Re: Minutes of Meeting Held between Vatika RWA and Sovereign Residents on 15th Dec 2024

[nitin mehta]

Dear Praveen and the Entire VCAOA Team,

Thank you for sharing the Minutes of the Meeting (MOM) mutually agreed upon between VCAOA members and the Sovereign representatives present that day. I am forwarding this email chain and the MOM to the larger Sovereign resident community, who have been copied in this email.

I would like to reiterate a few key points that reflect the clear majority and strong request by Sovereign residents:

Key Points from Sovereign Residents:

1.                   Retaining G4S Services:

a.       Background: Sovereign residents strongly oppose the removal of G4S due to its decade-long service and the exclusive amenities for which the apartments were purchased, including Club, HVAC, Lobby, and Security.

b.      Performance: G4S has consistently provided exceptional service, adapting to VOC inputs and implementing SOPs effectively.

c.       Decision-Making Process: The decision to consider replacing G4S was made without consulting Sovereign residents, which is neither appreciated nor acceptable.

 

The decision was taken by RWA/VCAOA without informing these minority set of residents present in the complex, which is not appreciated and against the norms.

              2.           No Reduction in Guard Strength:

The current arrangement of guards for Sovereign towers must be maintained without any reductions to ensure adequate safety.

              3.           Basement Security:

The basement area must remain manned at all times. Leaving it unmanned poses a significant security and safety threat to all residents.

              4.           Tower Door Closure Timings:

The proposal to close the tower side door from 8 PM to 8 AM is not acceptable. This creates a safety and security risk for residents, particularly children and senior citizens. Logically, it is equivalent to restricting entry to one’s own home, which is impractical and not lawful.

              5.           Guard Rotation Policy:

Guards in these towers should rotate only within the four Sovereign towers, as has been the practice for years and because of the built nature of these towers. This ensures consistency and security, given the distinct nature of these towers compared to others in Vatika City. Any deviation from this norm would jeopardize resident safety especiuually kids and senior citizens which is not acceptable.

              6.           Service Standards:

There should be no degradation of services in Sovereign or infact across entire Vatika City. Instead, efforts must focus on continuous improvement and upgradation, adopting best practices wherever applicable.

              7.           Trusted Guards:

Guards who have served Sovereign towers for years must not be replaced from these towers. Over time, residents have developed trust in them, which is critical for maintaining a secure environment.

 

Acknowledgment and Future Expectations:

I appreciate VCAOA’s acceptance and circulation of the MOM as per the discussion. One of the steps highlighted in the MOM has already been implemented( Sov. Committee) , and I am sure that  this sets a precedent where no decisions impacting Sovereign residents will be made without the prior knowledge and approval of the Sovereign Committee .All Sov. residents need to be fully informed. Moreover As you rightly agreed , Sovereign Towers has exclusive rights like Sovereign Club ,Lobbies ,HVAC based on the premium which owners paid here ( and exclusive security too which has been consistent  and without break since the inception/ more than a decade). I would also like to thank VCAOA for having a meeting with the G4S team yesterday and we sincerely hope that you are able to reach an agreement with them for entire Vatika City, as they are a world class company which provides excellent services. 

Thank you for the clear and focused meeting and we look forward to collaborative steps that prioritize the welfare, safety, security and satisfaction of all residents not only in Sovereign but throughout Vatika City.

Best regards,

Nitin Mehta

Sovereign 3

Vatika City

9958275566

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Praveen Arora <pravee...@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Dec 27, 2024 at 11:08 PM
Subject: Minutes of Meeting Held between Vatika RWA and Sovereign Residents on 15th Dec 2024
To: nitin mehta <nitin1...@gmail.com>
Cc: VCAOA <vcaoa....@gmail.com>, <shvetapa...@gmail.com>, Pawan Kumar Singh <Pawan...@gmail.com>, <sunilbak...@gmail.com>, Sonali Panchal <sonali...@gmail.com>

Dear Nitin,

Please find below the MOM related to the above meeting

Regards

Praveen Arora

[nitin mehta]

Hi Sov. Family,

As requested by many, re-forwarding the mail for those who have not received it yet.

