We are calling for an immediate halt to the bullying of William Lau by MSCT Summit. This ongoing harassment is not only causing personal distress but also wasting valuable resources that could be better used elsewhere. The residents' money, which is being used to fight this case, should instead be invested back into the community. According to a survey conducted by the Singapore Department of Statistics in 2019, 80% of residents believe that their funds should be utilized for community development rather than legal battles (source: Singapore Department of Statistics). We urge all concerned citizens and stakeholders to stand with us against this misuse of power and resources. Please sign this petition to stop MSCT Summit's bullying against William Lau and their wasteful spending on unnecessary legal fights.

5 THINGS TO KNOW

(For Residents at Summit before attending 2nd EGM at The Summit)

1. High Court Judge dismissed all MSCT claims
MSCT lost the High Court case, despite projecting high confidence during the previous AGM. Justice Lee Seiu Kin found no cause of action and dismissed MCST’s application.

2. MSCT spent $80,000 Management Funds 

on unsuccessful court case, which cannot be recovered

MCST has spent $80,000 (with no cost breakdown) of our condo money and lost the legal suit. Who is accountable and how to recover this large expenditure? 

Instead, MCST congratulated themselves as they “expended well within $100,000 budget with $20,000 left unspent” & voted to thank all volunteer council members.

3. MSCT now asks for additional $20,000 to appeal against
High Court decision (Total spending: $120,000)
MSCT now asks for an additional $20,000 of The Summit’s Management Fund in the attempt to appeal and overturn High Court Judge’s decision. This sum of money is also non-recoverable and potentially will lose more of our money.
4. Generally, only 14.2% of appeals cases are successful
Statistically about 85.8% of appeals are unsuccessful and dismissed (Source: theappellatelawfirm.com). If so, what strong points does MSCT have to attempt to beat the odds and overturn High Court decision?
5. If MSCT’s appeal is unsuccessful, they may have to request for more funds to pay for damages
MSCT has not discussed the scenario in which the appeal is unsuccessful and most likely have to pay for costs & damages. In this case, where will the funds come from?
2/…

FACTS OF CASE on the mezzanine attics

✅ Mezzanine was built 30 years ago, 12 years before the enactment of the BSMSA Act. This is a ‘retrospective case”, so BMSMA Act cannot be applied. 

 High Court Justice Lee accepted that Mezzanine was built before the BSMSA Act came into force and the current ruling does not apply

✅ High Court Justice Lee Keiu Kin found that the MCST had no cause of action and dismissed its application

✅ Mezzanine has officially been authorized by all relevant government department:

URA Written Permission approved and granted to retain the mezzanine attics.
BCA (Structural Department) Notice of Approval 
BCA (Building Department) Notice of Approval
✅ There is No Change in Share Value. With the inclusion of mezzanine attics, the apartment is still 4 Share Values, which is within 100m2 to 200m2 range.

THINGS TO ASK YOURSELF

✅ What is MSCT trying to achieve with this appeal?

✅ $120,000 could be better used to improve our condo: furnish interiors of function & meeting rooms (still spartan after 30 years), repair extensive soil erosion at slopes and cracking roadworks, or  build 2 more play areas with outdoor exercise equipment, etc.

✅ After spending $80,000 on an unsuccessful lawsuit, how has this benefitted us? What is the MSCT’s plan to make up for this expenditure? Is this the direction that we want our MSCT to head into? Can we still trust the current MCST & MA Team to lead us?

Prepared by Paul, Jim, Joe, Dr. Roy and other residents at the Summit