internal roads and vacant land within the residence do not belong to the residents.
Among the confusion of certified GnG (Gated & Guarded), GC (Gated Community) in strata properties and GN (Guarded Neighbourhood) in non-strata properties, the central feature of GCs is the social and legal frameworks which form the constitutional conditions under which residents subscribe to access and occupation of these developments, in combination with the physical feature which make them so conspicuous.
Legally speaking, outsiders who are not living there can still demand access into the residences under the provisions of various Acts and Laws such as under the Road Transport Act.
Security is a complex and costly matter. Communities who have invested heavily in their neighbourhood security such as RFID card based entries and exits are just to make you feel like you are in office, even though you are at home. (That was sarcasm by the way, in case you didn’t get it). Then there are Boom Barriers (or boom gates), just to give you the feel of the Toll plaza. (Again, sarcasm here.)
Data has suggested that gated communities’ rights and responsibilities are, by and large confined to legalities rather than extending to a commitment to enhance social networks either within the development or in the adjacent wider community exacerbating the effect of physical and social barriers between residents within and the wider communities.
Gated communities appear to provide an extreme example of more common attempts to insulate against perceived risks and unwanted encounters. The time-space trajectories of residents suggest a dynamic pattern of separation that goes beyond the place of residence.
Gated Community further extend contemporary segregatory tendencies, and that policy responses are required that will curtail the creation of such havens of social withdrawal. Many of us don’t even bother to get to know our neighbours, so what is the big deal living in a gated community?
Gated communities serve no purpose unless “100% prison or military-like” process of identification and registration is adhered to and monitored 24/7, and without prejudice and favour to any particular group of people.
It is a sad reflection of society that we think we need gated communities to improve security. Nobody likes gated residential areas as they cause a lot of inconveniences when visiting relatives and friends living in those areas, as you need to present your IC and wait for the registration process, etc.
It’s still okay to go through such registration process provided those are certified Gated and Guarded (GC) private strata properties, as you have no choice here.
However, as for those non-strata properties/residences that have implemented their own GC schemes via their RA, it is not acceptable at all, as these terrace houses (link-houses) are under individual titles and classified as public property, not private.
These non-strata gated communities by unscrupulous RAs have blatantly flouted all the local guidelines and laws - and they are the main problem now. They are the ones to be blamed for residents' bickering, unhappiness, and segregation.
Another con is that most if not all boards (RA committees) go bad as far as they and their friends are above the rules. It is very easy for the board (RA) president to skim money from the padded bill and countless other ways to steal.
Living in a gated community means signing up to a legal framework which allows the extraction of monies to help pay for maintenance of common-buildings, common services, such as rubbish collection, and other revenue costs such as paying staff to clean or secure the neighbourhood.
Another con is that most if not all boards (RA committees) go bad as far as they and their friends are above the rules. It is very easy for the board (RA) president to skim money from the padded bill and countless other ways to steal.
Living in a gated community means signing up to a legal framework which allows the extraction of monies to help pay for maintenance of common-buildings, common services, such as rubbish collection, and other revenue costs such as paying staff to clean or secure the neighbourhood.
Many do not believe in gated communities. Why does the work of the police, who are entrusted to uphold security and safety, need to be done by others, and the people have to pay for them? Besides, even with GnG, there are still thefts, break-ins and other crimes happening.
Many people do not like to be asked so many personal questions and they do not like to leave their personal details with private security guards (some of which looks more like gangsters than guards), especially when at times they are in a hurry. Friends and relatives also prefer not to visit anymore, due to this troublesome inconvenience at the guardhouse.
GnG, all forms of Gated Communities (GC) and Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) must be government-controlled so that unscrupulous parties cannot take matters into their own hands and implement as they like. This is also to avoid them taking advantage of the situation in reaping in profits and burdening the rakyat.
The government needs to step in to make every district safe via the police force or some security arrangement. Citizens should not need to pay additional amounts for the security of their homes and families.
The people should not have to worry and leave their homes and families to “work out” the security and safety issues of their neighbourhood.
The laws must be followed through - police must carry out their responsibilities accordingly and law breakers must be punished.
*********************************
BBR Is Not Suitable If You Are Looking For A Gated Community
For those residents who feel insecure without having a gated community (GC) scheme in their neighbourhood, it is better that they move to a Strata-titled and proper "Gated & Guarded" (GnG) residence like "Eco Ardence" or "Eco Park". There are many certified Gated Communities out there, but certainly not those double-storey link houses developed by Sime Darby Property in Bandar Bukit Raja.
They would feel much safer and secure in such "Strata title" properties which are also gazetted as Gated Community (GC) by the Local Authorities /Council.
Please do not try to implement a Gated Community (GC) scheme in a non GC neighbourhood here.
Please do not try to apply from the Land Office to change our current land title from "Individual" title to "Strata". Because this will mean that all maintenance works (such as rubbish collections, drains, maintenance of roads, landscape, streetlights, etc) will no longer be handled by the local council.
Please do not consent or try to form a Residents' Association (RA) to implement a Gated Community (GC) scheme in a non-gazetted GC neighbourhood here.
Please do not implement illegal automated card access system which is prohibited by all local councils in Selangor (unless you have 100% consent from the residents).
Please do not set up any illegal barriers to block any public roads or access to any public parks or children's playground.
Please do not consent or condone to such illegal schemes. You cannot implement a GC scheme legally in a Non-Strata titled neighbourhood.
Please do not leave the security of our neighbourhood to "private security guards" hired by the RA. Please do not erect any guard house without proper consent and permission from the local authorities.
We rather trust our local police (PDRM) than the "security services" hired and implemented by the RA. The security and safety of our neighbourhood lies beyond the capability of any RA.
And for those residents who think that non-paying residents are like "parasites", then those who consented to these illegal schemes in the first place, are like "the biggest tumour any cancer has ever seen".
Even though stringent guidelines have been published by the relevant authorities, residents have been bullied or taken advantage of by some unscrupulous residents associations (RAs), some believed to be linked to syndicates. Providing "security services" seems to be very lucrative and easy money for these gangs.
This looks like a classic case of unscrupulous people trying to take advantage of the situation or trying to profit from people's lack of information/knowledge.
