查看完整版本 : 有無發覺公屋業主立案法團d人好似土皇帝

半空進擊的天才 2018-12-12 09:48 PM

有無發覺公屋業主立案法團d人好似土皇帝

去參加過一次業主大會,好似要打交咁。。。。之後都唔得閒去了。聽講果班人年年都以現有的關係搞喂喂喂投票通過利於呢班小圈子的提案。外人根本無辦法推翻佢d!

same-same 2018-12-13 12:23 AM

無「法」可施;除非抓到佢地具體犯法

zzzxxx111 2018-12-13 09:25 AM

呢班小圈子, 你可以搵大圈子對付.
但搵大圈子, 即係公屋業主居民, 你可能要花錢又花時間.
要通知居民支持你. 可能要街站, 宣傳, 派傳單.

半空進擊的天才 2018-12-13 11:01 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]zzzxxx111[/i] 於 2018-12-13 09:25 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=491921149&ptid=27907910][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
呢班小圈子, 你可以搵大圈子對付.
但搵大圈子, 即係公屋業主居民, 你可能要花錢又花時間.
要通知居民支持你. 可能要街站, 宣傳, 派傳單. [/quote]


好難搞,日頭要返工,根本無時間無財力。。。。。。

iapple2 2018-12-15 03:27 AM

每兩年都會改選,你去參選做主席:smile_38:

chuwy 2018-12-15 10:26 AM

仇恨,罪惡溫床,小掂為妙

I-HAVE 2018-12-15 11:07 PM

做2屇主席, 可以買樓...
當中利益.........;P :smile_15:

雪山肥牛 2018-12-17 06:32 PM

用:smile_39: 建築物管理條例:smile_39: 可以推翻,只要你肯做:smile_38:

thespanishlady 2018-12-23 02:03 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]雪山肥牛[/i] 於 2018-12-17 06:32 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=492117421&ptid=27907910][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
用:smile_39: 建築物管理條例:smile_39: 可以推翻,只要你肯做:smile_38: [/quote]
[url=http://www.mingpaocanada.com/tor/htm/News/20170918/HK-goa1_r.htm]http://www.mingpaocanada.com/tor/htm/News/20170918/HK-goa1_r.htm[/url]

【明報專訊】本報早前報道,大角嘴富多來新邨二期法團2015年啟動維修工程後,約700萬元工程儲備金去向不明。警方確認,今年7月接獲舉報稱法團有人冒簽文件及公款下落不明,調查後以偽造文書罪拘捕46歲姓姚男子,年齡及姓氏與法團時任主席姚盛賢相同;警方消息稱,被捕者為姚盛賢。法團上周四改選並換屆,姚盛賢落選,主動要求一周後交還法團文件及銀行帳戶,現屆法團擔心其間有人銷毁證據。

勸住戶推翻法團 商戶被放臭肉

在富多來新邨二期商場開設裝修舖的郭女士,上周日(9月10日)清晨,其店外被人擺放兩袋動物內臟。「臭氣熏天,每次開業主大會前,都有類似的怪事。」郭女士接受訪問時表示,除和時任法團主席姚盛賢結怨外,沒開罪過其他人,「兩年前因為我們互數不是,結果被他告我誹謗,案件明年才有裁決,我已花近30萬律師費」。郭女士說,最近四出勸說住戶投票推翻法團,懷疑因此被恐嚇。警方確認案件,表示當日曾派員到場,相信異味懷疑由載有動物骨頭的膠袋傳出,案件列求警調查,暫無人被捕。

法團改選 主席報警稱被冒名授權

至上周四法團改選,業主王火強聯同其他住戶組成團隊挑戰現任法團,當日逾140名住戶到達梁顯利油麻地社區中心,投票前警方接獲時任主席姚盛賢報案稱有人使用虛假授權書,到場了解事件。

負責點票的管理員現場翻查發現包括姚盛賢在內的數名法團委員,授權予挑戰他們的業主團隊。王火強即場放棄該授權書︰「這是栽贓,所有授權書由現屆法團投票前核實,怎可能至投票時才由法團委員發現自己的授權書是假的?」王火強反問。而在現場的主席姚盛賢拒絕交代,只重申自己沒寫過授權書。現場監察的民政事務處職員確認現場的住戶數目連同有效授權書,高於總業權的5%,可繼續進行法團改選。

王火強的業主團隊最後以99%得票率勝出,落敗的前主席姚盛賢提出按法例規定一星期後交接法團文件、銀行帳戶等資料。新上任的法團主席王火強表示「當然擔心其間會有人銷毁證據」,會聘請會計公司接收並查核當中的帳目及文件,強調交接過程或帳目中若有可疑之處,會向執法部門求助。

一周後方獲帳戶 新法團憂被毁證

本報今年7月報道,住宅連商戶逾600戶的大角嘴富多來新邨二期, 2015年申請市建局資助啟動大維修工程,時任法團集資約2200萬元,但今年5月被負責工程的「金溢工程有限公司」(下稱「金溢」)揭發拖欠逾280萬元工程款。時任法團主席姚盛賢7月底接受本報查詢時承認法團戶口餘款不足100萬,當中700萬差額去向不明,維修工程亦已停工5個月。王火強表示,現階段首要向金溢支付欠款,期望能重啟工程。

金溢發言人接受查詢時重申,只要現法團償還180萬元欠款便可以復工,更承諾若法團因公款去向不明而未能即時支付最低還款額,公司可寬限。

thespanishlady 2018-12-23 02:05 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]雪山肥牛[/i] 於 2018-12-17 06:32 PM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=492117421&ptid=27907910][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]
用:smile_39: 建築物管理條例:smile_39: 可以推翻,只要你肯做:smile_38: [/quote]
大角嘴富多來新邨第二期姚盛賢俾其他業主推翻。告誹謗敗訴輸咗輸埋訟費!

