The new official Puteri 11 RA website is :

Please update your bookmarks.

Sunday, October 31, 2010

Collection Of Security Fee

Notice To All Residents of Puteri 11

Re: Security Fee

The collection of security fee started from 30 October 2010, immediately after the Extraordinary General Meeting, which the members voted for the resolution. The amount payable per house is RM 150.00 for 3 months security services starting from December 2010 to February 2011.

Payment by cheque is in name of 'Persatuan Penduduk Bandar Puteri 11, Puchong'. Payment (cheque and cash) to be handed to your respective Road Representatives named below;

2 Jln. 11/1A Mr Kenny
7 Jln. 11/2 Ms Josephine
10 Jln. 11/3 Mr Kevin
21 Jln. 11/5 Mr Jeffrey
18 Jln. 11/6 Ms Devi
14 Jln. 11/7 Mr Kavljeet
2 Jln. 11/8 Ms Ann
24 Jln. 11/9 Ms Tan
1 Jln 11/10 Ms Alice
36 Jln 11/11 Mr Mahendra
32 Jln 11/12 Mr John
37 Jln 11/13 Ms Venice
35 Jln 11/18 Mr Raymond
42 Jln. 11/17 Mr Ng
(Jln. 11/16 - Mr Ng of 42 Jln. 11/17 is also your RR)

Your support and contribution to protect our properties and family members from criminals is a top priority.

Chairman - Puteri 11 RA

November 2010 Meetings - RA & Residents

Please take note that the informal meetings between RA and Residents in November 2010 will be held every Sunday, 5:30 PM at the Playground.

Any question and concern residents may have can be discussed at the weekly meetings. RA will also provide residents with the latest updates on our activities.

Payment for security fee can also be made at the weekly meetings.

Chairman - Puteri 11 RA

Friday, October 29, 2010

theStar: Barriers not necessary 

The recently released Gated Community and Guarded Neighbourhood Guidelines has raised some doubts among residents prompting the minister in-charge Datuk Wira Chor Chee Heung to clear the air. 

Q: Under what law are the guidelines provided for?
A: The preparation of the planning guidelines are in line with Section 2B (1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1976 (Act 172), which requires the Town and Country Planning director-general to formulate and advise the government on matters concerning town and country planning and the use and development of lands in Peninsular Malaysia.
For the guidelines on guarded neighbourhood, no specific law governs its operation. Furthermore, local councils have no authority to approve the application in setting up the schemes, which had taken form in an ad hoc manner.

Q: Would the local councils be held liable should any untoward incidents happen as a result of the gated community and guarded neighbourhood schemes?
A: Considering the erecting of structures is under the purview and responsibility of the gated communities and residents associations, and these actions are voluntary, the local councils cannot be legally blamed for any untoward incidents in both gated communities and guarded neighbourhoods.

Q: Some feel that the guidelines are inconsistent with the existing laws (Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974 and Road Transport Act 1987) as clauses in these acts prohibit any form of restriction of access on roads, while the guidelines for guarded neighbourhood allow temporary obstacles, such as cones, security signboards and manual boom gates, as long as the locations are stationed by a guard.
A: The issue has been debated at length by Cabinet and NCLG members, and the decision to allow temporary obstacles was made after considering opinions and suggestions from stakeholders including local councils, residents associations and the police.
The temporary barrier shall only be allowed if there is a 24-hour security guard to control the temporary, non-stationary and non-dangerous obstacles. This does not contradict with the Road Transport Act 1987, which prohibits dangerous obstacles. Furthermore, the guidelines also state that a temporary obstacle can only be considered by the local authority on a case-by-case basis. If other residents disagree, the local authority may decline the installation of such obstacles.

Q: The guidelines imply that every entry-exit point must have at least a guard (as no permanent obstacle is allowed) but housing estates in the Klang Valley tend to have many entry-exit points. It would be impractical to place a guard at every location.
A: Firstly, the NCLG has made a decision that these guidelines are only applicable to new guarded neighbourhood schemes, and not the existing schemes which are often unplanned and thus not suitable for operation as a guarded neighbourhood.
Secondly, the clause about temporary physical obstacle is only an option, and not a condition. The residents associations can opt to operate the guarded neighbourhood through patrolling and other surveillance method without having to station guards at every entry-exit point.

