Resignation as Secretary of PHRA

I am Yap Boon Huan, the ex-secretary of the PHRA for the 2009/2010 committee. I resigned from my position as secretary on 26.10.2009. Today I received a call from a committee member of the present committee of the PHRA requesting that I continue to sign cheques for the PHRA until an AGM has been called and a new bank account is opened and the monies from the present account is transferred to the new account.

I have declined to sign any more cheques as I am no longer the secretary and neither am I a committee member of the PHRA. A copy of my resignation e-mail is reproduced below:

Yap Boon Huan
67 Jalan PH 2/4
Puchong Hartamas

26th October 2007

The Chairman

Dear Mr Cheah

Resignation from the Position of Secretary, PHRA

It is with regret that I have decided that I will be stepping down from the position of Secretary of the PHRA with immediate effect.

It has been my privilege to serve the residents and a luxury I can no longer afford.

Thank you.

Yours faithfully

B H Yap

cc the PHRA 2009/2010 committee

I wish to emphasize that it would be wrong for me to continue signing cheques for the PHRA when I no longer hold any position in the committee. I have advised the committee member who contacted me to have the committee pass a resolution and produce the same to the bank so that the signatories may be changed quickly. This can be done without the consent and involvement of all the present signatories. I also wish to reiterate that this is the LEGAL and CORRECT way of handling the issue.

Perhaps it would be pertinent to raise a few issues on the current situation for thought.

1. Is it appropriate that the collection of our monthly security charges be delegated to Angela, who also happens to be an Auditor in the committee? Who is going to audit the Auditor collecting monies from the residents?

2. When the committee announced overwhelming positive response from the members for a proper security handover at the recent EGM, was it told explicitly and clearly to the residents that our present 3-month deposit with Fivestar will remain with the developer (at least until the company pays it back to us) while we will be asked to pay a fresh deposit of 3 months and a further 2 months fees in advance? Would the response be as unanimous if this was made known?

3. Are the committee members of the PHRA ready to give the residents a guarantee that Fivestar will definitely refund their deposits, since the committee has announced that "Your PHRA will arrange with developer to return your previous payments." ?

4. It was further reported by a committee member that "We are glad that all residents almost unanimously choose Option A for proper hand over." A proper handover would mean the proper subrogation of authority via an assignment to enable the PHRA to continue collecting fees for security from the residents. Has this been done yet? I doubt it. How then does this make it proper for the PHRA to collect fees now as they are doing?

5. The question that the PHRA is likely to pose will be how the security can be continued without the collection of fees. Obviously this is a failure in planning. If not the least the committee could do would be to explain this problem to the residents at the recent EGM and to seek their support. Was this done? Or are the residents being forced to pay up because of their need for guards? Has the committee put the cart before the horse?

6. In Enclosure 6 covering the minutes of the PHRA committee meeting held on 16th July, 2009, it is stated that "We will continue to state our stand that the PHRA will only take over the security management upon the settlement of the guard house legality and audited accounts." Have these two conditions been fulfilled?

7. In the notice for the committee meeting on 25th October, 2009, the only item on the agenda was "1. To discuss and decide the way forward on taking over Security Management and Guard House." Would this not be contradictory to Item 6 above or has the Guard now been legalized?

I hope to see the committee members for forthright and transparent in dealing with the residents. After all we are going to be neighbours for a long time and putting all the cards on the table will certainly be more conducive to a better bonded community.

Your rating: None
yeak's picture

I reproduce what I have answered you in the egroup here:

Hi BH Yap,

I need to make these point clear:
1. We understand that John Choong the treasurer is calling you about signing check to pay for security fees.
2. We have no plan to open new bank account as you said below. Even after EGM or AGM we continue to keep the current facility unless the bank itself fail us.
3. We want to change check signatory to current active committee members so that we don't have to burden you and your time. As resigned committee, you have already been released of duty and responsibility on the liability of anything happen to signing the check. Hence you should not be so nervous about it.

Let's change the signatory. We will find out how to do it properly as requested.


1. Since you have mentioned John Choong's name, yes, he did call me to request that I continue to sign cheques for the PHRA after my resignation. My intention was not personal. That was why I left out all the names in my post.

2.While I sympathize with your "predicament" which is also ours, since we are all resients of Puchong Hartamas, I will not be able to comply with the request as I have already relinquished my position. And this includes relinquishing my authority to sign any cheque on behalf of the PHRA. In short, Yeak, I no longer have any locus standi to comply.

3. Keeping the current bank facility or creating a new account is the privilege of the new committee and out of my purview, since I no longer have a locus standi. Any point I raised should only be treated as a suggestion at most. I no longer have a legal standing and do not intend to impose my views.

4.Unfortunately I will have to disagree with you that " As resigned committee, you have already been released of duty and responsibility on the liability of anything happen to signing the check. Hence you should not be so nervous about it." Yes, I have been relieved of my duty and responsibility upon my resignation. NO, I will still be liable if I sign any cheque for the PHRA after my resignation. That's why I cannot and will not do it.

Should I continue to sign even one cheque and a report is made against me by anyone who is unhappy, I will be guilty of abuse of power, possibly even of CBT. The intention may be good but what is illegal is still illegal. Please do understand this. And I am certainly not nervous. I am just being transparent, ethical and clear-headed. And I would advise you without prejudice to observe likewise so that you do not get in trouble later on. Good intention is not always protected by legislation.

5. Do proceed to change the signatories as you have suggested. It appears to be the only legally-sanctioned option. Convenience should not be placed ahead of what is legal.

Thank you.