Residents were being told to set up their own RA to implement Gated Community or Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) scheme even before checking with the local district police OCPD (PDRM) on whether their residence sits on an identified "high crime zone" or not.
The implementation of such schemes have been highly questionable including the laws and legality of it, guidelines, getting the consent and approval from the authorities, the monthly fees, the hiring of qualified licensed guards, using card access system which is prohibited, and the barring of non-paying residents from entering (harassing, bullying and coercing the non-paying residents into paying).
So you see, we are not the problem here. It is just that you might have a problem moving to or living in a Non Gated Community (GC) neighbourhood now.
And then, through your RA, you are trying to apply from the Local Authorities to convert our non GC neighbourhood to a GC scheme neighbourhood. Now this is the problem!
*********************************
Do You Smell Something Fishy
…about the way the "Gated Community" (GC) scheme or "Guarded Neighbourhood" (GN) scheme being implemented here? Do not be coerced by your RA (Residents Association) or Persatuan Penduduk.
Does your residential area require the implementation of a "GnG" scheme with Card Access system in the first place? Is your neighbourhood located in a high crime zone (as verified by the local district police OCPD)?
Why not let the local police (PDRM) do their job as we cannot trust the RA entirely (nominated by a handful of people) in its hiring of questionable security services. We are not sure if the "security guards" hired are qualified locals that have undergone the necessary training, background and urine checks by the police. We also cannot ascertain if they are licensed by KDN to operate, and that they are mostly comprised of ex-police/military personnel as required by Kementerian Dalam Negeri.
The security of our neighbourhood is beyond any local RA as it lies with the local, state and federal government authorities. By the way, did you know that Sime Darby Property has already allocated a piece of land here (located strategically between Nahara and Geta) for a "Balai Polis Komuniti" in their master plan? This is already in the pipeline and now we want to seek PDRM to go ahead to develop it. Having this Balai Polis Komuniti would certainly boost the safety and security in this area greatly!
Why jump on the bandwagon without thinking carefully the implications this can cause when you give consent to a handful of people to form your local RA committee? What was the reason being given to you? That, most other places have done so? Were there fear mongering?
Please think carefully before agreeing to the scheme. It would be like giving the licence to your RA to collect "protection money" every month. Is it possible that he has a selfish agenda and motive? Are syndicates at work here? Think again!
Is it going to cause inconveniences and have negative implications socially? Will we be causing segregation among the residents here? Some residences have basketball courts and some don't. Some have nicer playground and some don't. Both kids and parents or residents from the nearby areas can't go around to mix/play together with the other kids and this has a negative implication for the community and country. It is hindering social unity! This sort of schemes shouldn't be allowed to flourish here.
Please don't get us wrong - we have nothing against residential areas that are proper "GnG" gazetted (with strata titles/ strata mgmt act) that require such scheme. These Gated Community (GC) require it because they are bound by the Strata Management Act.
But why would all the neighbourhoods here (with "Individual" land title), want to implement Gated Community (GC) schemes in the first place? Something's fishy right?
A "Gated & Guarded" (GnG) Community is basically a Gated Community (GC) scheme that is bound by Strata Title Act 2007). If a neighbourhood (RA) wants to apply for a Gated Community (GC) scheme, then it has to apply from the Land Office to change its land title to "Strata Title" first. This will also mean that all maintenance works (incl. garbage collections, drains, roads, landscape, streetlights, etc) will no longer come under the local council and authorities. These services will then be privately managed and paid for as if it is a private property.
Residences such as the nearby "Eco Ardence" or "Eco Park" charge around RM465 per month because they are exclusive Gated Communities (GC) or "GnG" with private Clubhouse, Swimming Pool, Private Landscaping Contractor, Garbage Collection, and a whole lot of other facilities.
However, the residences here in Bandar Bukit Raja (mostly double-storey link houses) are not under Strata Title Act. They are under Individual Title.
Lastly, before contemplating to join in this highly questionable community scheme, please think for the other less fortunate residents such as the old-folks, the retirees, the unemployed, and others who are struggling to cope with high cost of living in the klang valley. Even the local council does not charge you this much for their assessment fee and quit rent.
At RM80 per month (or close to RM1,000 per year) it is more than the BSH - Bantuan Sara Hidup (formerly known as BR1M). At a time when our government is trying to help address the cost of living for the people, this is one of the ways we can play a part too. Assuming you are 35 years old now and you are going to live for another 35 until the average age of 70, you would have to pay at least RM35,000 (not including interests and future increases in the monthly fee) just to pay someone to sit at the guardhouse. You do the math and where is the logic behind this?
Instead of paying "protection money to your RA, why not give it to the needy such as the old folks home or rumah anak yatim? Instead of hiring "security guards" to sit at the guardhouse, why not have the police (PDRM) patrol and watch over your neighbourhood?
For those who are thinking about supporting or even joining to become RA committee members, please think again! Be careful of such syndicates. Don't be ignorant anymore as you might regret later and you will not be able to get out of it soon enough.
For those who did not subscribe to the RA's Card Access system, we applaud you as you probably are aware that it is prohibited by all local councils. (Implementing Card Access is illegal unless they have 100% consent from all its residents).
Know your rights - the "security guard" cannot stop you from entering, or ask you to register as a visitor each time you want to come home (you are not a visitor but a resident here). You have the right to report this harassment to the authorities.
They cannot stop you just because you do not have their card access. Do not let them coerce you into signing up for it as you are only condoning to their illegal scheme. The Card Access System causes tremendous downsides such as inconveniences to you, your entire family, visiting relatives and friends. Actually there are more helpless residents like you and me who are against this scheme than you know!! But we must be firm and united to thwart any syndicates from operating in our neighbourhoods.
Residences like ours (landed-properties such as link houses) or similar do not require the implementation of the Card Access system. It causes a lot of inconveniences to everyone, restricts freedom and ease of movement to you, your family and friends.
Even though it has been mentioned in Circulars and Guidelines for Gated Community (GC) and Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) that the Card Access System is prohibited by the Local Councils (eg: MBPJ, MBSA, MPKlang), the Residence Associations here are still defiant and breaking the law.