FYI - There was a meeting yesterday between G4S and VCAOA teams.

BR ,

Nitin Mehta

+91-9958275566

[nitin mehta]

 Dear VCAOA Team,

 This email pertains to the following:

1.       The meeting held on 14th January 2025 between VCAOA (Vatika RWA) and the Sovereign Tower Committee.

2.       Circular No: 22-12-2024/#12-11/VATIKA CITY SOVEREIGN TOWER COMMITTEE/VATIKA CITY SEC-49 issued by VCAOA.

3.       Discussions between VCAOA and the Sovereign Committee on the whats app  group “Sovereign Committee.”

4.       The Sovereign Committee’s disagreement with the proposed changes by VCAOA due to lack of data validation for CAM charges.

 

Considering the above points, we, the Sovereign Committee, had requested VCAOA to provide all relevant data and analysis to establish the proposed CAM charges for Sovereign Towers before implementation. Unfortunately, this data has not been shared yet.

 It is important to note that CAM charges for Sovereign Towers (Sovereign 1 to Sovereign 4) have historically been calculated using a consistent mechanism that has been in place since the inception of these towers. This mechanism was initially implemented by the builder, Vatika, and subsequently followed by all previous RWAs. A sudden change without proper justification, transparency and agreement is unfair, unjustified and illegal.

To ensure clarity and consensus, we urge the following actions ( not only for Sovereign but all towers in Vatika):

1.    Data Sharing: VCAOA must share the detailed analysis and justification for the proposed CAM changes with the Sovereign Committee,other committees  and residents.

2.    3rd Party Audit: A proper third-party audit should be conducted and discussed with residents. This will ensure transparency and validation of the CAM charges.

3.     Validation Exercise: A detailed and inclusive exercise involving Sovereign and other towers and Vatika residents should be conducted. This will ensure consistent CAM charges across all towers in Vatika, based on relevant parameters and accurate data.

4.     A discussion and agreement with the committee formed for each of the towers and open discussion with residents ,once an agreement is made amongst the Committee group/s.   

The core purpose of forming a committee is to validate the proposals put forward by the RWA. If validated, these points can then aid discussions between the RWA and residents. However, in this case, the vast majority of the Sovereign Committee/Other Committee does not agree with the proposed changes due to the lack of justification, transparency, and analysis , its responsibility of RWA to share proper details both with residents and the Committee members.

We kindly request VCAOA to take the necessary steps to address the above concerns, as well as the points raised by Sovereign committee members during WhatsApp discussions on the concerned group.

Let us work together to make Vatika City the best place to live, irrespective of the tower we belong to. After all, we are all "very proud Vatikans first".

Warm regards,

On behalf of

Sovereign Committee

18/01/2025

[nitin mehta]

Dear VCAOA Team,

Further to trailing mail  and regarding Circular No. 24-01-2025/#01-7/REVISED SOVEREIGN CLUB & HVAC CHARGES/VATIKA CITY SEC-49, I find the said circular as an attempt to mislead the Vatika residents and lacks proper data/analysis for all individual Vatika City towers while targeting only Sovereign. Implementing such unproven measures is unethical, illegal, and unjustified.

I strongly oppose this decision, both personally and as a member of the Sovereign Committee.

Best regards,
Nitin Mehta

 

[Arun Sharma]

Dear VCAOA team

I absolutely agree with Nitin’s viewpoint that your communication on mygate regarding Sovereign HVAC and Club’s revised charges is misleading. Committee members continuously expressed their disagreement and also sent an email on 18th January as well as communicated  on committee WhatsApp group with RWA. 

I strongly oppose this unilateral approach leading to illegal and unethical decisions taken by VCAOA, targeting Sovereign residents. 

Regards

Arun Sharma

[Sanjiv Jain]

I 100% agree with Nitin and you can't go ahead like this just only on your assumptions. If you really want to play like this then bring all the details of all the buildings that how any lifts in each tower and covered area in each tower and this implies to all the items like motor, lights everything. Bring everything on books and then reach to some conclusions.