Q: If the guards have no authority to deny anyone from entering the neighbourhood, how will the guarded neighbourhood scheme be effective at all?
A: This aspect has also been debated at length at the ministry level as well as the Home Affairs Ministry and the police. Residents operating the guarded neighbourhood schemes should be aware that only the police and other legally designated personnel have the authority to stop, seek identification cards or investigate people. Security guards employed by residents have no power to seek identification or stop anyone from entering.
Moreover, from the perspective of land ownership, the guarded neighbourhood scheme is just a normal housing scheme with individual land titles, unlike gated community which is planned as a private property.
Even without stopping or seeking identification, the guards can be proactive by familiarising themselves with local residents and the inventory of residents’ vehicles so that potential intruders can be recognised and monitored. The guarded neighbourhood is just a loose concept to deter criminal activities. After all, guarded neighbourhoods are an “afterthought” ad hoc action, unlike gated communities.

Q: Does majority mean 51%? Wouldn’t that be too small a difference?
A: Mathematically, majority means 51%. In politics, two-thirds majority is often used. The spirit of this prescription is that it should be both fair and realistic.
Selangor has imposed an 80% consent requirement and initially in March, the ministry had proposed a 100% consent requirement before operating the guarded neighbourhood. Following this, the ministry has received many responses and complaints from the public and media saying that this regulation is not logical because it is difficult to get 100% agreement from the residents. There is no law that prohibits a house owner, or a group of house owners, from appointing security guards to oversee their houses. With public welfare and public rights in mind, the guidelines have clearly stated the condition that the majority rule would only apply with undue force or pressure on those residents who do not wish to pay for security services. In other words, those who do not wish to be part of the scheme are not obliged to pay for the expenses.

Q: Some commented that the need to apply for Temporary Occupation Licence (TOL) for permanent structures on the road shoulder makes it difficult for those who genuinely need the guarded neighbourhood scheme.
A: The ministry has no intention to cause unnecessary difficulties to the guarded neighbourhood operation but its objective is to ensure that the guardhouses erected by the residents associations are legal and in accordance with the provision of National Land Code 1965.
This is also to avoid the guardhouses from being demolished by the land office, which has the legal right to demolish buildings which are not in line with the National Land Code.

Q: The guidelines forbid the guarded neighbourhood scheme to be implemented in areas with public facilities but almost every neighbourhood in Subang Jaya and Petaling Jaya has common facilities.
A: As explained, the NCLG has decided that the guidelines approved is only applicable to new guarded neighbourhood schemes. It is not the intention of the guidelines that all neighbourhoods be implemented with the scheme.
Only neighbourhoods that are planned to be mutually exclusive and have communal facilities like those of gated community are practical because they should not have public facilities in their premises. It should also be noted that the majority of the housing schemes outside the Klang Valley do not have boom gates and guardhouses, but only security patrolling in and around the housing schemes. The public are free to use such roads and public facilities.

Q: The attached FAQ states that “legalisation process would not be done immediately and hastily”, so the councils are supposed to let the illegal ones go?
A: What this means is that the illegal erection and installation of guard posts, perimeter fencing, boom gates and oil drums, in existing guarded neighbourhoods shall be dealt with in phases and using case-by-case basis with priority on areas that compromise critical public services like ambulance and fire brigades.
Focus areas also include guarded neighbourhoods that install boom gates, oil drums or other obstruction on public roads, or any other public access that is used by other neighbourhoods and by doing so, cause difficulty and instigate the disturbance of public peace.
Q: Some feel that the guidelines were drawn without consulting the people on the ground, hence some impractical clauses.
A: The fact is that the guidelines have been drawn up in consultation with people on the ground. The study group from the ministry has made extensive consultation with various stakeholders discussing the issues on guarded neighbourhood and gated community.
Within the two-year period that this guideline was developed, consultation with more than 50 groups of stakeholders were made, including Real Estate and Housing Developers’ Association Malaysia, developers, police, academicians, residents associations and the public. Seminars and focus group discussions have also been arranged for and analysed as input to the guidelines. The ministry has also conducted a special study to obtain responses from the public, involving 450 respondents in several local authority areas in the Klang Valley and Penang in formulating the guidelines.

