Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act gazetted 31.1.2002. Implementation?

[jeffooi]

<font size="+1">Dear Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting:
The Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act
revamp 2002 has been gazetted January 31, 2002.
Just when do you intend to implement it?</font>


NEW STRAITS TIMES
Thursday, November 14, 2002

LETTER
<font size="+1">Amended law is more protective of house buyers</font>

WE refer to L.C.F.’s letter (NST, Nov 7, 2002) and we sympathise with the problems that his son is facing after being told to take possession of his house.

On his refusal to take over the house due to a leaking roof, flooding in certain parts of the house and warping of the parquet, we have this to say.

The Housing Developers' Act, 1966, Schedule G (this is the stipulated standard Sales and Purchase Agreement for landed properties) Clause 21 (2) and Schedule H (this is the stipulated standard Sales and Purchase Agreement for Subdivided buildings) Clause 23 (2) both state: "Upon the expiry of 14 days from the date of a notice from the Vendor requesting the Purchaser to take possession of the said property, whether or not the Purchaser has actually entered into possession or occupation of the said Property, the Purchaser shall be deemed to have taken delivery of vacant possession." Hence there is no question as to whether L.C.F.'s son wants to take vacant possession of the house. Fourteen days after being notified by the Vendor, he is deemed to have taken over the house whether he likes it or not. Ridiculous? Yes, but that's exactly the situation as stipulated by the Housing Developers' Act 1966.

Based on this clause, certain developers are forcing house buyers to take over vacant possession even before the Certificate of Fitness for Occupation (CFO) is issued.

Perhaps one can now see why certain cynical remarks were made that the Act is indeed the Housing Developers' Act because it was designed to benefit housing developers at the expense of house buyers. For more details on the subject of the mystical CFO, please surf our website: http:// www.hba.org.my.

Yes, irresponsible developers will play a game of patience with their buyers. They keep delaying defect rectification work until the buyers run out of patience and rectify the defects themselves.

However, Clause 23 of the Act also states that after 30 days written notice of any defect and if the developer still does not make good the defect: "The purchaser shall be entitled to recover from the Vendor the cost of repairing and making good the same and the Purchaser may deduct such costs from any sum which has been held by the Vendor's solicitor as stakeholder for the Vendor.

"Provided that the Purchaser shall, at any time after the expiry of the said period of 30 days, notify the Vendor of the cost of repairing and making good the said defects, shrinkage or other faults before the commencement of works and shall give the Vendor an opportunity to carry out the work himself within 14 days from the date the purchaser has notified the Vendor of his intention to carry out the said works."

The law seems very clear about what the Purchaser can do to seek rectification to the defects in his house while under the defect liability period. But we have reservations when it comes to practical implementation. For one, the stakeholder who is holding the five per cent of purchase price is the developer's solicitor, not the Purchaser's. And he knows full well who is paying him!

However, L.C.F. can take consolation that the amendments to the Housing Developers' Act 1966 have been gazetted on Jan 31, 2002. For a start it is no longer called the Housing Developer's Act but is now called The Housing Development (Control and Licensing) Act revamped 2002. The amended Act is certainly more protective of house buyers although there are some clauses that can still be exploited by errant developers.

We are anxiously awaiting our Minister of Housing and Local Government to announce its implementation.

CHANG KIM LOONG
Secretary-General National House Buyers Association, Malaysia


SOURCE:
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Thursday/Letters/20021114083701/Article/

[jeffooi]

THE STAR
Tuesday, November 19, 2002

<FONT SIZE="+1">New housing Act to take effect on Dec 1</FONT>

KUALA LUMPUR: The implementation of the long-awaited Housing Development (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2001 under which a Housing Tribunal will be formed, will take effect on Dec 1, Housing Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting announced yesterday.

Gazetted on Jan 31, the new Act will effectively replace the aging Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) Act 1966.

The main intention for the setting up of the Tribunal is to circumvent the slow and expensive court process under the old law. It is for buyers who have grouses against the developer or a purchaser who has bought the property from the initial buyer. It will not hear any cases from third or subsequent purchasers of the property. All proceedings of the Tribunal shall be open to the public.

Jurisdiction of the tribunal, said Ong, was limited to hearing a claim not exceeding RM25,000 per complaint. Exception is given if both parties agreed to otherwise in writing.