This is completely unjustified and illegal.

Sanjiv Jain 

[Rahul Jain]

Dear VCAOA Team, 

 Further to trailing mail and regarding Circular No. 24-01-2025/#01-7/REVISED SOVEREIGN CLUB & HVAC CHARGES/VATIKA CITY SEC-49, I find the said circular as an attempt to mislead the Vatika residents and lacks proper data/analysis for all individual Vatika City towers while targeting only Sovereign. Implementing such unproven measures is unethical, illegal, and unjustified. 

I strongly oppose this decision, both personally and as a member of the Sovereign Committee. 

Best regards,

Rahul Jain 

Sent from Gmail Mobile

[Nikhil N Goyal]

Dear VCAOA Team,

As part of our Sovereign Committee member and Team, I fully agree with our Team and our Mr. Nitin Mehta, and second his below attached email sent to you today with ALL the points mentioned in the same.

Best regards,

Nikhil Goyal

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sovereign_Family" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sovereign_fami...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/CA%2B6z0bh_HF60mghdO8OUY2XMGSWv%2BSmLedczMi%3Dsr4_DO7bhvQ%40mail.gmail.com.

[Andleeb Jain]

Dear All,

The decisions being taken look very arbitrary and unilateral and it seems that no discussions with the authorised members of the sovereign committee have been incorporated 

For last 20 years the things have been so harmonious and transparent that we have not felt like targeted specifically.

There looks to be some motive behind all these decisions to target only Sovereign residents

When there is a sovereign committee why are they not being consulted 

Looks like a pure vendetta to me in absence of facts and Data

I feel this is totally illegal, illogical and Irrational 

Warm Regards

Andleeb Jain

---

From: Rahul Jain <jainra...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2025 2:53 PM
To: Sovereign Residents <sovereig...@googlegroups.com>; VCAOA Gurgaon <vcaoa....@gmail.com>; Praveen Arora <pravee...@gmail.com>; shvetapa...@gmail.com <shvetapa...@gmail.com>; Pawan Kumar Singh <Pawan...@gmail.com>
Cc: Sanjay Malhotra <Sanjayma...@gmail.com>; Sanjiv Jain <San...@saditya.com>; Andleeb Jain <jaina...@hotmail.com>; Ravi N Puri <ravi...@gmail.com>; Indra Puri <indra...@gmail.com>; Arun Sharma <arunsha...@gmail.com>; Ravi Arora <Ravi7...@gmail.com>; deeksha arora <deeksh...@gmail.com>; Ashok Kumar Sareen <ak.sar...@gmail.com>; Divya Kaushal C4-501 <divya...@gmail.com>; s...@delhivery.com <s...@delhivery.com>; goyaln...@gmail.com <goyaln...@gmail.com>; Vatsala Sharma <hiva...@gmail.com>; vikas malhotra <mevikas...@gmail.com>; Nirupama Neb <msn...@yahoo.com>; vim...@yahoo.com <vim...@yahoo.com>; Binita Mohanty C4-1502 <binita...@yahoo.com>; Neeraj&Shalini Sinha <neeraj...@yahoo.com>; Anand....@bmw-infinitycars.in <Anand....@bmw-infinitycars.in>; Geetika Sharma <geetika...@gmail.com>; may...@yahoo.com <may...@yahoo.com>; nitin mehta <nitin1...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Action Points of Meeting Held between VCAOA and Sovereign Committee on Tuesday 14th Jan 2025

 

[Seema Goyal]

Dear VCAOA Team,

As part of our Sovereign Committee member and Team, I fully agree with our Team and our Mr. Nitin Mehta, and second his below attached email sent to you today with ALL the points mentioned in the same.

Best regards,

Nikhil Goyal

[Vatsala Sharma]

The RWA Team,

Despite our repeated requests including, at the Open House, to conduct an impartial meeting with Sovereign residents so that we can understand the basis and workings, the RWA has unilaterally and UNETHICALLY imposed charges from 1st Jan 2025 without giving Sovereign residents an opportunity to understand and share their views.