Q: The Guarded Neighbourhood Guidelines forbid the residents to fence up their neighbourhoods but some felt that the fence is an essential part of the scheme to prevent strangers from entering and exiting the neighbourhoods freely.
A: Roads and backlanes in housing schemes are public roads and are accessible to the public. It was because of the change in circumstances pertaining to the security problem, the ministry decided to do something helpful by introducing the guidelines. In the context of liveable and social integrative communities, housing schemes with perimeter fencing or walls that promote social exclusion would not support integrative approaches towards a common cohesive society.
Moreover, fences and walls are aesthetically unpleasing, exude paranoia and can be visually intrusive. A home is not an army camp or a government complex. What would our country be if the whole length and breath of this beautiful country consists of fenced up or walled up neighbourhoods? Will it portray that our country is an unsafe place to live in and that there is no other option to address the safety issue?

Q: The guidelines specify that perimeter fencing is not allowed as it is normally built on road reserve.
A: Residents associations should understand that the construction of perimeter fencing will involve road reserve which, under the provision of National Land Code, is legally under the ownership of the public. Road reserves do not exclusively belong to members of the residents associations in guarded neighbourhood schemes.

Q: The guidelines discourage gated community to be implemented in rural areas, for fear of negative impact and social division. Does the ministry feel that such schemes can cause social division among the people in urban areas? Some felt that the schemes have actually brought the urban residents closer in terms of working hand-in-hand to make the neighbourhood a safer place for all.
A: There are cases that the schemes have brought the residents closer. However, this is mutually exclusive and rarely extend beyond the walls and fences of their neighbourhoods. There are many factors that can bring residents together.
Commons interests in safety (not necessarily walls or fences), such as community policing and community welfare have often brought people together. The timeless and priceless concept of “love thy neighbour” should be re-introduced by creative residents associations. This goes way beyond the need for fences and walls.

Q: Respondents have urged the government to set up a similar administration to the Commissioner of Building to oversee the residents associations in the event of disputes. Can this be done?
A: The guarded neighbourhood scheme operates on houses with individual land titles and not strata titles.
As such, there is no provision of a management corporation as with gated communities under the Strata Title Act 1985. The guarded neighbourhood scheme has sprung out to mirror facilities in a gated community, but still hold the benefits of individual titled land. The management corporation to some extent relieves local authorities from the responsibilities of daily upkeep, maintenance and administration. The ministry has no plan to set up a special administration to oversee the operation of the residents associations in guarded neighbourhoods as at present, the capacity and resources of local authorities are limited and catered for the interests of the wider community.

theStar: Non-paying residents at receiving end

Subscription to security schemes in residential areas often cause dispute among paying and non-paying residents.

While those who disagree with the schemes maintain that they have the freedom of choice, the rest think the former are taking advantage of those who contribute to the monthly fees.

A resident in Bukit Rahman Putra 7, Sungai Buloh, who stopped subscribing to the security services, was unhappy that the residents association put up two banners that read “Do not live on the charity of your neighbour. Please pay your share to protect your family”.

“No one can insult or humiliate us. We have equal rights to stay here without prejudice, shame and fear as the rest of the paying residents,” she said.

The resident spoke strongly against the action of putting up the tri-lingual banners at the guardhouse to embarrass the non-paying residents.

“It does not promote harmony within the neighbourhood and I certainly do not live on my neighbours’ charity,” she said.

Do your part: Bukit Rahman Putra 7 Residents Association chairman K.S. Ooi said this banner was put up to create awareness and encourage the residents to join the security scheme and not to humiliate them. – By THO XIN YI/The Star

The resident said she opted to drop out from the scheme as she was dissatisfied with the services provided by the security company.

She pointed out that a neighbouring residential area, Bukit Rahman Putra 6, also has a similar banner put up near its guardhouse.

When contacted, residents association chairman K.S. Ooi said the intention of putting up the banners was not to embarrass the residents and was not targeted at anyone in particular.

“It’s a general banner to create awareness and encourage the residents to join the security scheme,” he said.

He added that the fees charged by the security companies increased when the government stopped them from employing foreign guards.

“The residents association faced the plight when there is insufficient subscription to pay for the fees.

“Some residents take the security services for granted as it is paid for by other residents,” he said.

Ooi said he was upset over the sole complaint by the resident.

He added that out of the 348 houses, about 220 were participating members.

“Last year, two or three burglaries happened fortnightly. We are having the security service for the benefit of all,” he said.

Over in Taman Mutiara Puchong, the residents association face a problem of non-paying members and visitors hitting the boom gates to enter or exit the neighbourhood.

The association has to fork out RM600 every time the boom gate was hit, and it has happened more than 10 times.

Gerard Lim, a association committee member, said they had lodged police report and even took the matter to the magistrate court.