A buyer can have several complaints, worth RM25,000 each against the developer as long the complaint is within the ambit of the sale and purchase agreement.

The tribunal will comprise a chairman, a deputy appointed from among members of the Judicial and Legal Service and not less than five members who must be either serving in the service or advocates and solicitors of the High Court in Malaya who have practised for seven years or more.

The Minister can set up branches in Peninsular Malaysia to hear the disputes. The chairman, his deputy or a member can sit alone to preside over any matter.

“We have put in a lot of effort for this and it is time that we get down to business and we are going to be very strict with housing developers,” Ong told reporters after closing the Aquatex Malaysia 2002 international flower horn competition and exhibition.

“Now for all housing development projects they (developers) will have to plan carefully and responsibly before they start selling houses. They have to make sure they can deliver before they sign the sale and purchase agreement.

The Bill went through Parliament in October, received the Royal Assent on Jan 24 and was gazetted on Jan 31.


SOURCE:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/11/19/nation/ccimp&sec=nation

[jeffooi]

THE SUN
Saturday, November 23, 2002

LETTER
<font size="+1">New housing law a joke</font>

THE housing minister announced the new housing Act is to take effect on Dec 1 (theSun, Nov 19), and has no retrospective effect. The reason given was "legal provisions do not allow it".

Human beings make laws and I cannot see the logic of the legal provisions not allowing this.

Over the years, thousands of laws were passed by parliament, including the federal constitution, and amended later to suit the times.

The ruling party has more than two-thirds majority and the attorney-general's advice comes as a complete surprise.

By not allowing the law to take retrospective effect, how will thousands of unsuspecting buyers caught in a situation, not of their doing, hope to get redress?

In short, this is a loophole for exempting the housing developers from making good the wrongs suffered by buyers.

The amendment, invented to "protect" the rights of house buyers is a joke.

Consider the plight of people most of whom know nothing of the laws and find themselves caught through ignorance.

The minister overlooked to mention the enforcement part of the amendment.

I am not surprised to see developers continuing to flout the law, assured in the fact that no action can be taken against them.

Why the amendment?
Kuala Lumpur

[jeffooi]

SUNDAY STAR
Sunday, November 24, 2002

LETTER
<FONT SIZE="+1">Give all house buyers access to tribunal</FONT>

THE National House Buyers Association (HBA) welcomes Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting’s recent announcement that the amended Housing Development Act will take effect from Dec 1.

House buyers can now expect better protection from the implementation of the long-awaited amendments.

However, we found that the focus of the announcement seemed to be on the establishment of the Housing Tribunal.

While this is a positive move to ease the pains and suffering of a large number of house buyers, one crucial question begs to be answered. This is with regard to whether the current aggrieved house buyers can bring their cases to the Housing Tribunal come Dec 1.

The HBA strongly feels they should be allowed to do so. Anything contrary is deemed to be a frustration to the aggrieved house buyers who prompted the amendments.

It is clear that Parliament had deemed it fit to promptly pass the amendments to provide better protection for house buyers.

This was due to the increasing number of complaints from house buyers as the existing Housing Act was inadequate to provide for their protection.

To their chagrin, a vast number of house buyers found themselves facing problems with the purchase through no fault of theirs.

What a house buyer wants is to buy a house so that his loved ones can have a roof over their heads and not to spend half of his prime years chasing the developer for his rights.

To deny them access to the tribunal now that it is going to be set up would be grossly unjust.

Though there are some other laws that have been made retrospective, we feel the minister could have been advised that it would be difficult to implement this particular Act retrospectively.

However, we see nothing illogical or unlawful to allow the tribunal to hear cases regardless of whether they came about after the implementation of this Act or before. This is totally different from implementing the Act retrospectively.

Furthermore, the tribunal is only hearing the cases. Its decisions can go either way. It only provides a simpler and speedier avenue for aggrieved house buyers to seek redress. It does not favour the house buyers or the developers. It does not mean every case will be ruled against the developers.

If the tribunal is only accessible to house buyers who sign their Sale and Purchase Agreements on or after Dec 1, then we can guess it will not see any action until problems surface with SPAs signed after its setting up.

This is because developers are supposed to hand over vacant possession of the houses during that period. Only then will the disputes and problems surface.

