PUTRAJAYA
I first visited Putrajaya in 2006 and until today i am still till amazed at the stupendous view of Putrajaya. Never would I thought Malaysia can display in the shortest time, a modern and such a well-planned township bearing the best architectural design. I am proud to see the prominent government buildings and the many futuristic-designs and world best bridges. I am a proud Malaysian. It took almost a year of courting Putrajaya and much deliberation on its business potential before I decided to transfer my 12 year old Proton Edar dealership from the fastest growing township in Puchong to Precint 15, Putrajaya.
I was inspired by YABhg Tun Mahathir whom envisioned Putrajaya similar to major cities in Paris and America filled with major corporations with impressive office buildings, famous fine-dining restaurants, fast food outlets, automotive car showrooms, cafes, bistros as well as theatres with crowded people strolling along the city.
Putrajaya is dead much to YABhg Tun Mahathir’s dismay and disappointment as clearly written in his chedet blog. Putrajaya will continue to be dead with the PERBADANAN PUTRAJAYA (PPj) business-unfriendly approach. Putrajaya is dead because of PPj unnecessary red-tapes that is neither attracting new businesses nor supporting existing business community.
1. On 20 January 2009, I personally met Puan Zuraini Abdul Halim from PPj to submit an application to renovate the new Proton Edar showroom. The Interior Design for the renovation was produced and printed by Proton engineering department according to Proton new Corporate Identity and does not require any structural or building modification. The original copy that was duly signed and stamped by Proton Edar authorised General Manager and Managers was submitted to Puan Zuraini.
2. Puan Zuraini rejected the application because the drawing produced by Proton Engineering department did not comply to the size and shape required by PPj. I appealed for re-consideration as any delay will result in monetary losses especially during this economic crisis. Nonetheless, the non-compliance (size of drawing) was only a minor issue. The interior design for the renovation was already implemented throughout Malaysia in more than 300 showrooms.
3. Puan Zuraini had to refer to a ‘higher authority’ and on 22 January 2009, the higher authority rejected my application. I appealed to meet the ‘higher authority’ but was told his schedule was full and even if I meet, I will receive similar remark. PPj requirement MUST be complied and PPj will NOT ACCEPT nor entertained any submission unless the requirement is fully complied with.
4. Puan Zuraini then advice me to appoint PPj staff whom are well-versed with PPj requirement and compliance for RM2,500 to avoid any ‘delay’. After much deliberation and to avoid any unforeseen ‘delay’, we appointed En Hairuddin Haji Daud for all preparation, liaison with PPj and Bomba until approval. The approval was promised within 1 month.
5. 3 datelines were given by En Hairuddin without success. Various attempts were made to contact Puan Zuraini and En Omairi Hashim to follow up on the application but without success too.
6. On 23 March 2009, upon our inquiry since we have not heard from PPj, we were told our application was officially received on 16 March 2009, although it has been more than two months since the actual submission and liaison via En Hairuddin. PPj approved our application for renovation 3 days later on 26 March 2009 and we began our renovation.
7. We wasted 4 months of rental payment and thousands of Ringgit in lost of business awaiting PPj approval for renovation.
8. On 9 April 2009, we applied our business license online via the E-Lesen application from PPj website(Appendix A1 , A2 & A3)
9. On 13 April 2009, we spoke to En Rozaimi b Ramli, PPj Assistant Director for an update on our Business License application that was applied online. En Rozaimi informed us that there is no record of our application. Flabbergasted, we applied again on 13 April 2009 (Appendix B1 , B2 ) the Business License via the E-Lesen application through the PPj website and spoke again with En Rozaimi. Again, we were informed there is no record of our application online.
10. 13 April 2009 (same day), after 2 failed Business License online application attempt, we submitted BY FAX (Appendix C1 , C2 , the application for Business License with a printed copy of both the online application dated 9 April 2009 and 13 April 2009 (Appendix A1 , A2 , A3 & B1 , B2 The submission was verbally acknowledged by En Rozaimi Ramli on the same day (Appendix C1 & C2 ). We officially wrote to Yg Bhg Tan Sri President (on 13 April 2009) to informed our thus far predicaments with PPj as well as our licensing application (Attachment 1a , 1b & 1c).
