Property Owners Penalized Over $220,000 for Ignoring Demolition Orders
Significant fines issued for unauthorized structures highlight the consequences of failing to adhere to building regulations.
Two property owners were convicted and fined over $220,000 in total at the Fanling Magistrates' Courts early this month for failing to comply with removal orders issued under the Buildings Ordinance (BO) (Cap.123).
The case involved five unauthorized structures, each with an area ranging from about 5.5 to 80 square metres, on the flat roofs of three units in a composite building at Tai Wing Lane, Tai Po.
As the unauthorized building works (UBWs) were carried out without prior approval and consent from the Buildings Department (BD), removal orders were served on the owners under section 24(1) of the BO.
Failing to comply with the removal orders, the owners were prosecuted by the BD and were fined $222,920 in total, upon conviction at the Fanling Magistrates' Courts on December 3.
One owner holding two units was fined $153,280, of which $113,280 was the fine for the number of days that the offence continued, while the other owner holding one unit was fined $69,640, of which $56,640 was the fine for the number of days that the offence continued.
A spokesman for the BD said today (December 20), "UBWs may lead to serious consequences.
Owners must comply with removal orders without delay.
The BD will continue to take enforcement action against owners who have failed to comply with removal orders, including instigation of prosecution, to ensure building safety."
Failing to comply with a removal order without reasonable excuse is a serious offence under the BO.
The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine of $200,000 and one year's imprisonment, and a further fine of $20,000 for each day that the offence continues.
The case involved five unauthorized structures, each with an area ranging from about 5.5 to 80 square metres, on the flat roofs of three units in a composite building at Tai Wing Lane, Tai Po.
As the unauthorized building works (UBWs) were carried out without prior approval and consent from the Buildings Department (BD), removal orders were served on the owners under section 24(1) of the BO.
Failing to comply with the removal orders, the owners were prosecuted by the BD and were fined $222,920 in total, upon conviction at the Fanling Magistrates' Courts on December 3.
One owner holding two units was fined $153,280, of which $113,280 was the fine for the number of days that the offence continued, while the other owner holding one unit was fined $69,640, of which $56,640 was the fine for the number of days that the offence continued.
A spokesman for the BD said today (December 20), "UBWs may lead to serious consequences.
Owners must comply with removal orders without delay.
The BD will continue to take enforcement action against owners who have failed to comply with removal orders, including instigation of prosecution, to ensure building safety."
Failing to comply with a removal order without reasonable excuse is a serious offence under the BO.
The maximum penalty upon conviction is a fine of $200,000 and one year's imprisonment, and a further fine of $20,000 for each day that the offence continues.
AI Disclaimer: An advanced artificial intelligence (AI) system generated the content of this page on its own. This innovative technology conducts extensive research from a variety of reliable sources, performs rigorous fact-checking and verification, cleans up and balances biased or manipulated content, and presents a minimal factual summary that is just enough yet essential for you to function as an informed and educated citizen. Please keep in mind, however, that this system is an evolving technology, and as a result, the article may contain accidental inaccuracies or errors. We urge you to help us improve our site by reporting any inaccuracies you find using the "Contact Us" link at the bottom of this page. Your helpful feedback helps us improve our system and deliver more precise content. When you find an article of interest here, please look for the full and extensive coverage of this topic in traditional news sources, as they are written by professional journalists that we try to support, not replace. We appreciate your understanding and assistance.