In the meantime, there are thousands of aggrieved house buyers who are unable to seek redress in court due to financial constraints after having expended their savings on their house purchases.

This group places high hopes on the tribunal to hear their cases. To deny them access will be a complete disappointment and a gross injustice.


Chang Kim Loong
Secretary-General
National House Buyers Association
(via e-mail)


SOURCE:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/11/24/focus/hbax&sec=focus

[edteam]

THE STAR
Saturday, November 30, 2002

Compensation in 60 days under housing tribunal
By FOONG PEK YEE

KUALA LUMPUR: Housebuyers can now get compensation of up to RM25,000 from developers within 60 days from the date the Housing and Local Government Ministry’s Tribunal for Homebuyer Claims starts hearing a case.

This is provided for under the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2002, which comes into effect tomorrow, a copy of which was made available to The Star yesterday.

The Act also specifies that up to 8% interest per annum should be paid on any sum or monetary award to buyers concerned unless it has been otherwise agreed upon between the parties involved.

Any claim should not exceed the RM25,000 ceiling to qualify for hearing by the Tribunal.

Under the Act, an agreed upon settlement reached by the parties involved without being heard by the Tribunal should also take effect as if it is an award of the Tribunal upon approval and record of the settlement by the body.

Such awards shall be final and binding on all parties to the proceedings and deemed to be an order of a magistrate’s court and be enforced accordingly by any party to the proceedings.

Members of the Tribunal – comprising at least seven members from the judicial and legal fraternity – will be appointed by the Minister.

In another move to avoid delay in compliance, the Act also states that any person who fails to comply with an award made by the Tribunal within the period specified is deemed to have committed an offence and liable to a fine of up to RM5,000 or a jail sentence of up to two years or both.

The offender shall also be liable to a fine of up to RM1,000 each day or part of a day during which the offence continues after conviction.

However, the powers of the Tribunal will only be executed provided the Tribunal has concluded that the cases involved do not merit reference to the High Court.

If such cases are referred to the High Court for a decision, the Tribunal will make its award in conformity with such decision.


SOURCE:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/11/30/nation/fppayss&sec=nation

[jeffooi]

SUNDAY STAR
Sunday, December 01, 2002

<font size="+1">Changes to Housing Act favour buyers</font>
By FOONG PEK YEE and CLARENCE CHUA

PETALING JAYA: Housebuyers can now terminate their sales and purchase agreements and get refunds for their payments from developers under the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2002 which takes effect today.

They only need to prove that they cannot obtain financing and forfeit only 1% of the purchase price to the developers for the termination to take effect.

Developers must give the refund within 21 days of the termination.

Previously, buyers who were unable to obtain a loan were obliged to continue with the transaction.

Housing and Local Government Minister atuk Seri Ong Ka Ting said in an interview the Act had taken into consideration the welfare and interest of buyers and developers.

“It is good for the housing industry and country’s economy in the long run,” he said.

“Honest and responsible developers should not worry over the amendments which in fact will help to uphold the industry’s good name.

“Developers should help ensure its effective implementation,” he said when responding to a joint statement on the amended Act by his ministry’s legal adviser Shamsulbahri Ibrahim and advocate and solicitor The Sek Hock yesterday. The Act also extends to 21 working days the previous 14-day deadline to pay progressive payments to developers.

The longer deadline is to provide for a more reasonable time frame for the disbursement of loans by the buyers’ financier.

Interest in late payment can only be charged by the developer after the expiry of the 21 working days.

As an added protection to buyers, the developers are not allowed to charge buyers interest on late payment of instalment if the delay is not caused by the latter.

Generally, the reasons for the delay are attributable to the developer and not the buyers.

A developer, who declined to be named, admitted that reasons for such a delay were mostly “administrative and technical in nature” and occ-urred during the process of disbursing the payment and the parties involved were the lawyer handling the loans, the banks concerned and the developer.

A buyer who welcomed the amendment said she had to pay about RM500 in late interest payment because the lawyer for the loans was slow in disbursing a cheque for the pro-gress payment to the developer.

The lawyer’s reason for sitting on the cheque was that it was a long weekend followed by Christmas and New Year and his office was closed.

She had to pay interest to the bank which had released the cheque and was charged interest irrespective of whether the cheque had been cashed.

