SIGNAGE Inc, the outdoor billboard concessionaire, has expressed shock over the Subang Jaya Municipal Council’s (MPSJ) removal of its billboards without any notice.

The council started removing the billboards last Wednesday evening, after the Shah Alam High Court lifted the injunction obtained by the company in 2008 to prevent the MPSJ from taking down its billboards.

In an agreement signed in 1998, the billboard company was given permission to build more than 310 billboards in the municipality and in return, it was required to build 60 bus and taxi stands, and 20 pedestrian bridges.

Down with it: A billboard located at the junction of Persiraran Kewajipan and Persiaran Perpaduan was brought down on Wednesday evening.

Signage Inc operations manager Carol Lim said the company was informed about the removal of billboards by the advertisers instead of the council. She immediately lodged a police report at the police station in Taipan, USJ.

“We cannot understand their high-handed action in removing the billboards because Signage Inc and MPSJ were partners in the billboard business.

“If MPSJ had worked together with us, we would have been able to spend and deliver about RM40mil worth of public amenities and billboards for MPSJ.

“All MPSJ had to do was to help us obtain the required clearances as per schedule. But it turned around to blame us for having illegal structures,” Lim said.

The company also said the Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim had consented that the dispute between the company and the council be resolved through legal and proper channels.

“Despite the agreement to wait for the legal process to take place for a resolution, MPSJ managed to lift the injunction.

“The injunction was needed by us as MPSJ sent an ultimatum letter to us to remove all of our structures in late 2007.

“The injunction was to prevent MPSJ from removing any structure until a resolution is made by the legal system,” the company said in a statement. Lim added that MPSJ wanted Signage Inc to go to the High Court, while the company preferred arbitration as the arbitration clause was provided in the service agreement between the two parties.

“We cannot understand why MPSJ is unable to agree to go for arbitration as it is provided in the contract.

“The resolution that could come out from arbitration can also be faster while it is unbiased to either party.

“It is surprising to us that MPSJ was so eager to tear down the billboards the very day when they got the injunction lifted,” she said.

Lim added that the company could not understand why the MPSJ was saying its billboards were illegal.

“The Certificates of Fitness (CF) were provided while the temporary occupation licences (TOL) were not sorted by MPSJ. The decision on TOL seemed to be at the discretion of MPSJ.

“The TOL is the responsibility of MPSJ and the council is conveniently ‘passing the responsibilities’ to us,” she said.