Till the time you hold a meeting with Sovereign residents at the group level, you can not revise the rates and basis of working which has been the way since the past 12 years or more. This is UNDEMOCRATIC and UNETHICAL.

- Vatsala

[Ravi N Puri]

The RWA Team,

It's beyond reasonable understanding to arbitrarily / unilaterally change system, which has been in place for last 11-12 years and has proven itself. That too without even involving Sovereign team , which is going to face impact of the change.

I vehemently oppose the imposition of charges from 1st Jan. 2025, without calling open house with Sovereign Committee. 

Personally,  I have never experienced such imposition of rule without discussions with affected parties.

Ravi N Puri 

[vikas malhotra]

Dear Team RWA,

I am not sure what is the underlying purpose of forming a committee. In my opinion, it is about having two way communication and working towards mutual win. 

From what has transpired, it seems like your intent was to have a group of members to whom you just announce your decisions as a check in the box activity and assume that a decision  has been made.  

I feel that this could have been dealt in a far more inclusive manner. 

Not in agreement of this hike as a resident and committee member. 

Thanks & Regards

 

 

Vikas Malhotra

[BINITA MOHANTY]

Team RWA,

I am in total agreement with the replies you have received from various Sovereign residents regarding changes in CAM charges.
As Nitin has aptly said, please do the CAM audit of the entire township and give us facts and figures. We oppose arbitrary and ad hoc figures.
Please remember that you have to be inclusive of Sovereign. We have been subjected to sly innuendos in the past about Vatika subsidizing Sovereign, without an iota of evidence.
Therefore please provide the necessary information so that we can move forward.
Either you treat Sovereign as part of the RWA or let us maintain our own finances.
On the eve of Republic day it will be a shame to trample on our constitutional rights.
Do the right thing.

Regards
Binita Mohanty

Yahoo Mail: Search, organise, conquer

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/CAH%2BnBGx-JAwUSxvFsp%2B5Ax0CWiSEudayi-3U-KdLwpbuENk3Ag%40mail.gmail.com.

[divya soni]

Dear VCAOA Team, 

Further to trailing mail and regarding Circular No. 24-01-2025/#01-7/REVISED SOVEREIGN CLUB & HVAC CHARGES/VATIKA CITY SEC-49, I find the said circular lacking proper financial transparency and clarity. An immediate increase of Rs 1400 is a lot of money and requires proper consent from all the residents affected.

I strongly oppose this decision, both personally and as a member of the Sovereign Committee. 

Also I would request you to conduct an open house specific to Sovereign residents for sake of transparency before implementing any changes. 

Best regards,

Divya Kaushal

C4/501

On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 at 9:10 PM, amit jain <amit....@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear VCAOA Team,

Further to trailing mail  and regarding Circular No. 24-01-2025/#01-7/REVISED SOVEREIGN CLUB & HVAC CHARGES/VATIKA CITY SEC-49, I find the said circular as an attempt to mislead the Vatika residents and lacks proper data/analysis for all individual Vatika City towers while targeting only Sovereign. Implementing such unproven measures is unethical, illegal, and unjustified.

I strongly oppose this decision, both personally and as a member of the Sovereign and HVAC  Committee.

,

On behalf of

Sovereign and HVAC  Committee

Amit Jain 

C1-803

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: nitin mehta <nitin1...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Jan 2025 at 1:28 PM
Subject: Re: Action Points of Meeting Held between VCAOA and Sovereign Committee on Tuesday 14th Jan 2025

[s gupta]

Very unfortunate.  Sovereign is misrepresented, rather ill represented by this RWA. 

Even for ppl from Sovereign who voted for the current RWA. This RWA has let them down.