In a residents association meeting, it was decided that the signs that read “You Bang You Pay” to be displayed on the boom gates to stop the stubborn ones from hitting the bar again.

The method has proven effective as no other incident happened since then.

“The paying residents are given access cards to raise the automatic boom gates, while non-paying residents and visitors have to register at the guardhouse every time they want to enter the neighbourhood.

“It is not fair to 80% of the residents to pay for the non-paying ones.

“Our guards take care of the common area, such as the field, where children gather and play,” Lim said.

Thursday, October 28, 2010

(Almost) Missing Child

Just now at the park a young girl approached me to help her find her missing young brother (6 years old). She was crying and scared. Me and another lady stopped and helped her contact her parents to find the missing child.

I then told her I would drive her around Puteri 11 to find the child.

After I drove my car to the park, the missing child re-appeared and everybody were relieved. She thanked us and went home with her brother.

We are lucky that this time we found the child back, false alarm. But we should learn from this and be extra careful with our children in future. Always know where is your children.

Speedbump installed at Jalan Puteri 11/1A

A new speedbump has been installed at Jalan Puteri 11/1A near the TNB substation.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Dedaun Puteri Apartments at Puteri 10

The new condo at Puteri 10 is renamed Dedaun Puteri Apartments:

IOI Properties Dedaun Puteri Apartments

This blog previously blogged about it previously in May 2010: 280@Puteri10

Thursday, October 21, 2010

Missing drainhole cover near park staircase

The drainhole cover near park staircase at Jalan Puteri 11/11 is missing/stolen. Please be extra careful when walking along this road especially during night time.

Friday, October 15, 2010

Notice Of Extraordinary General Meeting

Address: 2 Jalan Puteri 11/7, Bandar Puteri, 47100 Puchong, Selangor.

Notice is hereby given that an Extraordinary General Meeting of the members of Persatuan Penduduk Bandar Puteri 11, Puchong Selangor will be held at the Bandar Puteri 11 Playground on Saturday, 30 October 2010 at 5:30 p.m. for the purpose of considering the following business:-

Approval is given to the Bandar Puteri 11 Residents Association Management Committee to engage a registered Security Company to provide security guard services in Bandar Puteri 11 under the Guarded Neighbourhood guideline and to make payment of the security fees estimated at around RM 15,000.00 per month effective from December 2010.


Thursday, October 14, 2010

Comment on Security Summary Meeting


Missed the 1st meeting last sat on security issues. Glad to know that there will be succession session every sat of Oct for residents to meet RA and seek suggestion. Further to your summary, would like to seek more info and hope RA can clarify as follow. However, please do excuse me if these were brought up during the 1st meeting:

Point 1)
Can RA share the 3 proposal with us and what do you meant by preference given to Puteri 12 Security due to "operational synergy". If im not wrong, RA did highlight few security incident at Puteri 12. My Q's, why engage the same firm if security was in some way compromised. Isn't it "safer" if we have another security firm to safeguard our own area. Unless, you are looking at cost effectiveness. There again, i do not know how much the other 2 charged, their responsibilities, etc.

Point 2)
10 security guards proposed. Can you elaborate more in terms of security responsibility, area of coverage, accountability, shift pattern (24hrs coverage) and importantly, how much are the security personnel paid monthly. Dont get me wrong, we are in no position to question how much the firm pay their guards. But if the cost of each guard is RM1500 per month and they are paid (assumption) RM800 or RM900, what level of accountability will they assume? No one works for free. Security are not easy job and they deserved to be paid adequately to perform the job. I have had guards telling me off, "gaji kurang apa lu mau..." Unless, there are other cost to cover by the firm. Again, appreciate if RA can elaborate on this.

Point 3)
Car decal and security Tags issued to paying residents. Clearly meant that those that dont pay dont get these i assume. So, may i know what is the difference in terms of security treatment? Yes, I know, as mentioned many many times, we as neighbours have to work together, meaning contribute to the betterment of the Taman. I agree. But do bear in mind that these commitment are long term the moment you moved in till you move out from this area, as in paying the RM50 p/mth. OK, assuming that i am not a paying resident, so i dont get a car decal and security tag on my gate. Am i to register at the security post each time i need to come in/go out? What is the procedure? Can i harass the guard and intimidate him to let me pass tru if i refuse to "sign in/out". How strict can they be? I am voicing this out due to the fact that eventually, when there are residents who discontinue to pay or not satisfy or start to compare "why not paying (no decal) but still can access freely... blah..blah", thats when the issue starts and you see the contribution dwindle and eventually short of fund.. and so on... thats the usual scenario. So, do you have a system to solve this. Dont throw the Q back to me coz i dont know. Honestly.