Looks like this is a classic case of unscrupulous people trying to take advantage of the situation or trying to profit from people's lack of information/knowledge.
If those who think that the non-paying residents are like "parasites" ... then those who started this scheme in the first place without checking all the facts and laws are like "the biggest tumour any cancer has ever seen".
For those residents who feel insecure without a 'gated & guarded' community here, it is better that they move to an exclusive private gated community (GC) or "GnG" neighbourhoods like Eco Ardence or Eco Park. They would feel much safer and secure in such Strata title developments.
*********************************
Guarded And Gated Communities And Townships
HAVING gone through the GP022 document drawn up by the Federal Town and Country Planning Department under the Housing and Local Government Ministry and run through its guidelines, and taken a legislative look at what the local law and its Acts state, we now look at the social and emotional implications of guarded communities. One asks then, if this is a privilege or a necessity?
Are we buying safety or exclusivity? And how will this impact society down the road?
Western view
A dissertation was written by Keith Veal, a political science student at the University of Michigan, for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. In it, he cited his experience, having walked into a G&G residential area where the guard was no where to be found, and how he was rudely questioned and shown the way out, when his entry was discovered.
Hostile, sharp, accusatory and unpleasant words were uttered by the "security" personnel, almost instantly putting Veal in defence mode. Haven't many of us encountered similar experiences?
This sparked many questions, of which Veal decided to ask those living outside the boundaries of the G&G area, their views on gated communities.
On social and emotional implications, it really boils down to which side of the "gate" you're on inside or out.
Here are some facts Veal learnt:
» Gated communities – overall – do not have lower crime rates compared to similar communities without gates (Blakely and Snyder, 1997).
Gated communities do not tend to have higher resale values in the market when compared to similar housing. In some cases they even had a slight price disadvantage (Ibid).
Gated communities do not have higher levels of community or being "close-knit" (Low, 2001).
No doubt, G&G areas restrict access, limit interactions and divide communities. Veal also mentioned that if G&G areas focus on safety, then those on the outside become the "amorphous other … not limited to solely criminals and potential law-breakers …"
And when G&G areas are occupied by the "upper class," Veal considers those "gated-out" as "different from the upper class – socially, economically and politically."
Beginning of G&G
Preferring to remain anonymous, a reader (and "provider of security for 10s of housing estate committees in Klang Valley") emailed his views on how G&G first started.
He says: "Some 15 years ago, there was a need to form some sort of security scheme as crime, house break-ins and snatch theft was on the rise.
We called this scheme 'homeguards' which was basically patrolling without requiring any fencing or boom-gates.
The monthly fee was cheap. However, this did not deter the ruthless and crafty criminals … and the police could not do anything but say to the public: 'Itu biasa dah'."
He adds that this led to complaints that reached the ears of the many politicians who were further enraged when "bad reports" from the media put them in tight spots and the government was not much help.
"It was the local councillors and politicians that came up with the many suggestions and ideas to close up roads and place guards from private security companies in hotspot crime areas.
It all worked well until law suits followed (referring to the case where the fire engine could not get to a location in time, blaming the key to the locked boom gate was not accessible, and a person's life was lost)."
He also names a couple of housing areas where the developer's or property management company has put up notices claiming no liability if motorists get their vehicles damaged by the boom gates.
"Crime rates still rose in the subsequent years which led to the residents associations deciding to take matters into their own hands – hence (to keep costs low/affordable), foreign 'guards' were employed."
Citing many reports including the Berkeley Gardens case in Klang, go-downs in Banting and Sungai Buloh area and such, which led to the rakyat losing trust in our police force and the authorities, he states, "All this mooted the idea of proper security-guarded enclaves."
The reader also says that there are laws governing G&G housing estates where the developers have applied for this status (with one main entrance and exit, with a proper guardhouse and boom gates) which has been approved by the authorities.
"Maintenance fees are high and a joint management board is engaged to run the day-to-day activities. It is similar to an up-market condo, with all the rules and extras where one has to pay to keep the premises clean and orderly."
His point: "The government needs to step in to make every district safe via the police force or some security arrangement. Citizens should not need to pay additional amounts for the security of their homes and families.
The people also should not have to worry and leave their homes and families to 'work out' the security and safety issues of their neighbourhood. The law must be followed through – police must carry out their responsibilities accordingly and law breakers must be punished."
He also condones whipping in public as punishment and asks for more CCTVs. "And G&G must be government-controlled."
Others' perspective
theSun considered the views of the rakyat where gated communities and social segregation is concerned. Says Y S Ying, a retiree who lives in a condominium: "I don't believe in gated communities.
Why does the work of the police, who are entrusted to restore peace and safety, need to be done by others, and the people have to pay for safety? Besides, even with G&G areas, there still are thefts, break-ins and such.
In addition, I know many residents who do not like to be asked so many personal questions and have to leave their personal details with guards, especially when at times they are in a hurry.
Friends also prefer not to visit due to this inconvenience." On it spurring social segregation, Sandra doesn't think it does. "Generally, there is a perceived notion that gated communities are better neighbourhoods with real estate that fetches better resale value."
Sharon Saw comments: "It is a sad reflection of society that we need gated communities to improve security. Personally, I do not like gated residential areas as it causes a lot of inconvenience when visiting people living in that area – you need to present your IC and wait for the registration process, etc.
Says Jenn Salim: "Gated communities serve no purpose unless the full and complete process of identification/registration is adhered to and monitored properly. On the residents, whether gated or not, it is one's attitude that causes segregation in the community."
One who wishes to be known as Anak Malaysia states: "It will surely lead to some social impact and create a more prominent gap between the communities on both sides of the boom gate who will look at each other differently."
Anak Malaysia reminisces the days of Rukun Tetangga where the rakyat were seen "bergotong-royong, tolong menolong satu sama lain", in unity.
"Society has changed today … and if the government does not do what it is supposed to do, the rakyat will need to be self reliant and take things into their own hands. We can forget about 1Malaysia then."
Excerpts from
The Sun Daily
24 APR 2015 / 16:45 H.
******************************
NOBODY’S CHILD GATED & GUARDED DEVELOPMENT with individual title. Do you know?