The urgency and high handedness with which Sovereign specific amenities are being scrutinised and maligned - doesn't seem bona-fide.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sovereign_Family" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sovereign_fami...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/CA%2B6z0bjLT-n7B2gcezJ%2Bcnv%3DMPo%3De%2BNHgJtP9Hmxjo9Z%2BwJc3A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Satyvan Dagar]

Dear VCAOA Team,

Further to trailing mail  and regarding Circular No. 24-01-2025/#01-7/REVISED SOVEREIGN CLUB & HVAC CHARGES/VATIKA CITY SEC-49, I find the said circular as an attempt to mislead the Vatika residents and lacks proper data/analysis for all individual Vatika City towers while targeting only Sovereign. Implementing such unproven measures is unethical, illegal, and unjustified.

I strongly oppose this decision, both personally and as a member of the Sovereign Committee.

Best regards,

Satyavan Dagar

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/CAE3QNWyVUHcX%3Dt3REd%2Be-cw1iNzcEV2zfmDOdGtuWUTufu55Eg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sanjay Malhotra]

Dear VCAOA,

As an elected body of this community you are responsible to protect interests of all Vatikans however your circular seems skewed and serves as an act of misaligned, misrepresented and poorly framed action that is trying to destroy community harmony.

It’s not just unethical as mentioned by others but also demeans your own role and existence in what you were elected for.

It demands some soul searching at your end before any pragmatic discussions can happen.

I condemn your act and actions and will move every needle at personal level to fight against your unfair responses.

Regards,

Sanjay Malhotra

C3/1701

[Sanjay Malhotra]

Dear President VCAOA,

Every word of the speech you just gave on Republic Day is in extreme discord with actions you have been taking.

Please wake up to the call of residents before you create unrest in society. You will be solely responsible for creating disharmony contrary to elements of your speech.  

Good luck and happy republic day.

Cheers,

Sanjay

[s gupta]

Oh yes - some senior RWA member mentioned - charity by rest of vatika to sovereignites . Very low. Very arbit.

This will create disharmony within one community. And RWA is responsible for this discord.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/CAGo%3DdBhHdqXnsLquXWa747u9sfCnBaezLkRPo18_Ngi2o7S2Sg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Sameep Dixit]

Agree!👍 

Potentially prioritising their own agendas or interests over collective welfare.

1. Political Posturing: The RWA appears to be more focused on creating an illusion of activity or progress rather than genuinely addressing broader issues.

2. Neglect of Responsibilities: The RWA seems to have forgotten their primary responsibility to serve all residents equally and fairly.

3. Degradation of Standards: Instead of upgrading underperforming areas or facilities, the focus seems to be on downgrading well-maintained ones, possibly to appear balanced or to gain approval from certain groups.

4. Resident Expectations: As residents have invested in a premium living experience, there is dissatisfaction with the RWA’s approach, which could be seen as diminishing the value and quality of the community.

Thanks and regards,

Sam

[nitin mehta]

Dear VCAOA,

Thank you for your email.

To summarize the points we have reiterated earlier:

              1.HVAC + Club Charges: These charges have always been part of the final CAM /Charges that Sovereign residents pay. You cannot alter the methodology arbitrarily ,which has been in place for more than a decade. As you are aware, residents pay HVAC charges monthly in addition to club charges, and this structure has been in place since the inception of Vatika City. This is also the basis on which homeowners purchased their properties here.

              2.Tower-Specific CAM Calculation: The calculation of CAM must be done for each tower individually, due to uniqueness of each tower—be it Jasminum, Ixia, Primrose etc.— Targeting specific towers is not only unethical and illogical but also potentially illegal. Once done , an external agency must be put to validate the data and the change needs to be implemented across Vatika City and not only in specific towers.

              3.Data Transparency: None of the Sov. committee members agreed to the data that was presented but never shared and also they never agreed to the wrong steps taken by RWA . There is a clear distinction between showing data and providing it for review/Sharing , which, we hope, you understand.

              4.Scheduled Meeting: After considerable discussion, and with Sovereign  committee members opposing your autocratic approach and decision, a meeting for later,  as confirmed by a respected RWA member ( on 15th January 2025 at 9:16 AM ) , was to be held . This meeting was never initiated, so it is unreasonable to expect committee members to attend the open house instead.