Point 7)
Can RA elaborate the requirements for guards to have residence names, address and car number plate. Again, here im referring to what use of these and what system are they using to cross check these for what purpose. No point having it but not using it effectively. Again, security procedures.

Point 8)
Great to hear that there are follow up to the narrow road issue. I had commented on previous blog saying that its a waste of time with IOI and MPSJ and got a reply from RA President that its never a waste of time as there were issues that were solved previously by being patient with the respective parties. I can be wrong by making that statement. So, we just wait lah.... FYI, i did call mpsj few times myself to the extent of telling them that in one incident almost cause me an accident. My children were in the car. I had to brake hard. I drove slow uphill knowing the famous sempit road but there are a lot of inconsiderate drivers out there that knowing the road already so.... so...narrow, still bulldoze tru like F1 drivers. Lucky 2 of my kids were in child car seat, safely buckled. If not, probably one thrown tru the windscreen, the other have his head smash on to the front seat, breaking his neck!!!! Im not exaggerating, this can happen. Imagine all the daily school van FILLED with children plying the same route each day. My eldest son is in one of it. No seatbelt, overcrowded. Reply from MPSJ, working on it.... work... work. So, again, we wait and see who will be the casualty. I pray its not my family members and i pray its not yours either. Just like the express bus incident. We just wait, and wait... Pls do fwd this to IOI and MPSJ. Let them know our daily hazard.

Point 18 & 19)
Since there are 471 houses in Puteri 11, assuming every resident pay, monthly security fee total to 15k (RM1500 x 10) so in average we are looking at RM31.84. round to RM32 per household to cover the cost. Now, since there are 270 that sent in consent we will have total of RM13,500 (270 x RM50), assuming everyone paid. Who will bear the balance of RM1,500? Off course i hope more will participate. Basically, the more the cheaper. And what if the collection reduced? Again, its there a way to cover this?

Point 21)
I agreed, internet is cheap and fast as Mr President replied in my earlier comment. Other channel will be used when necessary. I agreed. For the benefit of residence that do not access internet, or illiterate, pls do not get offended by my statement (I meant non English speaking), can i suggest RA approach IOI to sponsor to put up 2 notice board at the play ground (Nadia and Oliver) and another 1 at Primrose. Create a bulletin area. They can either build a standalone structure or incorporate in the covered seating area. This helps the RA in many ways. If necessary, dont waste time doing house drop of letters, leaflet, etc. Just have them on the notice board. SHOUT OUT to the residence to refer to notice board for updates, info, activities, etc. At least notices in 2 or 3 language (ie Eng, Mandarin, Bahasa, etc). If IOI stingy, then RA raise this up and suggest to us residence. We can chip in to get it done.     

Kudos to the RA for spearheading this exercise. Lets discuss these on the next meeting this Saturday.

Finally, just a suggestion to everyone who commented or intend to comment in this blog. Since there's emphasis from RA that we as neighbours should get along and know each other better, can i suggest that we start by ending our comment with your name and not to have "Anonymous" signing off. At least the next time whenever we meet during the meet the residence session, etc, we know who we are talking to. Hope you guys get what i meant. BTW, RA, lets organise a TT session in one of the mamak lah. My treat for the 1st session. What you guys say.... Someone have to start somewhere... Cheers.