Wong Joseph
April 26, 2013 in Property Management News
Not All Gated & Guarded developments are protected by law. Indeed currently no law regulating gated and guarded communities unless they are landed strata developments.
When it comes to gated communities with landed strata titles, the collection of service charges (SC+SF) are mandated by the Strata Management Act. When it comes to guarded neighborhoods with individual titles however, there is no federal law. There is a state government gazette in Selangor which approves and regulates new gated and guarded developments guidelines.
“The bottom line is there is no law governing the collection of service charges for this type of Development except by a contract (DMC) between the developer and the first purchaser. After sub-sale, the enforcement will be a problem and difficult. Without money all the facilities would not be able to properly up keep and maintained.
Guarded neighborhoods are houses with individual land titles, where the “guarded” factor is not based on the provisions of any law or regulation but exists only on an ‘ad-hoc’ basis with the agreement between the Developer & the purchaser.
Common Property Maintenance and services such as security and rubbish disposal, landscaping would be handled by the police and the Local municipal authorities since the roads and drains within the development are considered public road and reserves, unless the resident association (RA) opts to implement a joint private contract with the Municipal or take over entirely from the Authority.
Therefore, it would be misleading to market a development with individual titles as a gated community, or “gated and guarded”. It is especially misleading when a developer offers such security services for a certain amount of time only if this precedent is not stopped, many RAs will inherit the same problem.
The matter is made worse it seems that insult is added to injury when the developer still owns several units and refuses to pay for the shares (SC) of these units. The RA would imaginably suffer in the long run. However, as if the development suffers, the value of the property would also fall.
If, no legislations are introduced to regulate G & G development with individual titles, The Developer will continue to exploits & bully the owners.
Posted By GMSSB
Term of Reference 2002-2022
Dated: 26-04-2013
*******************************
IMPORTANT NOTICE – IF YOU ARE BEING STOPPED BY GUARDS
To All Residents (Home Owners/Tenants) of Bandar Bukit Raja, Klang:
If the RA wants to implement this gated scheme, make sure they follow the rule of law first.
Many of the residents here are now fuming over the RA’s selfish agenda, causing lots of grievances and inconveniences to non-participating residents. If you are being stopped by the “guard” at the autogate from entering your own residence, this is what you should do:
1. Tell him you are a resident here, not a visitor – they have no right to ask for your details/register each time you are coming home. They have no right to stop you. Tell him you will have to make a police report if they don’t let you in.
2. Please make a police report at the nearest Balai Polis Bukit Raja Klang Utara (Tel: 03-3345 2222)
3. Either lodge in a public complaint (e-aduan) to MPKlang or do it at the MPKlang counter there. You can also e-mail your complaint directly to the President of MPKlang.. [yasid@mpklang.gov.my] and the Menteri Besar of Selangor.. [amirudinshari@selangor.gov.my]
4. It’s actually “illegal” for non-strata properties to block roads. Under section 46(1)(a) and (b) of the Street, Drainage, and Building Act 1974, it is an offence. (Automatic Card Access System is also prohibited).
5. Do not be fooled by your RA into joining the above mentioned schemes blindly as this entire Sime Darby Bandar Bukit Raja is not under “Strata-Title Act” and is not a gazetted “Gated and Guarded” residential zone. The persatuan penduduk (RA) cannot force you to join their highly questionable scheme hiring their own “security services”. (Proper RA can only enforce it under Strata Title developments i.e: high-rise & certain exclusive neighbourhoods eg. Eco Ardence, Eco Park).
6. The RA committee members here have been taking advantage of, intimidating and bullying the residents for their selfish agenda and we cannot let this continue. They have broken all the guidelines, laws, rules and regulations set by the authorities (the Local Council and State Housing Board). The hiring of “security guards” here are also questionable as they do not have the proper uniform. It is very likely that they do not have the proper licence and other stringent requirements from the Ministry of Home Affairs such as undergoing background checks and urine tests by PDRM.
7. Most of the rules and regulations provided by the Ministry of Home Affairs on the hiring of security guards by the RA are NOT followed. (SYARAT-SYARAT LESEN DI BAWAH SEKSYEN 3 AKTA NO. 27/71 UNTUK MENGURUS AGENSI PERSENDIRIAN KAWALAN, Lampiran 1: Pengambilan Pekerja dan Pengawal) - Garis Panduan Perancangan ‘Gated Community and Guarded Neighbourhood’ yang diterbitkan di Malaysia Oleh Jabatan Perancangan Bandar dan Desa.
8. There were many reports from the newspapers that suggest that some residence associations (RA) are believed to be linked to syndicates. Providing "security services" seems to be very lucrative and easy money for these gangs. Residents were being coerced to set up RA to implement Guarded Neighbourhood (GN) scheme even before checking with the local police OCPD (PDRM) on whether their residence sits on a "high crime zone".
9. It's time to leave these security matters back to our PDRM as we do not trust any security guards nor any RA. Our neighbourhood security is beyond any RA, as it lies with the local, state & federal government levels. We hope that you would be better informed and would make the right decisions for all your neighbours. Right now the residents concerned have very little awareness or knowledge on this issue. Know your rights and the facts. We have to put a stop to this unscrupulous practice right now. There are many of us here that feel we have been “cheated”. In fact more and more residents are awaking up to this unscrupulous money-making scheme.
We also want the RoS to audit the accounts of RAs that take in cash payments every month as the amount paid by each household to their RA far exceed the assessment fees and quit rent payable to their local council! At a time when the government is trying to address the rising cost of living, we must also learn not to waste our money on such dodgy scheme. Say "TAK NAK" to “GnG” scheme! Get back your freedom before it’s too late!
**********************************
Can Neighbourhood Guards Block Roads In Malaysia?
You are driving down a shortcut that you have used countless times and as you are snickering over gaining the upper hand, you notice a barrier obstructing the road and slam on your brakes. You are confused as to why there is a barrier in the middle of the road and some security guards manning it and roll down your window to ask.
The security guard then demands for your IC/licence and explains that the residents in the area have decided to implement certain security measures and only residents and registered visitors can enter the housing area. Angry over losing your favourite shortcut home, two questions pop into your head:
Can they block off the roads?