We urge you to stop spreading misinformation and ensure accurate communication with residents. To reiterate, the committee is firmly against your decision until:

•               A comprehensive CAM calculation is conducted for all towers in Vatika City.
•               Historical data is utilized to arrive at fair and transparent conclusions.
•               No decision can be taken without a holistic approach with right data points which are clearly missing today.
  

 

Only then can an outcome be reached that is both logical and acceptable to all residents, including Sovereign and other towers.

Requesting you to work in the interests of all the Vatika Residents.

Thanks.

 Best regards,

A surprised Member of the Sovereign Committee

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 11:38 PM VCAOA <vcaoa....@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks for your email, we welcome questions and a reasonable dialog. We hope the response below helps

1. We are surprised by the emails we are receiving from the Sovereign Committee members & other residents! Ever since the circular has been circulated, explaining all perspective charges, we have been getting calls & messages for its support from Sovereign residents who want to enjoy these services uninterrupted.

2. All data and detailed costs for the incremental charges were shared with the committee. We thought we had agreed to the principle (Sovereign residents would pay for the services unique and specific to Sovereign) prospectively.
These have been summarized in the annexures supporting the circular sent on 24/1 implementing the same. We acknowledged your ask for an Open Forum and budgeting time in the 19/1 open house, unfortunately, the committee members were missing that day.

3. The Committee has repeatedly asked us for data, this was shared in our meetings. Further, this has been published for all to see, to avoid anyone being missed. Could you please let us know what is missing from the tables used to arrive at the HVAC + Club costs?

4. Could you also let us know the role the Sovereign Committee will play going forward?
We'd hoped the committee would represent, understand and help resolve issues. We however appreciate this is a difficult task, and therefore we are giving an opportunity to individual Sovereign residents at large to come and meet the RWA members on 27th and 28th of January for explanations and discussions. Further, we will bring this up for a broader GBM discussion prior to ratifying this.

5. The RWA is working on recovering all leakages/under-recoveries, as we've outlined. The Sovereign Club & HVAC are just two of the leakages. The same have been mentioned in our circular also. We've shared the workings with all Vatika, since this (leakages, fund utilization) affects the entire society.

6. The revisions to the Sovereign charges (for HVAC, Club) are specific and unique to Sovereign and not common-area, hence this shouldn't be confused with CAM. Good financial and accounting practices would require we adopt a zero-based budgeting for this. The CAM issue can be picked up, if all residents so wish in a GBM. We did mention in our Open House on 19/1 that RWA will need additional funding, given inflation and Capex-heavy projects in the near future.

7. The ratification of these charges has been done by an elected EC body, the numbers and approach discussed with expert and resident committees, presented in an Open house and to be ratified by residents through a GBM. We believe this is fair, adheres to principles of transparency, fairness and equity, and that it is democratic

Thanks & Regards,

Team VCAOA

[s gupta]

The mail from VCAOA has raised more questions than answers. 

This reflects the afterthoughts of the welfare committee - emanating from a hurriedly taken decision.  It also says stuff that " we thought..."

It is also threat ridden like " uninterrupted services ..."

The changes has been throttled down and now we are being requested to think for meaningful dialogue? Really?

How can a RWA show some calculations and issue changes without an opportunity of being heard by the impacted ...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sovereign_Family" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sovereign_fami...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/CA%2B6z0biaQ%2Bw9F4wTEPbuWqZ94N6%3DR2Gj%3DAksaaVu34tFiC9DWw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Renu Kawatra]

Dear all

The decision taken seems arbitrary and  illegal. There is a methodology  for calculating CAM which is being followed for many years  infact since inception and changing that methodology  suddenly without any justification  reasoning, supporting data,  approvals and  consent of those affected is not in right spirit and completely unethical  unfair and illegal.

Regards 

Renu kawatra 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sovereign_Family" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sovereign_fami...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sovereign_family/SA1PR20MB5317BC1D48C5E9357FFE16E5A6E22%40SA1PR20MB5317.namprd20.prod.outlook.com.