She also had to pay interest to the developer who had received the cheque after the 14-day deadline.

Meanwhile, buyers who want to sell their units before completion, would only be subjected to a consent fee of RM500 or 0.5% of the purchase price or whichever is lower, and not other fees.

Prior to this, developers usually imposed a consent fee or administrative charges of up to 1% to 2% of the sub-sale purchase price before consenting to sub-sales and assignments by buyers.


FULL STORY:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/12/1/nation/fpmoneyy&sec=nation

[joker2107]

"Previously, buyers who were unable to obtain a loan were obliged to continue with the transaction. "
he who said that is but a man of little substance. the situation of the local housing industry, the laughing stock of the laws passed by parliament, the (non)enforcement of statutory requirements, etc all but add up to further illustrate the littleness of substance.

if any of you are in the predicament or know of anybody who is in the predicament, worry no more. i have access to a very senior practicing lawyer who will see to justice for you. and don't worry about fees - i believe even a church mouse will be able to afford this avenue. just drop me a note. but i've got to warn that only genuine cases will be entertained, so be prepared to be entertained by a drilling session and be really very honest. i've got a reputation to maintain so only genuine cases get referred. btw the lawyer is a friend of the people at the national house buyers association and some consumers' association. or if you don't trust me, go straight to the national hba. this one really no joke matter.

incidentally, could our lawyer friends clarify if an agrieved party can still demand specific performance if there are alternative agreed penalties or remedies for terminating a contract? and if one party has a right to demand specific performance, how about the other party?

read btwn my lines - it speaks something about the next general elections.

[Voter]

Are serviced apartments dwelling houses? Why is the Act excluding such category of purchasers, and leave them high and try to the victimization of unscrupulous developers?

[jeffooi]

I am perplexed by the manner The Star chose to blurb the details of the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing)
(Amendment) Act 2002 bit by bit.

Is it a veiled agenda to sustain media presence of Ong Ka Ting
episode by episode?

Could have done readers great justice by a special pullout with
graphical charts and allow readers to keep for future reference.

* * *

THE STAR
Monday, December 02, 2002

Buyers have to pay four months’ service charge now
By FOONG PEK YEE

PETALING JAYA: Property buyers will now have to pay four months of service charge upfront, of which three months are in the form of advance payment and the remainder as deposit under the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2002 which took effect yesterday.

The subsequent monthly service charge must also be paid in advance and the ruling applies to properties which had their sale and purchase agreements signed yesterday and thereafter.

Monthly service charges are imposed on flats, apartments and condominiums and some landed properties which have common areas.

A statement issued by Housing and Local Government Ministry legal adviser Shamsulbahri Ibrahim and advocate and solicitor Teh Sek Hock said the new ruling was among amendments made to the S & P agreements.

It said it was common for developers to encounter problems over the collection of service charges from buyers and this was the reason for the three months’ service charge to be paid in advance by buyers.

It said service charges are defined as money meant for the general maintenance and management of the common property and also other services that the developers have agreed to provide.

Besides the service charges, buyers also have to pay to a sinking fund or special accounts to meet major liabilities such as painting and repainting of common property, acquisi-tion of movable property for use in relation to the common property or the renewal or replacement of any fixtures in the common property.

Prior to the amendments, developers had the liberty of imposing the number of months of advance payment, with some up to six months or more while there were those who did not collect any such advance payment.

The Act specifies that all notices for payments of service charge must be supported by a service charge statement in which the relevant particulars of the services to be rendered and the relevant amounts to be paid for such services are clearly stated.

The Act also allows developers to appoint a qualified person or agent to provide the maintenance and management services.

Developers have to provide buyers with copies of the annual audited accounts for the sinking fund.


SOURCE:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/archives/story.asp?ppath=\2002\12\2&file=/2002/12/2/nation/fpserviss&sec=nation

[jeffooi]

THE STAR
Monday, December 02, 2002

Buyers happy but developers brace for problems

PETALING JAYA: The changes to the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act are consumer-friendly and will benefit both housebuyers and developers, said National Housebuyers Association (HBA) secretary-general Chang Kim Loong.

In lauding the amendments which took effect yesterday, Chang said HBA was pleased that Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting had taken a firm stand in carrying out the amendments.

The association looked forward to more positive changes to the Act, he said when contacted yesterday.