Can they demand for our IC or licence for registration purposes?
These also happen to be the most-asked questions every time we publish something related to housing or security but since they involve different areas of the law, this article will cover the legalities surrounding the first question while the IC issue will be covered in a separate article.
What is the difference between condominiums and landed property?
To be more accurate, the difference lies in the title to your property. Land titles for residential areas in Malaysia are divided into strata and non-strata (known as individual titles). Typically, strata titles are for condominiums, apartments, and certain landed properties. The main defining feature for strata properties is not how high it is built but rather owners of strata properties will jointly own what is known as common properties. These are facilities that is provided for by the developer and managed by the management committee and they are things such as roads, gyms and swimming pools.
On the other hand, non-strata (individual) titles are for landed properties alone. The owners of such properties only own the land that their house is situated on and any other facilities that may be in the area, such as roads, and parks, will be public property under the management of the local authorities.
Strata properties can legally block roads
For strata titles, having guards and boom gates is less of an issue because for strata properties, you are not only the owner of your property, you are also the joint owner of all the common facilities provided for you in the development. This means that anything within the development is essentially private property and is managed by the developers themselves or the management committee.
Since it is private property, the developers are allowed to set up their own gated communities by putting in an application to the relevant authorities. This was allowed after the 2007 amendment to the 1985 Strata Titles Act.
For example, in Selangor, in order to establish a gated and guarded community (“GACOS”), the developer must fulfil certain guidelines laid down by the Selangor government. We don’t have a link to the guidelines and they are pretty long to reproduce here but just know that when it comes to strata properties (ranging from condominiums to exclusive townships), the developers must seek the approval of the authority before creating a GACOS community.
The point of contention for many arises when the owners of landed properties with individual titles try to set up their own barriers and employ their guards. This is especially true for older, non-GACOS developments. To put it simply, older neighbourhoods usually don’t fall under the GACOS scheme which only came into existence in the 2000s.
As these owners merely own the land their unit is situated on, everything else around them is considered public property such as the roads, drainage systems, and parks. Given their public status, you might not be surprised to learn that…
It’s actually “illegal” for non-strata properties to block roads
Under section 46(1)(a) and (b) of the Street, Drainage, and Building Act 1974, it is an offence for anyone to erect or maintain any obstruction or cover any open drain:
“(1) Any person who—
(a) builds, erects, sets up or maintains or permits to be built, erected or set up or maintained any wall, fence, rail, post or any accumulation of any substance, or other obstruction, in any public place;
(b) without the prior written permission of the local authority covers over or obstructs any open drain* or aqueduct along the side of any street...”
Before you go driving around and refusing to stop for the guards, security concerns have created an understanding that such non-GACOS neighbourhoods could be converted into guarded communities if the Resident’s Association (“RA”) applies for permission from their local authorities.
Whether or not their application will be approved depends on whether they fulfil the guidelines given by the Ministry of Urban Wellbeing, Housing, and Local Government.
One of the pre-requisites for putting in such an application is that the RA must get at least 85% consent from the residents, though the local authority can accept a lower percentage in some cases.
However, the problem with this is two-fold. The first is that some of the Resident’s Association will not apply for permission and second, guidelines don’t have the force of law. This created some confusion and strife in certain communities and the municipal authorities would come and demolish barricades which were built illegally or when they failed to obtain the minimum consent from the residents.
While the law has been clarified by the highest court in our country, it is clear that many RAs are still not complying with the guidelines given.
According to DBKL, from 2011 to 2017, 158 RAs in KL implemented the guarded communities but only 65 applications were approved by DBKL. This showed that many security schemes are operating illegally and this became a thorn to users of the public areas.
Another important point to note is this, while such residential areas can be guarded, they cannot be gated. The difference between guarded areas and gated and guarded areas lies in the fact that if the area is guarded, access is merely regulated.
If the area is gated and guarded, then there will erection of fences and the sorts which can obstruct roads. This is why areas with public roads are only allowed to be guarded.
However, many of us still get confused over which security measures are allowed for public areas. The best example of this would be the fact that boom gates which are operated by access cards are actually against MBPJ’s guidelines. This leads us to our final point of…
If you don’t know it, just ask your local council
If you are unsure about what guidelines your local authorities would have, it is always best to ring them up and ask. It is much better for you to ask them and make sure that you get all the proper permissions before erecting barriers as illegal barriers which get torn down will just end up wasting the residents’ money and leave you guys in a limbo.
Aside from that, it is important to note that even if you have procured permission from the relevant authorities, you can never restrict someone’s access into a public area or restrict their access to use the public roads.
We will discuss the issue of demanding ICs and licences in a separate article but as a teaser...requesting for ICs is illegal.
At the end of the day, while we all appreciate enhanced security and a sound sleep at night, whatever security system that is implemented should not fall foul of the law nor infringe upon another person’s rights.
AskLegal.my
by Denise C
https://asklegal.my/p/neighbourhood-security-guards-registration-block-roads-malaysia
*********************************
Unlawful ‘Roadblocks’
WHERE do you want to go? Friend’s house? Address? Don’t know, but know which house? If you don’t know, you cannot enter!
Sounds familiar? I have experienced the frustration of being stopped and questioned and, sometimes, denied access on public roads, while trying to visit friends or get across to other areas of various housing estates, the most recent being on a public road at Jalan Anggerik Eria 31/109, Kota Kemuning.
The public could use this road to get to other parts of Kota Kemuning previously without hindrance. At times, I have even been asked to produce my IC before I was allowed access on some public roads.
By the police? No, I am talking about private guards. Do these guards have the authority or power to set up “permanent” roadblocks on a public road and to stop, question and deny access to the public?
Under section 78 of the Road Transport Act, 1987 (Power to set up road-blocks), “any police officer in uniform authorised in writing by a senior police officer of the rank of Inspector and above” or “any road transport officer in uniform authorised in writing by the Director” may erect or cause to be erected or placed any barrier as prescribed on or across any road.
Under section 21 of the Police Act 1967, it “shall be the duty of police officers ? to keep order on public roads, streets, thoroughfares and landing places and at other places of public resort and places to which the public have access.”