11. On 16 April 2009, we submitted BY HAND the supporting documents for the Business License and PPj acknowledged and signed receipt (Appendix D1 & D2 ).
12. On 23 April 2009, we submitted additional supporting documents as informed and required by PPj (Appendix E).
13. Although all supporting documents have been forwarded and submitted as perAppendix D1,D2 & E above, on 27 April 2009, Puan Nor Hashimah Bt Mohd Hashim from PPj officially wrote to defer the approval for our Business License (Appendix F1 & F2 ) for NOT SUBMITTING any supporting documents (baseless??) and PROTEST from the Public.
14. Since our showroom was open in Putrajaya, we have received an overwhelming and encouraging response from the neighbouring business community as well as Putrajaya residents. We seek clarification from PPj via our letter dated 13 May 2009 (Appendix G1 , G2 ) for the alleged PROTEST from the public.
15. On 7 May 2009, Puan Nor Azimah Bt Jamaluddin rejected our Signage License application (Appendix H1 , H2 ) and instructed my company to remove the installed signage within 14 days of her letter under Paragraph 5, Undang-Undang Kecil Iklan (Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya).
16. The signage board was designed, produced and supplied by PROTON EDAR that bears a standard size, design and material used at all 400 Proton Edar and EON Showrooms throughout Malaysia. My Proton dealership only borne the cost of installation amounting to an exorbitant RM12,000 and will have to incur an additional RM12,000 to remove the signage as instructed by PPj.
18. Proton is a national project, a government linked company (GLC) and a Proton dealership is part of Malaysia Second Industrial Masterplan to developed and nurture entreprenuer but does not received the slightest support in coordination nor any assistant from PPj except for strict compliance, various alleged non-compliance to regulation and alleged 'Protest'.
PPj lackadaisical business friendly approach was contrary to their President whom was the pillar behind the spirit of 'Malaysia Incorporated'. The spirit of 1Malaysia under the stewardship of our PM YAB Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak too was neither felt, understood nor implemented at PPj.
.
I first visited Putrajaya in 2006 and until today i am still till amazed at the stupendous view of Putrajaya. Never would I thought Malaysia can display in the shortest time, a modern and such a well-planned township bearing the best architectural design. I am proud to see the prominent government buildings and the many futuristic-designs and world best bridges. I am a proud Malaysian. It took almost a year of courting Putrajaya and much deliberation on its business potential before I decided to transfer my 12 year old Proton Edar dealership from the fastest growing township in Puchong to Precint 15, Putrajaya.
I was inspired by YABhg Tun Mahathir whom envisioned Putrajaya similar to major cities in Paris and America filled with major corporations with impressive office buildings, famous fine-dining restaurants, fast food outlets, automotive car showrooms, cafes, bistros as well as theatres with crowded people strolling along the city.
Putrajaya is dead much to YABhg Tun Mahathir’s dismay and disappointment as clearly written in his chedet blog. Putrajaya will continue to be dead with the PERBADANAN PUTRAJAYA (PPj) business-unfriendly approach. Putrajaya is dead because of PPj unnecessary red-tapes that is neither attracting new businesses nor supporting existing business community.
1. On 20 January 2009, I personally met Puan Zuraini Abdul Halim from PPj to submit an application to renovate the new Proton Edar showroom. The Interior Design for the renovation was produced and printed by Proton engineering department according to Proton new Corporate Identity and does not require any structural or building modification. The original copy that was duly signed and stamped by Proton Edar authorised General Manager and Managers was submitted to Puan Zuraini.
2. Puan Zuraini rejected the application because the drawing produced by Proton Engineering department did not comply to the size and shape required by PPj. I appealed for re-consideration as any delay will result in monetary losses especially during this economic crisis. Nonetheless, the non-compliance (size of drawing) was only a minor issue. The interior design for the renovation was already implemented throughout Malaysia in more than 300 showrooms.
3. Puan Zuraini had to refer to a ‘higher authority’ and on 22 January 2009, the higher authority rejected my application. I appealed to meet the ‘higher authority’ but was told his schedule was full and even if I meet, I will receive similar remark. PPj requirement MUST be complied and PPj will NOT ACCEPT nor entertained any submission unless the requirement is fully complied with.
