停車場改用八達通系統問卷 2014 Resident Survey of Change to Octopus Parking System at Hampton Place Car Park

上星期5看見在大堂放了一個關於停車場改用八達通系統問卷收集箱,請大家在9月5日前提交問卷,但是管理公司沒有在當眼的地方作任何解釋,後來跟其他住戶交談,才知道管理公司張問卷放進了信箱。由於本人沒有收到,今天才找管理公司的職員查詢,他們說由於我沒有車位,所以沒有收到,本人立刻要求他們把一個副本給我。問卷連結

當我再跟其他有車位的住戶聯絡後,發現最少有10多個住戶都沒有收到由管理處發出的問卷。

對停車場更改系統,我們有些議見。

首先,問題是管理公司由落成至今都是由他們管理,停車場的收支理應由使用者自付的形式負責,絕對無理由將停車場的赤字轉駕到住宅去支付。停車場出現赤字是因為管理公司在管理停車場時”使大左”和在預算中一直計錯數。

我們絕對支持當大廈的財政在一個健康和有盈餘的情況下為屋苑的設施更新,現在是不是應先從增加管理費和節約去平衡赤字再談更改系統的問題?加上停車場的的主要收入為大廈的管理費,時租收入的比重十分之低。花大量的金錢去改善時租車位的收費的確有點本末倒置。

管理公司所提出能在晚間節約人手,減去一名夜班保安員,但是同時間又需要在“物業整體賬戶上多增聘一名保安,負責管理屋苑入口的車輛管制,其支出將由商場、住宅及停車場共同攤分,而不須停車場獨立支付”。新增加的這個保安不用放假嗎?沒有花紅嗎?能否有校減省人手和收支平衡,我對管理公司所提出的一點信心都沒有。管理公司的問卷上沒有詳細交代,只偏向支持更改系統和增加屋苑支出。我們看不到人手和支出會有任何減省,只不過將停車場的赤字由大家住戶攤分。

其他的問題包括:

  • 往後八達通系統的管理費為多少?上年度的停車場系統和今年度的收費增加了 $20000,如系統出現問題,維修費用又要多少?需要調動特別人手嗎?
  • 如果安裝了系統後,停車場的財政未見有任何改善,這又由誰去負責?
  • 在減省晚班保安後,當停車場出現任何其他的特發事件,我們有足夠的保安去應付嗎?
  • 現在系統的投資跟時租收入的百份比?
  • 還有問卷中的問題應該分開發問,沒理由將2條問題合而為一,令問題非常含糊,如果我不贊成減人手,但是又同意安裝八達通;同樣地,如果贊成減人手,但不贊成安裝八達通,管理公司如何歸立這些意見?
  • 還有停車場的收入都是用在停車場上,管理公司理應找停車場用戶張赤字收回。
  • 管理公司還有其他方案給業戶考慮嗎?

我建議先跟停車場的用戶徵收一次過的費用去平衡現在停車場的赤字。同時增加時租車位和其收費方法。包括由每小時計算改為最小每3小時收費,第4小時後改回每小時收費。

再在這個前提下增加停車場部份的管理費,同時預留大約10%的管理費去支付可能會發生的停車場的更新工程。當財政上的盈餘有一年的支出,到時大家可以再考慮任何的更新工程。

我絕對不贊成在赤字中增加本年度沒有預算的額外支出。

我同意可以在不增加支出的前提下,就晚間減少一個保安員作測試。但是如何管理晚間時租車輛出入,需要再找方案。

如果你也應同我們的看法,歡迎將我們的回覆一起交回。下載我們的回覆

We have noticed a survey box was placed at the count of the building reception around last Friday but there was no notice posted. Upon inquiring with other residents, a survey form (click to download)  from the management has been distributed to the residents mailbox. However, we didn’t receive anything over the weekend, so we have approached the management staff today and requested a copy of it.

If you take a look at the Survey form it wasn’t really a survey, and we have a few comments regarding the proposing plan.

According to the survey, the plan is to eliminate two Security Headcount BUT adding One during the day time “Service center will then employ security staff responsible for the vehicle control at the main estate gate. The said cost incurred will be jointly shared by Commercial, Residential and Carpark Management Operating Account”.  So the proposed salary saving is not at $25000 a month as proposed by the management, and they are only reassigning the cost to shared between other Operating Account instead of just under the Parking Account, we need the management to clarify on this.

Also, we support any building improvement works, but not when the building finance is in the deficit. As management fee is the car park major income, the first priority should be adjusting the management fees, while controlling the expenditures before consider installing new system to further mess up the our money.

Here are some questions we have after we read the survey:

  • What is the ongoing management fee of using Octopus system? The system we are currently using, the service company is charging  $20,000 more than the previous year.
  • What is the ratio of investment in the Octopus System compare with the hourly rate parking income?
  • What if the building financial deficit does not get improvement after the installation of the Octopus System, who is responsible?
  • The survey questions on the questionnaire should be separated.  By combining the two like “reduce security guards and install Octopus Parking System” make it an invalid question.  What if, we support Octopus Parking System but do not want to reduce security Guards?

At last, we do not believe the management has any ability to turn around the building financial deficit without increasing management fee; and as management fee is the primarily income of the car park, it is a must to increase management fee, then, why the management are asking the second question?