Thus, if any other person (other than a police officer or road transport officer in uniform, duly authorised by a senior police officer or Director) erects or cause to be erected or placed any barrier on or across any road, he “shall be guilty of an offence” pursuant to section 119 of the Road Transport Act.
But residents claim that the local authorities have approved such permanent roadblocks or barriers.
Well, section 9 (10) of the Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 provides that “no person shall erect or maintain or permit to be erected or maintained any obstruction in any street ?”
Section 46 of the same Act then provides that “any person who ? builds, erects, sets up or maintains or permits to be built, erected or set up or maintained any wall, fence, rail, post ? or other obstruction, in any public place ? shall be guilty of causing an obstruction and may be arrested without warrant by any police officer or any officer or employee of the local authority ?”
Section 46(4) of the 1974 Act reserves to our local authorities the power to only allow “any temporary erections in any public place or the temporary use of any part of a public place on occasions of festivals and ceremonies.”
It is thus quite obvious in my view that our local authorities do not have the power to authorise any such “permanent” roadblocks or barrier on or across any public road.
Security is important, but can the public’s rights and freedom be curtailed unlawfully in the name of security?
If residents want security, the guards can follow any person who passes or enters their areas but they have no right to stop, question or prevent any person from accessing public roads and enjoying public amenities such as playgrounds, badminton and basketball courts, fields, etc in these public areas.
I thus hope that the IGP and the minister in charge of local government will take the necessary action to stop such unlawful roadblocks on public roads and also ensure that local authorities do not exceed their powers by giving approvals in disregard of the above Acts of Parliament.
AGAINST UNLAWFUL ROADBLOCKS,
Petaling Jaya.
Source:
https://www.hba.org.my/main.htm
11/08/2007
The Star
*********************************
Illegal Fencing Must Go, Residents Told
Housing estates that have illegally fenced up their areas must now pull down the structure before Johor Baru City Hall takes action against them.
This is the city hall warning to residents who have illegally created gated communities.
Mayor Datuk Mohd Naim Nasir said it has identified 14 housing estates that have illegal fencing.
“We have issued three notices to three housing estate communities in the last two weeks. We will take action against the other 11 soon.”
He said records showed that none of the 14 housing estates had sought approval before installing the fences.
He warned that the city hall would in future tear down fences without giving notice.
Mohd Naim said this on Tuesday after launching SP Setia Bhd “Road to Charity” drive at Setia Tropika.
He said the council had no choice but to act against offenders as such fences had caused inconvenience to adjoining residential estates.
He said only standalone housing project that is isolated from other residential or business areas would be allowed to have a gated community.
“We know residents put up such fences to ensure their safety and security. However, this is not allowed.
“Alternatively, they should organise a neighbourhood watch like Rukun Tetangga.”
He said any housing estate that set up the neighbourhood watch scheme would be entitled to a RM4,800 subsidy to buy equipment such as torch lights.
Source:
https://www.hba.org.my/main.htm
03/03/2007
The Star
By Meera Vijayan
*********************************
No Legal Right To Block Public Road
Your report on gated and guarded communities and its current popularity (StarMetro May 10) did highlight one point which is an issue for concern as well.
The point mentioned is the right of passage of roads.
I am staying in Bukit Jalil and in order for me to access my house, I have to travel through Jalan 7/155B across Taman Esplanad to connect to Jalan 3/155B.
The problem is that this public road has been blocked by the residents of Taman Esplanad by erecting a barrier to stop outside vehicles from entering the public road.
Each time, I have to seek permission from the guards to get access through the public road to reach my house at the other end.
Sometimes the guards are not so obliging and I have to argue my way through. This is really getting out of hand at the public ‘sexpense.
I understand the residents of Taman Esplanade’s concern over security, but to block off a public road and cause inconvenience to others is not a solution.
Furthermore, they have no legal right to erect the barrier on a public road, especially so if it is used by other residents to gain access to their home via the same road and also there are bus stops located along the road.
Is the local authority able to act on this since the area is under the purview of DBKL?
LWS ,Kuala Lumpur
Source:
https://www.hba.org.my/main.htm
24/05/2007
The Star
*********************************
Wrong To Retain Documents
I REFER to the SMS sent by a reader on the issue of whether security guards in apartments or condos have the right to inspect and retain a visitor’s identity card. This practice is common in both stratified and non-stratified residential areas.
With reference to the National Registration Regulations 1990, these security guards do not have the authority or power to inspect or detain a visitor’s identity card.
Regulation 7 on the production and inspection of identity card states:
Any registration officer, police officer, customs officer or any member of the armed forces while on duty, and any other officer or class or description of public officer authorised in writing in that behalf by the director-general may inspect the identity of any person.
https://www.thestar.com.my/
LETTERS: Wrong to retain documents
Friday, 31 Aug 2018
TAGS / KEYWORDS:
Letters , Security , MyKad , IC
Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/letters/2018/08/31/wrong-to-retain-documents/#um08DUrJRI4fmRUJ.99
*********************************
MBPJ Orders RAs To Take Down Illegal Guard Booths & Boom Gates
IF YOU are living in a gated-and-guarded neighbourhood in Petaling Jaya, chances are the guard booths and boom gates erected to deter criminals are in violation of local government guidelines.
StarMetro has learnt that there are 181 residential areas with guard booths throughout the city of Petaling Jaya, designed to restrict access and monitor visitors.
According to Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) public relations officer Zainun Zakaria, only 18 residents associations (RAs) of the 181 have applied to erect guard booths.
Besides the guard booths, even the boom gates and other access control methods employed in these gated-and-guarded schemes are technically illegal as they do not comply with MBPJ’s Planning Development Department’s guidelines.
The letter dated July 2 stated that following investigations, it was discovered that guard booths had been constructed without approval, together with permanent barriers placed at certain roads connecting the section with another.
Automatic gates requiring the vehicle driver to reach out and press a button to exit the housing section were also installed on the one road permitting entry.
According to the notice, these obstructions on public land contravened Section 46(1)(a) of the Streets, Drainage and Building Act 1974.
Bura has been given 14 days from receipt of the notice to remove the structures.
Zainun said the council would act if the association had not taken them down.
