Berjaya Vacation Club Forum

A liaison Forum between BVC members and Berjaya Vacation Club management to voice out issues to protect common interest for both parties.


    Should there be an EGM in view of Trustee letter dated 8 June 2011

    Share

    Sien
    Moderate Contributor
    Moderate Contributor

    Posts : 53
    Join date : 2009-04-26

    Should there be an EGM in view of Trustee letter dated 8 June 2011

    Post  Sien on Sun Sep 04, 2011 11:25 pm

    Hi my fellow members who signed the EGM form in the last AGM,

    This is a follow up of my earlier email dated Aug 23, 2011 which requested your response on or before Hari Raya whether in your opinion it was a good solution particularly clause iv) of the Trustee’s letter dated 8th June 2011 which was attached with the email dated Aug 23 and also the Trustee letter posted on the BVC Liaison website. Let me repeat clause iv) of the Trustee letter here: “ in the event any ONE of the LC members not agreeable to the justifications of AMF increase of more than 5% then the proposed AMF increase of above 5% shall be brought up at the AGM of members for members consent.” The reason stated in the EGM form for removal of Trustee signed by you was that the Trustee gave consent to the Annual Maintenance Fee (AMF) of more than 5% without proper justification in a relevant, rational, and logical manner; it is/our my opinion Trustee did not exercise “due diligence” in carrying out its duties and the consent does prejudice the interest of BVC Timeshare members.

    It’s fair to say; only members who had signed the EGM form concerning the stated reasons in the resolution have the right to decide whether it was necessary to call the EGM in view of the Trustee letter. If 50 or more (Quorum required to hold EGM) responded that clause iv) was not a good solution by giving a reason, I would request BVC to conduct the EGM on the same date and venue as the coming AGM. In order to conduct an EGM, we need to state the reason(s) in the EGM resolution signed by the individual member supported by at least 50 members signing the respective EGM forms sharing the same reason(s).

    If you did not response by now after two weeks, I would take it that you had accepted the solution as stated in clause iv) of the Trustee letter. The email dated Aug 23 was also forwarded to BVC so that they know they might be a possibility of incorporating the EGM notice together with the AGM notice. BVC did mention that they will only send out the notices after the long holiday’s i.e next week. For everyone’s information, members did not and cannot call for an EGM at the last AGM as the 50 or more members who signed the forms were only collected during/after the AGM. However due to new development in this issue it was only fair for me to email all those who signed the form calling for an EGM to decide again whether it was still their desire to do so giving a reason .

    As at today Sep 4, 2009, only 4 members responded to call the EGM in view of the Trustee’s letter. Even if I include 19 members who did not provide email address for me to contact them, we do not have the Quorum to call an EGM- we need 50 members to call an EGM. 3 of the 4 members did not and could not give any reason to call the EGM in view of the Trustee’s letter except one who argued that the Trustee was arrogant. I think you agree that in view of the Trustee’s letter particularly clause iv), the Trustee indirectly admits that they made a mistake concerning their attitude in approving the Annual Maintenance Fee (AMF) of more than 5% unilaterally without proper justification. To err is human.Let me express my personal opinion,in view of clause iv)in the Trustee letter, the reasons stated in the EGM resolution is already achieved and therefore calling an EGM is no longer necessary.

    To avoid misunderstanding among members, let me put things in perspective concerning the question should there be an EGM? If there should be an EGM, it should be combined with the AGM so as not to tax the BVC members and incur unnecessary costs. It’s more effective. Hope you guys can look at the Facts in the correct perspective so that we are not barking at the wrong tree.

    i) It all started with the LC 2009/10 unanimously voting No Confidence against the Trustee because of the Worrisome Precedent set by the Trustee of unilaterally approving the Annual Maintenance Fee (AMF) increase of more than 5% without proper justification.

    ii) This Vote of No Confidence against the Trustee was subsequently also unanimously supported by all members at the AGM except two members.