4. Puan Zuraini then advice me to appoint PPj staff whom are well-versed with PPj requirement and compliance for RM2,500 to avoid any ‘delay’. After much deliberation and to avoid any unforeseen ‘delay’, we appointed En Hairuddin Haji Daud for all preparation, liaison with PPj and Bomba until approval. The approval was promised within 1 month.
5. 3 datelines were given by En Hairuddin without success. Various attempts were made to contact Puan Zuraini and En Omairi Hashim to follow up on the application but without success too.
6. On 23 March 2009, upon our inquiry since we have not heard from PPj, we were told our application was officially received on 16 March 2009, although it has been more than two months since the actual submission and liaison via En Hairuddin. PPj approved our application for renovation 3 days later on 26 March 2009 and we began our renovation.
7. We wasted 4 months of rental payment and thousands of Ringgit in lost of business awaiting PPj approval for renovation.
8. On 9 April 2009, we applied our business license online via the E-Lesen application from PPj website(Appendix A1 , A2 & A3)
9. On 13 April 2009, we spoke to En Rozaimi b Ramli, PPj Assistant Director for an update on our Business License application that was applied online. En Rozaimi informed us that there is no record of our application. Flabbergasted, we applied again on 13 April 2009 (Appendix B1 , B2 ) the Business License via the E-Lesen application through the PPj website and spoke again with En Rozaimi. Again, we were informed there is no record of our application online.
10. 13 April 2009 (same day), after 2 failed Business License online application attempt, we submitted BY FAX (Appendix C1 , C2 , the application for Business License with a printed copy of both the online application dated 9 April 2009 and 13 April 2009 (Appendix A1 , A2 , A3 & B1 , B2 The submission was verbally acknowledged by En Rozaimi Ramli on the same day (Appendix C1 & C2 ). We officially wrote to Yg Bhg Tan Sri President (on 13 April 2009) to informed our thus far predicaments with PPj as well as our licensing application (Attachment 1a , 1b & 1c).
11. On 16 April 2009, we submitted BY HAND the supporting documents for the Business License and PPj acknowledged and signed receipt (Appendix D1 & D2 ).
12. On 23 April 2009, we submitted additional supporting documents as informed and required by PPj (Appendix E).
13. Although all supporting documents have been forwarded and submitted as perAppendix D1,D2 & E above, on 27 April 2009, Puan Nor Hashimah Bt Mohd Hashim from PPj officially wrote to defer the approval for our Business License (Appendix F1 & F2 ) for NOT SUBMITTING any supporting documents (baseless??) and PROTEST from the Public.
14. Since our showroom was open in Putrajaya, we have received an overwhelming and encouraging response from the neighbouring business community as well as Putrajaya residents. We seek clarification from PPj via our letter dated 13 May 2009 (Appendix G1 , G2 ) for the alleged PROTEST from the public.
15. On 7 May 2009, Puan Nor Azimah Bt Jamaluddin rejected our Signage License application (Appendix H1 , H2 ) and instructed my company to remove the installed signage within 14 days of her letter under Paragraph 5, Undang-Undang Kecil Iklan (Wilayah Persekutuan Putrajaya).
16. The signage board was designed, produced and supplied by PROTON EDAR that bears a standard size, design and material used at all 400 Proton Edar and EON Showrooms throughout Malaysia. My Proton dealership only borne the cost of installation amounting to an exorbitant RM12,000 and will have to incur an additional RM12,000 to remove the signage as instructed by PPj.
18. Proton is a national project, a government linked company (GLC) and a Proton dealership is part of Malaysia Second Industrial Masterplan to developed and nurture entreprenuer but does not received the slightest support in coordination nor any assistant from PPj except for strict compliance, various alleged non-compliance to regulation and alleged 'Protest'.
PPj lackadaisical business friendly approach was contrary to their President whom was the pillar behind the spirit of 'Malaysia Incorporated'. The spirit of 1Malaysia under the stewardship of our PM YAB Dato Seri Najib Tun Razak too was neither felt, understood nor implemented at PPj.
.