“The Evidence of Mr Yiu

9.  Mr Yiu gave evidence first.  I observed his demeanour, looked at the contemporaneous documents, and considered the probabilities of his evidence.  I found Mr Yiu to be an evasive dishonest liar whose evidence, in so far as it was self-serving, was wholly unreliable, plainly ludicrous in certain parts, and rejected by me as false.

10.  The following are some examples of how “plainly ludicrous” certain parts of Mr Yiu’s evidence really were: -

   (1)  Mr Yiu alleged under cross-examination by Mr Damian Wong, Counsel for Mr and Mrs Kwok, that he intended to attend the IO’s Annual General Meeting on 8th May 2015 (“the AGM”) in person, but also authorized and paid 2 persons to vote as his proxies at the AGM, as he needed “assistants”.  That made no sense whatsoever since each unit in the Estate should only have one vote (with the weight of that vote being determined by the unit’s undivided shares in the Estate) and voting would just be a matter of putting a tick on a piece of paper with a pen and then inserting that piece of paper into a ballot box.  It would not take 3 persons to do so.

   (2)  Mr Yiu further alleged the words “食屎、呃錢、屎忽鬼” [English translation: “Eats Shit, Cheating People’s Money, Arsehole”] written on a promotional sign of the Business [B/17] could be part of the original format (格式) of that sign, as opposed to the result of criminal acts of vandalism.  In my judgment, it was highly unlikely that an aluminium window business would choose to include such derogatory, offensive and insulting words as part of the format of its own promotional sign.

   (3)  Mr Yiu suggested to Mr Damian Wong, Counsel for Mr and Mrs Kwok, that he should ask Mrs Kwok to speak in Punti, as Mrs Kwok’s Punti was incomprehensible to him and for that reason he never managed to understand what Mrs Kwok had said to him.  However, when Mrs Kwok gave oral evidence, it was crystal clear she spoke perfect Punti.  Mrs Kwok could and did express herself in Punti perfectly well, directly contrary to what Mr Yiu alleged.

11.  Mr Enzo Chow, Counsel for Mr Yiu, sensibly conceded in his oral closing that Mr Yiu’s evidence on the proxy forms, as summarized in paragraph 10(1) above, was “a bit ridiculous” and “a bit unbelievable”.

12.  Mr Yiu alleged the Words were false. The Words were: -

“自2015年6月19日,富多來新邨第二期業主立案法團,由姚盛賢先生當主席後,(他是利用假的授權書當選的,當時前管委會主席龔文輝先生已報警)… ”

“到2015年4月至5月期間,姚盛賢到處揚言,他一定要當富多來立案法團主席(第十一屆)當時因為我們不支持他,他就叫夜班的管理員破壞本舖的招牌及棄掉了超過五十多個。(到姚生當了法團主席後,他繼續針對性的破壞本舖的招牌)…”

[url=http://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=115106&currpage=T]http://legalref.judiciary.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=115106&currpage=T[/url]

今天懷舊的水樽 2018-12-23 02:05 PM

香港地可以揾錢嘅地方都會有皇帝:smile_44:

charlottechurch 2018-12-23 04:35 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]thespanishlady[/i] 於 2018-12-23 02:05 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=492357384&ptid=27907910][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]

大角嘴富多來新邨第二期姚盛賢俾其他業主推翻。告誹謗敗訴輸咗輸埋訟費!

“The Evidence of Mr Yiu

9.  Mr Yiu gave evidence first.  I observed his demeanour, looked at the contemporaneous documents, and considered the probabilities ... [/quote]
天有眼!👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽

HY.Cheung 2018-12-24 12:06 AM

~Q1C7aaa5B2~ 2018-12-24 08:11 AM

[quote]原帖由 [i]thespanishlady[/i] 於 2018-12-23 02:05 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=492357384&ptid=27907910][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]

大角嘴富多來新邨第二期姚盛賢俾其他業主推翻。告誹謗敗訴輸咗輸埋訟費!

“The Evidence of Mr Yiu

9.  Mr Yiu gave evidence first.  I observed his demeanour, looked at the contemporaneous documents, and considered the probabilities ... [/quote]
天有眼 x2

水喉學生 2018-12-25 10:54 AM

公屋業主立案法團
- 沒人工
- 責任有多
- 有事..就找你煩

bchk2015 2019-1-6 05:36 PM

[quote]原帖由 [i]thespanishlady[/i] 於 2018-12-23 02:05 AM 發表 [url=https://www.discuss.com.hk/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=492357384&ptid=27907910][img]https://www.discuss.com.hk/images/common/back.gif[/img][/url]

大角嘴富多來新邨第二期姚盛賢俾其他業主推翻。告誹謗敗訴輸咗輸埋訟費!

“The Evidence of Mr Yiu

9.  Mr Yiu gave evidence first.  I observed his demeanour, looked at the contemporaneous documents, and considered the probabilities ... [/quote]
姚盛賢告誹謗敗訴輸咗輸埋訟費好波!
頁: [1]
查看完整版本: 有無發覺公屋業主立案法團d人好似土皇帝