    iii) At the AGM meeting, as a facilitator, I asked those members at the AGM in favour of calling an EGM to remove the Trustee to sign and submit the EGM Form to me because of the Worrisome Precedent set by the Trustee.

    iv) In my subsequent letter to the Board of Director’s Trustee & BVC and copy to you guys and posted on the BVC Liaison website, I made it clear that we would not take any action for the 1st six months. The purpose is to let the Trustee resign or come out with a solution acceptable to the members who signed the EGM Form, otherwise we would call the EGM to remove the Trustee because of the Worrisome Precedent. Let me say this, the supremacy of any strategy to win a battle objective is to gain the battle objective without going to battle. As a facilitator, if there is a solution to remove the Worrisome Precedent without going to battle, I’ll do the right thing and let the members who signed the EGM form to decide whether they still want the EGM by giving a reason if the Worrisome Precedent is removed.

    v) Subsequent to the six months, Universal Trustee came back to me with a letter stating that in future any AMF increase above 5%, they will consult the LC and get the LC agreement. In my reply, I asked the Trustee to consider fine-tuning the letter to incorporate a clause iv) and I’ll let the members who signed the EGM form to decide whether they still want an EGM if the Worrisome Precedent is removed. The clause that was proposed by me was incorporated in the Trustee’s letter and I repeat it here: “iv) “ in the event any ONE of the LC members not agreeable to the justifications of AMF increase of more than 5% then the proposed AMF increase of above 5% shall be brought up at the AGM of members for members consent.”

    vi) Let me say this, I believe Universal Trustee change their attitude and agreed to include the clause iv) I proposed is because the LC 2009/10 and
    the members at the last AGM sent a clear message to the Trustee that a Trustee cannot unilaterally approve the Annual Maintenance Fee (AMF) increase of more than 5% and without proper justification.
    Because LC 2009/10 was united and the members at the last AGM were united to send a clear message, we gain our battle objective without going to battle. In my opinion, clause iv) in the Trustee letter will protect the
    interest of members concerning the AMF increase of more than 5%.

    For now, isn’t it better we focus on BVC regarding the more important topic of Loss of Holiday resorts and resorts previously no surcharge and now surcharge at the AGM? Latest,from this Forum,BVC members who now have to stay at the Berjaya Redang Hill resort are not allowed to go to the Berjaya Redang Beach resort and even eat there? Please raise your opinion at the coming AGM (24.9.2011) and stand up to support the other members’opinion if you are agreeable to make it known to BVC.

    Regards,

    Sien

    annchoo
    New Contributor
    New Contributor

    Posts : 4
    Join date : 2009-08-15
    Location : Kuala Lumpur

    Should there be an EGM?

    Post  annchoo on Thu Sep 08, 2011 11:24 pm

    We need to know how BVC utilize the maintenance fees collected for members’ benefits. Up till now, there are still so many complaints from members about the run-down deplorable room conditions of Redang, Georgetown, Meranti, PD, Camerons etc.

    We hope BVC will be honest with the members.

    kinrarateoh
    New Contributor
    New Contributor

    Posts : 2
    Join date : 2010-09-21

    Re: Should there be an EGM in view of Trustee letter dated 8 June 2011

    Post  kinrarateoh on Tue Sep 13, 2011 10:19 pm

    Agreed with Mr. Sien. We should be concentrating on the issue of loss of resorts and benefits. For every resort lost, there should be a replacement resort of equal quality. This issue has been brought up during the last AGM but there has been no improvement at all. In fact, it has worsened as we are still losing resorts.

    They keep raising the annual maintenance fee even while the number of resorts keep decreasing and the quality of the resorts keep declining. How are the maintenance fees being utilized in reality?

    BVC used to be a "prestigious" club which one is proud to be a member of. Sadly, not so nowadays. The quality of the vacation club is on a slide going downhill all the way.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Should there be an EGM in view of Trustee letter dated 8 June 2011

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Oct 24, 2017 1:53 am