These houses

0

Waiting for the wrong moment to topple over … Aduuh!

I AGREE with Kuching North Datuk Bandar Datuk Abang Abdul Wahab Abang Julai that abandoned houses in areas under the jurisdiction of Kuching North City Commission (DBKU), indeed everywhere, are the potential haunts of rats, mosquitoes, or snakes – and become a source of health hazards. Add to that the drug addicts and thieves.

The problem posed by abandoned houses is nothing new in Kuching including in its suburbs. Someone must find the root cause or causes why these buildings have been neglected.

I do not understand why there seems to be little that local councils can do about the problem. Surely, there must be some regulations or bylaws by which all local authorities in the state can use and apply in specific cases. If there is no bylaw, then make one. That’s what the councils are created for – to make rules by which to handle problems, including health hazards, in each council’s area.

Remember that the responsibility given to every local authority is to “assist generally the officers of the federal and state governments in the execution of their duties and in particular, in the preservation of the peace, the prevention and punishment of crime, the detection and arrest of offenders and the prevention and suppression of disease; take such steps as may be necessary and expedient generally to effect improvements in the living conditions of the people under its control” – Section 33, Local Authority Ordinance, 1948.

I think this regulation still stands as long as rats, mosquitoes, and other pests are still around.

Those are potential carriers of disease. Each council is expected to help with the prevention and suppression of disease. They thrive in the bush around any house long abandoned and neglected. The grass and creepers eventually take over the whole house too.

And if these houses are within the area under the jurisdiction of a local authority, the problem is that of the council, and it is for that council to solve, according to the relevant bylaws.

According to the Datuk Bandar, DBKU has the power and authority to clear the compounds of abandoned houses and charge the cost of clearing of the compounds to the owner when the owner is nowhere to be found. The council cannot afford to do the job free. But who will pay for the cost of the grass cutting then, he asked.

DBKU has been trying to find out who the owners of those houses are or thereabouts so that the council can send bills on rates or cesses but their efforts have not been very successful.

There must be a number of reasons why a house is abandoned – the owner has gone away to  another country to work and it has not been possible for him or her to come home to cut the grass, or is not coming back and awaiting someone to buy it, or is dead and the process of probate is too long to complete. The property may have been mortgaged to a bank, which has yet to be redeemed. There can be many other reasons.

However, in the case of a property under mortgage to a bank, it is the bank which is the equitable owner of the abandoned house until the mortgage is redeemed. There must be a caveat lodged by the bank against dealing with the property.

I think the bank should pay for the cost of grass cutting, which expenditure may be added to the final payment of the mortgage if and when it is paid off. Meantime, this is the bank’s problem and shouldn’t worry the council.

The bank has also to pay for any assessment or cess. It is the council’s job to collect this important source of its revenue.

If the owner of the house cannot be traced, then a check with the Land and Survey Department may be made to find out the name of the registered proprietor(s). That is, if the house is built on land under title. I’m assuming that most properties in Kuching South or North are or should be on land with a registered title or document such as the TOL.

I think every city council or municipality has all the power and the authority to deal with the problem that we are talking about. Who am I to remind them what to do? Just that this problem seems to have defied solution. As a rate payer, I am concerned with the health hazards posed by wildlife living and thriving in the compound of my neighbour’s house.

The longer the delay, the worse the problem will become. The grass grows taller by the day and the rats and cousin rodents, and mosquitoes multiply manifold in the meantime.

You can’t wait for the owner to turn up tomorrow or next week. Act as soon as possible.

I think the local authorities in Sarawak have the necessary power and authority to do something about solving the problem of abandoned houses.

I’m not familiar with the bylaws of a municipal council or city council. If you look at the old Local Authority Ordinance, 1948, there is a provision (Section 37, I think), that empowers a local authority,

“37. If, in the opinion of a local authority, any building or part thereof, or anything affixed thereto –

(a) is in a ruinous state, or likely to fall, or is in any way dangerous to the occupiers thereof, or to a neighbouring building, or to the public;

(b) is unfit for human habitation by reason of defective structure, ventilation or sanitation;

(c) is in such a state as to be a nuisance or injurious or dangerous to health; or

(d) unduly obstructs light or air from other building, the local authority may, by notice in writing, order, within a time to be stated in the notice, the owner or occupier of such building to demolish and remove such building, or such part thereof as may be specified in the notice.”

Isn’t this enough authority for a council to act on? I think so.

That building along the Batu Kawah Road has been standing there since ‘time immemorial’. I’m exaggerating, of course, but not intending it to be fake news. The first time I saw it was 20 years ago. It is still there. See the photo taken by me on Wednesday.

It is dangerous to man and vehicle. One fine day, it might just topple on somebody or some vehicle … Aduuh!

Pull it down lah!

Comments can reach the writer via [email protected].