Monday, October 11, 2010

Summary Of Main Points Discussed At Residents Meeting On 9th. October 2010

  1. Three Security Companies proposals were presented.  Preference for Puteri 12 Security due to operational synergy.
  2. 10 Security Guards are required to provide 24 hour security in Puteri 11 at RM 1,500 per guard per month.
  3. Security car stickers and house gate tags will be issued to residents who are paying the security fees.
  4. The security fees is RM 50 per month per house to be collected every three months upfront. 
  5. Road Representatives were appointed for all row of houses in Nadia, Olivia and Primrose.
  6. Letter explaining the security guard services and fees will be handed in person to every house owners/residents. 
  7. Security guards to have the residents names, addresses and car number plates.
  8. RA to continue pursuing the car parking issue at Puteri Bayu Apartment with IOI and MPSJ for a permanent solution.
  9. MPSJ to trim tree branches and leaves encroaching onto road along Jalan Puteri 11/1A.
  10. RA to organise some social activities for residents get together.
  11. RA receive complaints about dog shit and speeding cars in our neighbourhood.  Residents please cooperate on the matters.
  12. Street lights not functioning due to thunder lightning strikes.  MPSJ need to respond fast whenever it happens.
  13. IOI Sales and Marketing office informed that the proposed condominium development will be converted to town houses! RA to closely monitor.
  14. Puteri 12 RA informed that our cars without Puteri 11 stickers will not be allowed entry through Puteri 12.  They are tightening up security.
  15. Puteri 6 Ixora RA will have a dialogue session with Serdang Police Chief on Sunday 10 October 2010.  A few houses there were broken into last month.
  16. The new guidelines on Guarded Neighbourhood should be available soon at MPSJ.  Puteri 11 is not a Gated Community under the guidelines.
  17. RA request for lawyer and civil engineer among our house owners/residents to provide professional advice to RA.
  18. Total houses in Nadia, Olivia and Primrose is 471.  Of this 120 houses are still unoccupied, mainly in Primrose.
  19. 270 houses have signed consent for Guarded Neighbourhood.  A few did not agree to sign and the remaining were not in when we visited them.  RA to follow up.
  20. RA emphasize to residents the important of getting close with your neighbours as this can help in crime prevention.  
  21. RA explain that communication via our website and emails is fast and free.  When necessary other channel such as meeting, banner and leaflet will be used.
  22. RA request for residents to come forward and contribute their services to the RA.  Donations and sponsorships are most welcome.
  23. The RM 15 entrance and annual fees is to pay for general administrative and meeting expenses including Annual General Meeting of members.
  24. RA will meet with residents every Saturday in October 2010 at 5:00 p.m. at the Playground. 
Here is the list of Road Representatives appointed at yesterday's meeting.

No. 2 Jln 11/1A - Kenny
No. 7 Jln 11/2 - Josephine
No. 10 Jln 11/3 - Kevin 
No. 21 Jln 11/5 - Jeffrey 
No. 18 Jln 11/6 - Ms Devi
No. 14 Jln 11/7 - Kavljeet Singh
No. 2 Jln 11/8 - Anne
No. 24 Jln 11/9 - Ms Tan
No. 1 Jln 11/10 - Alice
No. 36 Jln 11/11 - Mahendra
No. 32 Jln 11/12 - John
No. 37 Jln 11/13 - Venice
No. 35 Jln 11/18 - Raymond
No. 20 Jln 11/17 - Tony
Jln 11/16 - PC Ng ( No. 42 Jln 11/17 )

RA Committee

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Residents meeting on 9-Oct-2010

Thank you to the Puteri 11 residents and RA committee who managed to attend the meeting.

The RA will provide a summary of items discussed later.

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Security Warning To Residents Of Puteri 11

There were some houses broken into in Bandar Puteri Puchong in the month of September 2010.

In Puteri 12 alone, there were a few incidents where the burglars strike during daytime when there was no one in the house. 

The suspects were well dressed Chinese men driving expensive cars like BMW, Mercedes, Volvo, Camry and Accord to camouflage their actions.

They drove passed the security guardhouse by pretending to be interested buyers of the bungalow houses in Puteri 12.

A meeting between Bandar Puteri RAs and the District Police Chief will be held this Sunday, 10 October 2010 at 10:00 a.m. at the Puteri 6 Basketball Court.

The meeting will discuss increasing the role of the Police and Residents in crime prevention in Bandar Puteri Puchong.

Puteri 11 Residents are advise;
  1. to be on the alert and call the police when there are such strangers roaming near your houses.
  2. to ensure that your cars have the Puteri 11 car stickers or you will not be allowed entry by the security guards.
  3. to attend the security meeting on Saturday 9 October 2010 at 5:00 p.m. at the Puteri 11 Playground.

Please help to inform your neighbours and friends in Puteri 11 about this.  They are your best security guards!

Puteri 11 RA Committee.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Puteri 12 access only for cars with Puteri 11 stickers

Puteri 11 residents to make sure have Puteri 11 car stickers or you won't be allowed to come in through Puteri 12.

Puteri 12 are tightening up their security in view of a few recent incidents.

Sunday, October 3, 2010


Bandar Puteri 11 Residents Association is holding a meeting with House Owners and Residents of Nadia, Olivia And Primrose.