A check on Aug 2 revealed that the autogate was still in operation while permanent barriers were still visible.
Other than Bura, another RA in Ara Damansara was given a similar notice on July 2.
MBPJ Planning Development Department’s guidelines are based on documents issued by both the Housing and Local Government Ministry and the Selangor Housing and Property Board (LPHS).
A copy of the guidelines obtained by StarMetro also had photographs of what were considered “Permitted” and “Non-Permitted” forms of gated-and-guarded buildings.
For example, while guard booths placed in the middle of the road are disallowed, exceptions are permissible if there is a 50m reserve, depending on the size of the booth and the requirements of security agencies.
Other examples in the guidelines also include aesthetic conditions for the booths, and differentiating between “manual” boomgates which require a security guard stationed 24 hours, and permanent obstructions.
Coincidentally, it was current Petaling Jaya Mayor Datin Paduka Alinah Ahmad who oversaw the formulation of the guidelines by the housing board during her stint as chief executive officer of LPHS.
“We did a ‘roadshow’ last year to explain the new guidelines to the RAs,” said Zainun.
However, as of Aug 1, it is learnt that only 18 RAs had applied for approval from the council.
Major violations of the guidelines include the placement of permanent obstructions, which could be fatal in an emergency.
“Fire engines and ambulances will have a hard time getting through. They are supposed to reach the area using the shortest route.
“Also, no one can bar entry on a public road,” Alinah said.
As Hari Raya Aidilfitri is just a few days away, the council has stated it will not take action yet as break-ins are more prevalent during the festive period.
“Safety is an issue as many residents will be out of town,” said Alinah.
The mayor also said that the council would be sending out notices, similar to the ones received by the Bandar Utama and Ara Damansara RAs, to the other errant schemes after Hari Raya.
“They will also receive the same 14-day period to remove the boomgates,” she added.
Housing associations can still apply to legalise their gated-and-guarded schemes within the two weeks.
“We will try to help where we can but not in cases where structures such as automatic gates or permanent barriers that cut off access from another road, are involved,” she said.
Community
The Star Online
Read more at https://www.thestar.com.my/news/community/2013/08/05/mbpj-orders-ras-to-take-down-illegal-guard-booths-and-boom-gates/#uTQ2tbPV79tvX9Gj.99
*********************************
Gated And Guarded Community In Klang
If you have heard about it, The MPK has just recently torn down the barriers and removed the temporary guardhouse of one of the gated and guarded area in Bukit Tinggi, after complaint received among the residents in that particular Taman.
Yup~ Selangor State Government has announced earlier, in order to be gated and guarded(G&G) residential area, one area has to get 100% consent from the residents. Which meant that even if there is one objection from among residents, the G&G application won’t get approval from local authority!!This definitely has created disappointment among residents, especially when the rising of the crime rate, G&G is a MUST for everyone to stay peacefully.
Besides to curb the crime rate, one key factor for residents to opt for G&G community, is that this will boost the property prices of a particular area. According to market value, similar types of property in G&G will fetch 5~10% higher price compare to those non-G&G area. Not only for security reason, some of the house owners are hoping the G&G community will boost their property price to higher level.
There are 2 different types of G&G community in Klang. First is the one that originally G&G by Developer, like Ambang Botanic 1 and Ambang Botanic 2, and also Bandar Parkland Precinct 1~3A. which when developer started to built, they planned it as a whole compound, to include the landscaping and garden altogether, to ensure the residents enjoy the exclusiveness of the environment. Definitely, by promoting the uniqueness and exclusiveness of the living environment, developer get higher margin!
Second type of G&G is the G&G community initiated by Residents Association(RAs) of particular area, we called it as G&G Afterwards. These become popular for the past decade, when higher crime rate become threats to most of the people. RAs normally have a lot of convincing and canvassing work to do, they need to walk through every houses, try to persuade every residents to join the G&G scheme.
Few years back, for RAs to get their G&G approval from local authority, they only need 85% of consent from residents. Only last year, State Government has came out with new guidelines, to get approval for G&G, RAs have to get 100% consent from residents, which most of RAs think is mission impossible !! Bandar Bukit Tinggi, Butterfly Park, Bandar botanic, Precinct Bidara, Angsana, Cassia are all considered as G&G Afterwards. Local Authority normally allowed them to fence up only residential area, but not the public area, lake, park etc.
In fact, G&G original from Developer, they collected higher maintenance fees compare to those G&G afterwards. For example, Ambang Botanic 1 monthly maintenance fees for superlink will be RM250 monthly, while for link house in Bandar Botanic, the maintenance fees only RM50~60 monthly.
But the G&G afterwards community they normally face difficulties when getting everyone to pay, as they don’t have rights to ban those unpaid residents to go into their own property. Whereby G&G originally from Developer, they already had the Agreement signed beforehand, if the residents not paying maintenance, management has the right to inactivate their access card, and stop them from enter the residential area.
References:
https://klangproperties.com/
https://www.thestar.com.my/metro
April 23, 2018 by emily
*********************************
Issues With Guarded Scheme
As in any form of security, a guarded scheme or even a gated and guarded scheme is not foolproof. “At least we know that those not staying in the scheme cannot come in and go out without any form of control.
“The guards will ask for their particulars like name and IC,” Lam said. He said there was one break-in, recently.
It happened in a house where the owner refused to pay maintenance fees.
And what was most annoying was that the victim complained on the security and demanded to view the closed CCTV, Lam said. And certainly there are people who take opportunity, over the people’s concern for security.
In Bandar Sri Damansara, a resident, only known as MY Shu said there was a spate of break ins and petty theft in the neighbourhood before a few men who claimed to be from a security firm, approached the residents to offer their services.
“Some of us suspected these so-called guards were either the robbers, thieves or their accomplices.
“They purposely frighthened us so that we would take up their offer,” she said, adding that the “guards” quoted RM30 monthly fees.
The “guards” would put up a little signboard on the gate for those who paid for their service. She said she did not take up the offer.
A similar type of patrolling service was also offered to residents in Taman Rasa Sayang, Ipoh, some time ago. A housewife said the “guards” had asked for RM20 a month. “They put up a little signboard on my gate, saying this house is being patrolled.
