1. There is a number of surprising events from the post Discovery. Does it not indicates the neighbour is carrying out works in the flat and officers are involved?
2. The actions of Head,Pasir Ris HDB Branch Office(HBO) and the Officer-in-Charge(OIC) are questionable.
3. Chairman,Residents Committee(Chairman), whose term of office for two years ended 31 Mar 09 shown on the noticeboard, is still the Chairman who spoke to the owner on 6 Dec 09. He could not rely on a new Chairman and members of his committee to check on noise in his flat. It will be possible when there is no one to inform the neighbour about their visits.
4. The owner knows of instances where HBO, Community Centre members, and people in the flat across the neighbour who have a view of the owner's flat are involved with the neighbour.
5. After the owner wrote to the President, Ministers, the Police, and on his blog on 1 Feb 10, HDB Branch Office wrote there was no evidence of undue noise from interviews with several neighbours and no noise recording device as claimed. A letter from Neighbourhood Police post-dated 11 Mar 10 stated they were unable to find evidence of alleged noise or criminal offence. A meeting with officers from the Branch Office, Community Development and Neighbourhood Police at the owner's flat on 12 Mar 10 was the same - no noise heard by the neighbours, no recording device, gave the name of the person in the flat across the neighbour, and offered mediation. It seemed like a position to take after the facts.
6. The owner had wrote noise only affected his flat in his first post, and the flat across the neighbour was occupied after he wrote his first letter to the Meet-the-People Session. The bcc would indicates the flat was used to keep watch over the neighbour.
7. In his posts the owner stated there were people from the inside who assisted him. A list could includes the followings:
a) Within a week after he wrote a letter to HBO on 10 Mar 99 (another person at the time) the occupier shifted out and a Techical Officer visited to inform him of the eviction. It was significant he asked the owner what he did that let to the eviction because of other instances the owner had noted.
b) About four years later a man came to live for a short period in the flat across the neighbour and noise stopped. A lady who scolded him for staring gave him the full name of the man. The owner was actually keeping tag of persons living at the upper floor because of noise from the neighbour. It was quiet for four years before loud noise started for a number of days on Jun 07 and noise has continues since.
c) Someone checked out the maid in his first letter to HDB Branch Office on 12 Aug 07. Noise stopped at the same time a poster on domestic help was placed on the noticeboard. The maid was not seen again for six months afterwards.
d) A 15 seconds TV broadcast on perceived injustice that he could write to after HBO wrote his first letter to offer mediation or the court as a solution. His letter followed the owner's letter to a MP about the maid, force-entry and eviction pertaining to the neighbour.
e) A bcc was sent to him. The bcc was from HBO to Chairman asking him to give a talk to the owner. The bcc indicated two other facts -- the flat used to monitor the neighbour and a noise recording device.
f) Town Council wrote to him he will hear from HDB soon. The interviewer and Mr Teo Chee Hean asked him during the next session whether someone came to see him. The officer by not coming indirectly indicated something else was going on.
g) A blogsite published his complaint. It was a help. His subsequent meeting with the volunteers and correspondences indicated this was limited. He had earlier wrote to another site and a meeting was arranged, but they did not come. Another site asked the owner to keep him informed, but when he asked him to let his readers know about the post Discovery he replied he does not quite understand the content of the blog.
h) He thinks someone asked the MP to pass a message to HBO during his last Meet-the-People Session. It was his ninth session when the MP said he will meet HBO the next day and noise was reduced.
8. Three MPs replied, one through an intermediary, after the owner posted Discovery on 4 Mar 10. HBO in turn replied to the owner on 29 Mar 10 and cc to two MPs but not the third, as it could be too obvious. The third MP is familiar with the case having met the owner four times and during the last meeting said he would meet HBO. The MP had replied he asked the Branch Office to look into his complaint which did not made sense. But it does because HBO would have to read about himself in the complaint, and all letters to HDB ended up in the Branch Office anyway. HBO's reply was officers had visited the owner as Item 5 above, added the owner was not keen on mediation, and since he had exhausted all forms of assistance the owner may have to engage his own private solicitors.
9. It may be procedure to refer the case to HDB Branch Office, but with the same officers noise from works by the neighbour will continues uninterrupted. The neighbour is kept informed and had signalled to the owner they had the upper hand. He had talked to the HBO one time, the Chairman two times, the Community Center member who lives at his block three times, the OIC who called over the telephone and visited many times, and saw the person who lives in the flat across the neighbour many times since '08. They had shielded the neighbour and in some instances dropped the pretence.
10. The surprise events show there is concerted effort and HBO has substantial influence. Between HBO and the people in the flat across the neighbour no inspection could be carried out without alerting the neighbour. And for writing about them they have reason to want the the owner to leave his flat. Whether it was the letter asking the owner to seek assistance elsewhere in Item 7d) or the bcc he sent to the Chairman, HBO wanted to divert attention away from the neighbour.
11. On 31 Mar 10 the Business Times reported "Five-pronged push to make Public Service fit for the future". DPM Teo Chee Hean was speaking at the Administrative Service Dinner and Promotion Ceremony. "Public officers will also be encouraged to keep to the logical rather than ideological path and stay pragmatic in making policies - an approach that has produced many innovative solutions in the past, Mr Teo noted." seemed relevant to the case.
12. There was very little noise the afternoon of 30 Mar 10 and on 31 Mar 10 the day after the speech. After that noise at lower level is still through the day every day of the week.
13. Noise had been loud to intimidate and low to keep him off guard. At present the knock, ramble and thump seemed to be muffled but would worsen as had happened many times before since the situation has not changed. Knock in the early morning(4.00am - 7.00am), noise in the morning and longer period of noise in the afternoon. These may be verified for presence of machine-tool and material at the neighbour's flat or noise at the owner's flat taking note they are kept informed. He had tried to held on to his flat by meeting his MPs and later writing in his blog for two years and nine months now.
14. This is an appeal. The owner hopes HDB could take up the case by Item 10.