The amendments, among others, would enable housebuyers to terminate their sales and purchase agreements and seek refunds from the developer if they could prove that they could not get financing for the purchase.

Buyers will also get a 21-working day deadline to settle the progressive payments instead of the previous 14-day period.

However, Penang Real Estate and Housing Developers Association immediate past chairman Datuk Ong Gim Huat said developers would face cash-flow problems with the longer deadline.

The developers, he said, would be hard-pressed since buyers would wait until the last minute to pay the instalments.

“We (the developers) are also borrowing money from financial institutions to implement the projects. When housebuyers drag the payments, we will have to pay more interest on the loan,’’ he said yesterday.

He said there had been cases where housebuyers gave excuses that they were unable to pay the progressive instalment within the deadline as the money had been placed in fixed-deposits.

However, he said that the housing tribunal, which would be set up under the Act, was the developers’ main worry as they feared it could lead to buyers bringing up “petty issues.”

He said it was important that the Government picked a tribunal chairman who was unbiased.


SOURCE:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/archives/story.asp?ppath=\2002\12\2&file=/2002/12/2/nation/cmhse&sec=nation

[jeffooi]

THE STAR
Tuesday, December 03, 2002

Builders must reimburse within 14 days

PETALING JAYA: Developers must reimburse housebuyers who carry out rectification works on their own units within 14 days from the day they receive the buyers’ written demand under the Housing Developers Act (Control and Licensing) (Amendment), 2002 which took effect on Dec 1.

The amount claimed would be released from the 5% retention sum (5% of the purchase price of the unit) which the developers’ lawyers keep as stakeholder.

Prior to the amendment, there was no timeframe for the lawyers to release money for such claims.

Housing and Local Government Ministry legal adviser Shamsulbahri Ibrahim and its advocate and solicitor Teh Sek Hock said in a statement that: “Notices, requests or demands sent by registered post shall be deemed to have been received upon the expiry of five days after the posting of such registered letter.”

In another matter, the Act also provides buyers the right to initiate and maintain action on their own.

This provision “allows buyers who have assigned their rights and interests under the respective sales and purchase agreements to their financiers as security for the loans granted to them to maintain an action in their capacity as buyers against their developers in connection with the S & P agreements.”

It means that buyers can act without having to involve the relevant financier as a plaintiff or as a co-plaintiff in the actions, said the statement.

“The buyers on their own are entitled to initiate, commence, institute and maintain at any court or tribunal any action, suit or proceeding against their developers or any other person in respect of any matter arising out of the S & P agreements between the buyers and their developers.

“This entitlement applies unless contrary intentions is expressed in any agreement, assignment or charge between the buyers and their financiers.’’


SOURCE:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/12/3/nation/fpcorrectt&sec=nation

[edteam]

NEW STRAITS TIMES
Monday, December 9, 2002

LETTER
<FONT SIZE="+1">Housing tribunal should be allowed to hear all cases</FONT>

Dec 9: THE National Housebuyers Association Malaysia (HBA) welcomes the announcement by Minister of Housing and Local Government Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting that the amended Housing Development Act would take effect from Dec 1.

By and large, Malaysian housebuyers can now expect better protection from the implementation of the long-awaited amendments. But what the public expects and what it will actually get are two different things altogether. We found that the focus of the announcement seems to be on the establishment of the Tribunal for Homebuyers Claim, commonly called the Housing Tribunal.

While this is a positive move to ease the pain and suffering of a large number of housebuyers, one crucial question begs to be answered. This is with regard to whether the current aggrieved housebuyers can bring their cases to the Housing Tribunal from Dec 1 when it is set up.

HBA strongly feels that they should be allowed to do so. Anything contrary is deemed to be a frustration to the aggrieved housebuyers who prompted the amendments. It is very clear that Parliament had deemed it fit to promptly pass the amendments to the Act to provide better protection for housebuyers.

This was due to the increasing number of complaints from housebuyers as the then Housing Act was inadequate to provide for their protection. To their chagrin, a vast number of housebuyers found themselves facing problems with the purchase through no fault of their own.

What a housebuyer wants is to buy a house so that his loved ones can have a roof over their heads and not to spend half of his prime years chasing the developer for his rights. To deny them access to the tribunal now that it is going to be set up would be grossly unjust.