The meeting will discuss the setting up of our own Guarded Neighbourhood, the engagement of security guards and related issues.

Day : Saturday, 9th. October 2010.

Time : 5:00 p.m.

Venue : Puteri 11 Playground.

Your participation and contribution is important to the successful implementation of the Guarded Neighbourhood community.


We have rented a 20' x 20' tent, 10 tables and 80 chairs at RM 310.00 for tomorrow's meeting with the residents.

We will meet among our Committee at 4:30 p.m. before the 5:00 p.m. meeting with residents.

Please attend and show your support to the RA.

Alice - please get ready to sign up new members and the consent signature.
Loke - can you arrange the water drinks...any leftover from AGM?

I have invited Mr Tan Jo Hann - MPSJ Councillor and hopefully he can attend and address some of our issues.

Saturday, October 2, 2010

Illegal construction blocking backlane access road

As a responsible resident in Puchong Puteri 11, I found this illegal construction blocking the access road to the backlane of Primrose, Jalan Puteri 11/18.
The owner should realise that the backlane is belongs to MPSJ and it main purpose is to ease rescue effort in the unfortunate event of a fire.
I hope the house owner who put up this illegal construction can be more consideate for others in the neighbourhood and take the responsibility to remove it without needing to take it to MPSJ.

Attached is the snapshot of the illegal construction and an article from Star online stating that blocking backlane will hamper rescue efforts.

Please be kind enough to put this message onto the website such that we can raise awareness among the resident of Puteri 11.

Thank you.

Comment from a resident

From Mr Kuan

RA, if you need more support, do something!! "Promote" yourselves to the Puteri 11 community. I know its never eazy, but hey, you guys were elected. So, do something about it. Waiting for IOI and MPSJ is just a waste of time as far as i know. BTW, if you guys are concern on certain issues, dont just post on the blog.

Pls understand that there are owners out there that do not access your blog or even know how to (not all are computer literate) access info and are in the dark as to what the RA is doing all these while, me included. So, if you guys are serious about this issue, try to inform everyone as effectively as possible. Probably, as a suggestion, you may want to organise a meet the residents session every fortnight, etc. I believe you will slowly gain more crowd and support eventually. But making the 1st move (ACT) is more important.

Not just blah...blah... in the blog. Honestly, who cares what was in the blog!! I read, if i feel like commenting, i type, then..... what??? Thats the fact isn't it. Honestly, i dont even know who are you guys (committees). Best part, you guys never take the opportunity during the mooncake gathering to introduce yourself and to raise this issue. There were nearly 200 adults and children came. Dont you think it was a good platform to intro the committees and raise some issues. Tell the owners, they will then share with their neighbours, so on... At least you get to send some message across.

What happen to the appointment of security firm? Whats the updates? Dont get me wrong, im not here to critisize the RA. I will support, definitely, for the equal benefits to myself and the rest of the owners. But, there must be some effort and sacrifice. Work out something to BUILD the community FIRST. How much support do you think you can get via this blog??


Dear Mr Kuan,

Thank you for your comments. I think they are fair and constructive. We truly welcome people like you who can contribute to the RA. Please except our invitation to be a member of the Puteri 11 RA Committee. How can I get in touch with you?

For a start, I would like to provide here my brief explanations to your comments so you are aware of what is happening.

  1. Yes, the RA need to promote itself to the Puteri 11 residents. Some works have been done but these were not effectively communicated across to the residents.
  2. It was difficult to get people to serve in the RA Committee, so we manage to persuade some volunteers, and everyone who stood for elections were elected to the Committee.
  3. It is not always a waste of time waiting for IOI and MPSJ to take actions. We do get some things done through them over the past one year.
  4. Blog is just one of the avenue we communicate. It is inexpensive and fast and is effective to a certain extent.
  5. The RA Committee held a number of meetings over the past one year including one AGM. The residents were invited to all our meetings but very few showed up.
  6. Agreed the RA should have promoted itself during the moon cake festival as you have mentioned.
  7. We have received proposals from two Security companies and are evaluating them. A meeting with residents is being planned for on Saturday afternoon on 9th October 2010.

Mr Kuan, we would like you to come forward and share your experience with us.

You can contact me anytime on my h/p 016-2323480, email:

Hope to hear from you very soon.

Thanks and regards,

Chiam Tun Cheng
Puter 11 RA Chairman