LOHAS Park unit owner has case to answer over structural wall removal

The owner of a LOHAS Park flat accused of removing a load-bearing wall will have a case to answer, after proceedings at Kwun Tong Magistrates’ Courts continued on Thursday. The hearing has been adjourned to December 10 for closing submissions.

According to court documents, the flat owner, Ku Chun-ho, is charged with knowingly carrying out building works without prior approval and performing works in a manner likely to cause risk of injury to persons or damage to property.

He was charged after he was accused of being responsible for a renovation project, which the relevant work saw a load-bearing wall removed.

In a written testimony submitted to the court on Thursday, Building Department (BD) building surveyor Mandy Ha Man-chi said the department’s BRAVO system — an online database containing all final approved structural plans — is accessible to the public for a fee. She confirmed that neither the defendant nor the designer involved, Lai Chun-kit, were registered users of the platform.

Asked whether BD has promoted the BRAVO system to the public, Ha said it is listed on the department’s official website and at its Building Information Centre, adding that the system has around 100,000 new registered users each year. She added that BD’s publicity unit told her the system had also been promoted through exhibitions and promotional trucks.

However, she said she did not know how often exhibitions were held and had never personally seen the promotional vehicles on the streets.

According to the admitted facts, LOHAS Park’s customer service center had received an interior decoration application form for the flat in question. The defendant argued that the court should not rely on the document, claiming there was no proof of who filled it in.

The prosecution responded that the form had been completed by the applicant during a routine submission process rather than during a police-cautioned interview, meaning voluntariness was not in question. It also noted that no witness was required for the form to be valid, and that the signature on the document — which is not disputed — belonged to the defendant.

The defendant then pointed out that although the form bears their signature, the signature appeared in a different color from the rest of the text on the page.

After reviewing the evidence, Magistrate Lau Suk-han ruled that a prima facie case had been established. The defendant chose not to testify and called no witnesses.