On January 10, 2025, a Jolly Harbour freeholder received a cease-and-desist letter from CDAL's management (signed by Ms. Camilla Sukumaran). The letter alleged "defamatory" content on this website—jollyharbour.org—related to billing practices, infrastructure issues, and an interest-free loan used to fund developer-owned assets.
After reviewing the letter and the relevant documents, we—the curators of this communal forum—wish to clarify the following points and share the supporting references so that freeholders can draw their own conclusions based on the facts.
Key Points:
- Multiple Sources: All content derives from public records, court rulings, and official CDAL communications
- Documented Evidence: Every claim is supported by verifiable documentation
- Collective Forum: This site represents a community-wide effort to ensure transparency
- Open to Correction: We welcome any factual evidence that might require updates or corrections
1. Website Contributions & Collective Documentation
Multiple Sources
- The materials posted here derive from a wide array of freeholders, who have gathered:
- Public records (including prior court rulings and land transfer covenants)
- Community-wide communications (e.g., JHHA, JHPOA updates)
- CDAL-published documents (like budget overviews and Q&As)
Collective Forum
This site represents a collective forum, reflecting diverse experiences. Some freeholders provided photos or personal accounts of issues such as coercive billing, while others contributed official meeting notes or published financial statements.
Why We Highlight These Documents
We believe that Jolly Harbour's freeholders deserve transparent information on:
- How monthly community charges are calculated
- How infrastructure obligations are being handled
- Whether certain costs should be developer- or parcel-based according to the land transfer covenants
2. Addressing "Coercive Management Practices" Allegations
a) Bundling Utility and Maintenance Charges
Key Concern:
Starting in May 2023, freeholders began receiving a merged invoice—one that combines the metered utility usage (electricity/water) with the monthly maintenance (community) charge, without any formal agreement authorizing such a bundle.
Why This Is Problematic:
- Owners' Inability To Pay Only the Undisputed Portion
- Owners who dispute the maintenance component (based on covenant language or lack of audits) risk disconnection of essential utilities if they withhold that portion alone.
- Court Rulings
- At least two documented legal disputes in Jolly Harbour ended in injunctions, where courts enjoined utility cutoffs if the disputed fee was the maintenance charge rather than the actual electricity/water usage.
b) Threatening or Implementing Utility Disconnections
Legal Context:
- Covenants typically allow for the collection of maintenance fees but do not authorize cutting off essential utilities for nonpayment of contested sums.
- Injunctions granted by the courts have documented this stance—stating that a developer must not disconnect crucial services when only the "community charge" portion is disputed.
Reference:
- Court Orders: Utility Disconnection Injunctions (where temporary injunctions prevented disconnection)
- The Coleman Ruling clarifying that freeholders can withhold a questionable fee portion if it does not align with "to and for the benefit" stipulations.
c) Questionable Billing Practices
Reserve Study & Infrastructure Neglect
- The 2022 Reserve Study specifically addresses overdue repairs for roads, seawalls, and sewage lines—assets typically owned by CDAL.
- Owners have argued it violates the land transfer covenants to charge freeholders for large-scale capital replacements caused by prior developer inaction or mismanagement.
Where to Find These Materials
- The Reserve Study (highlighting urgent repairs)
- Summaries from JHHA "Submission on CDAL 2023 Draft Community Charge" (December 2022)
3. The US$800,000 Interest-Free Loan
According to multiple official documents (JHHA Inc., JHPOA Inc. presentations, CDAL budget overviews), CDAL's new owners extended a two-year, US$800,000 interest-free loan for urgent repairs—but it is apparently folded into the monthly community fee repayment schedule.
Key References:
- 2023 Jolly Harbour Community Q&A, #22
"The principle is $800,000 USD and is to be repaid equally over 24 months with no interest charged. This amount is repaid to the shareholder …"
- JHHA Submissions on the 2023 Community Charge Draft
"The infrastructure loan is only over 2 years … existing homeowners are paying for the upgrades. Should an alternative long-term loan be sought, that way new properties would contribute …"
- JHPOA AGM (March 2023) & Budget Overviews
"…the new owners … have made an interest free loan to the community of US$800,000 … repayable over two years … included in the US$372."
Why Owners Are Concerned
- By covenant, homeowners pay for services benefiting their parcels—routine upkeep, not large capital overhauls for developer-owned assets.
- If this US$800,000 covers neglected infrastructure that the developer itself should have maintained, freeholders question the legal basis for passing that cost onto them.
- Some owners fear expansions or asset depreciation remain wholly on the developer's shoulders and should not be financed by a "community" charge that is, in effect, bridging developer liabilities.
4. Insurance, Reserve Studies, Sewage Protocols
Liability & Risk Insurance
- The land transfer covenant typically requires real risk coverage for common areas.
- Freeholders have requested clarity about a recognized third-party policy or a properly segregated self-insurance reserve—lack of clarity is not an unsubstantiated accusation but a covenant-based concern.
2022 Reserve Study
- Outlines "serious infrastructural deficiencies" needing immediate funding.
- If no documented plan or allocated reserve addresses these concerns, owners wonder how fees can keep rising without the recommended repairs being promptly scheduled.
Sewage System
- Multiple homeowners have documented sewage overflows, foul odors, and insufficient capacity.
- Visual evidence shows that, despite rising charges, remedial efforts remain minimal.
- According to CDAL's own Operations Manager, Ms. Camilla Sukumaran, the sewage plant is "30 years old and at end of life having received no investment at all during the course of its life".
- Photos and videos posted on various social media platforms illustrate ongoing sewage issues and the potential public-health concerns they pose.
5. Defamation Allegations & Our Position
CDAL's cease-and-desist letter labels certain statements "defamatory." We note:
Factually Supported Complaints
The statements flagged as "defamatory" are widely documented through:
- Publicly available legal rulings
- Official budget and Q&A releases
- The 2022 reserve study
- Repeated homeowner testimonies
Opportunity to Provide Contrary Evidence
If CDAL or its representatives can prove any factual inaccuracy, we welcome corrections. Merely calling items "untrue" or "defamatory" without presenting counter-documentation does little to resolve the underlying disputes.
Notice to Readers
- We, as a community-curated site, have no single webmaster with unilateral editorial control. Materials posted here reflect the experiences, questions, and official references that freeholders have collectively shared.
- Should CDAL believe any portion requires correction or removal, they are invited to provide evidence clarifying the specific points. We will then consider how best to update the relevant sections.
Closing Note
Our goal is to ensure transparency about Jolly Harbour's maintenance charges, infrastructure obligations, and relevant legal/covenant provisions. The cease-and-desist letter underscores how strongly some parties wish to silence or discredit these discussions, yet the documents and prior rulings speak for themselves.
- If you hold additional documentation supporting or refuting any claims, please reach out through the contact form so we can maintain as accurate and complete a record as possible.
- For further reading, consult the direct document links above to make an independent judgment on the issues raised.