“But I do not know whether they actually did the patrolling,” she said, adding that the “guards” came and collected the fees for a few months and disappeared after that.
Reference:
http://www.starproperty.my/
By FOONG PEK YEE
May 29, 2012
*********************************
Living In Gated Areas While Crooks Go Free
I REFER to The Star report on the new rules for gated and guarded housing areas as I am very concerned about the level of crime in Malaysia.
Only the security companies profit, while the criminals will eventually find ways to defeat the security.
I am a post-graduate student currently studying in New Zealand. While it is not true to say that there is no crime there, the houses are not as heavily barricaded as they are in Malaysia, and people can walk freely without fear of motorcycle-riding purse snatchers.
Malaysians should not look at the increasing number of gated communities as a sign of “progress”. Rather, it is a symptom of our communities reacting to the disease of crime.
Clearly, the solution to this problem is not merely to build higher walls, but to remove the criminals from our streets.
Source:
https://www.hba.org.my/main.htm
22/03/2007
The Star
By Ariff Khalid, Hamilton, New Zealand
*********************************
Guarded & Gated Community Makes It Difficult For Local Authorities To Render Services.
Living in a gated community is not entirely trouble-free as residents in such places have to bear with a major problem such as getting the local authorities to provide services such as garbage collection, clearing drains and covering potholes.
As ratepayers, the residents are entitled to such services. However, the physical barrier put up at the guarded and gated community makes it difficult for the local authorities to render such services.
Alinah: ‘Access roads that are blocked do not belong to the residents’. “We know the local authority is supposed to provide us with the services but then when we contacted them, they say they could not come in.
They said we should do away with the security guard and barrier at our main entrance. But then again, if we remove the guards and the gates what is the point of calling it a gated community,” said Janet Leong who has been residing in one of the oldest gated community in Shah Alam.
Leong, who wished not to reveal the location of her house, claimed that they have been facing the problem for several years. She said her residents association had been arguing with the local authority and their management company for quite sometime on the issue.
Such problems are quite common, said Selangor Housing and Real Property Board executive director Datin Paduka Alinah Ahmad. She said usually residents or housebuyers were the ones at the losing end.
“Previously there were no clear guidelines for the developers to follow, leaving many grey areas which at the end leads to problems,” she said during a talk on the Implementation of Gated Community Development in Selangor held at Carlton Holiday Hotel and Suites, Shah Alam recently.
The problems include the public’s right to access a gated area without screening, legal rights of management corporations to the common areas and service charge collection.
Alinah said the access roads to the residential development were usually blocked to allow access to residents only.
“However, these blocked access roads do not belong to the residents living in such housing schemes,” she said, adding that once the developer applied for the titles for the individual homes in the area, the access roads had to be handed over to the local authority.
“The problem will arise when the application is made for individual titles for the houses in the area as the title was released without the access roads and other common areas being handed over to the local council. That means the local authority cannot go in and maintain the road and provide service to the residents,” she said.
Selangor state housing committee chairman Datuk Mokhtar Dahlan said the implementation of the new guidelines on gated communities would ensure that residents get their services from the local authority without sacrificing the security and safety they wanted.
“The state government hopes the guidelines will cover the grey areas and provide common solutions to problems faced by local authorites, developers and residents or housebuyers,” he added.
Source:
https://www.hba.org.my/main.htm
10/05/2007
The Star
********************************
Illegal To Bar Others From Housing Areas
The good people at Desa Seri Hartamas have many things going for them. Their houses are well built with spacious gardens and a central playground. This is enhanced by the housing estate sitting on a choice location.
A few years ago there were many burglaries and snatch thefts as the place was rather isolated then. The residents rallied around to combat this intrusion into their tranquillity and security. They hired private security guards to patrol their grounds.
They were among the first in the country to do so. Things were well again. Desa Seri Hartamas was an exemplary housing development and its value soared.
Employing security guards is perfectly legitimate so long as they know their limitations. But that does not seem to be the case here.
Initially the security guards only patrolled the area which I believe is about all they can do under the law.
As time went on, however, they became bolder.
There were many instances when they trailed visitors.
This was later taken a notch up when they began to question people passing through, which one can only put down to the guards looking for something to do or to kill boredom.
On one occasion a guard actually asked me to move on when I had stopped to answer my cellphone.
Things took a turn for the worse when temporary barricades were placed on the roads leading into the area, narrowing it such that it became a problem entering and leaving.
These barricades were then extended completely across the roads during school hours, denying parents access through the area to the school nearby.
Residents of this housing estate have taken the law into their own hands.
Recently, my daughter complained of a sore throat and as it was past nine in the evening, I decided to go to the pharmacy in Desa Seri Hartamas which opened until late.
Well surprise! Desa Seri Hartamas has now become a gated housing estate.
A metal barrier with the swing mechanism has been built. A guard at the barrier refused me entry as I had no resident's sticker.
While I was explaining to the guards that they had no authority to block a public road, a resident who was returning home, told me that I had no right of entry to "his" housing estate as I was not a resident.
Just like other housing estates, Desa Seri Hartamas is a public area that became so when City Hall took over the administration of the development. The streetlights, roads, grass verges, garbage disposal and sewerage are all managed by the local authority.
Being a public area, anyone has the right to visit, stay and drive through Desa Seri Hartamas. The attempt by the residents to make it their private enclave is illegal and a breach of the constitutional rights of other citizens.
I sympathise with the residents that their area invites unnecessary visitors and traffic as the business centre next to them is today second to none in vibrancy.
The principle is, if you cannot accept it you have the option of moving out but not the option of keeping others out.
City Hall should not be lulled by the security argument in allowing residents to break the law nor condone it by turning a blind eye. This is a breach of city by-laws and the freedom of other Malaysians.
If this is not nipped in the bud, a whole movement to barricade themselves by other housing estates will ensue; it has been replicated in Medan Damansara nearby. Next, these residents may decide that having come so far, they may as well go all the way and, start collecting toll to help pay the guards.
Since I live in a cul-de-sac, all I need is a single guard to start a similar operation. Where then will all this lead us to?
17/05/2004
The Star
By Egalite, Kuala Lumpur