Even though there are some other laws that have been made retrospective, we feel that the minister could have been advised, it would have been difficult to implement this particular Act retrospectively. However, we see nothing illogical or unlawful to allow the Housing Tribunal to hear cases regardless of whether they came about after the implementation or before.

This is totally different from implementing the Act retrospectively. Furthermore the tribunal is only hearing the cases. Its decisions can go one way or the other. It only provides a simpler and speedier avenue for aggrieved house buyers to seek redress. It does not favour the housebuyers or the developers. It does not mean that every case will be ruled against the developers.

If the Housing Tribunal is only accessible to house buyers who sign their Sale and Purchase Agreements (SPA) on or after Dec 1, then we can surmise that the tribunal will not see any action until problems surface with SPAs signed after the setting up of the Housing Tribunal.

This is because developers are supposed to hand over vacant possession of the houses during that period. Only then will the disputes and problems surface. In the meantime there are thousands of aggrieved housebuyers who are unable to seek redress in court due to financial constraints after having expended their savings on their house purchases.

This is the group that is placing high hopes on the Housing Tribunal being able to hear their cases. To deny them access will be a complete disappointment and a gross injustice.

Amendments to the regulations are considered necessary and vital to give it more consistency and effectiveness to curb undesirable practices prevalent among housing developers.

There should not be any form of accusation by the public that we have "new Acts and old Regulations" resulting in a mismatch of expectations.

The HBA hopes the related regulations are in place so that the implementation and enforcement can be effectively carried out. It will not work if we have a new Act but old regulations.

Another concern is on the assertiveness of the ministry to enforce the Act. We can have the most protective Act instituted but it will not achieve its intentions if the authorities do not have the manpower to take serious enforcement measures.

We should be reminded that the Government's public policy rests not only with economic factors but an underlying notion of social ethics towards the hapless is essential.

CHANG KIM LOONG
Secretary-general
National House Buyers Association Malaysia


SOURCE:
http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Monday/Letters/20021209081430/Article/

[jeffooi]

THE STAR
Friday, December 13, 2002

<FONT SIZE="+1">Ong: We will clarify position of tribunal first</FONT>
By SUSAN TAM

KUALA LUMPUR: The Housing and Local Government Ministry will seek the advice of the Attorney-General’s Chambers on whether the Housing Tribunal can hear cases involving transactions made before Dec 1, its minister, Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting, said.

The tribunal was set up under the newly-amended Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2002, which took effect on Dec 1, allowing house buyers the opportunity to seek redress instead of undergoing a costly court process.

However, the amendments only apply to sale and purchase (S&P) agreements signed after Dec 1.

The House Buyers Association had proposed that the tribunal be allowed to hear complaints dating back to almost two and a half years to allow more house buyers to have their problems heard.

It had also suggested a standard extension of 12 months on top of the 18 months warranty period given after the S&P was signed, to accommodate more issues raised by house buyers.


FULL STORY:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2002/12/13/nation/cmhse&sec=nation

[jeffooi]

SUNDAY STAR
Sunday, January 19, 2003

LETTER
<FONT SIZE="+1">Tribunal a big letdown</FONT>

WITH the setting up of the Housing Tribunal on Dec 1 last year, house-buyers are, ironically, worse off than before.

Last October, I approached the Consumer Tribunal to ask for help in resolving a problem I had with my developer.

However, I was told that since the Housing Tribunal was in the process of being set up, the Consumer Tribunal had stopped hearing cases against housing developers.

I was greatly encouraged to learn there was going to be a tribunal especially for housing and waited eagerly for the announcement of its launch.

However, when the Housing Tribunal finally opened its doors, it was a real letdown. I was utterly dismayed to learn that the tribunal would deal only with complaints pertaining to properties bought after its launch on Dec 1.

To add insult to injury, tribunal secretary Wan Hussein Wan Hassan was recently reported to have said that no housing dispute had been referred to it since it was set up a month ago.

Was he expecting otherwise?

The main complaints of house buyers are late delivery and shoddy workmanship. Since the tribunal accepts only cases regarding houses bought after Dec 1, and the minimum period for the completion of a house is 24 months, there is naturally a dearth of complaints until December next year at the earliest.

In the meantime, while waiting for the bulk of the complaints to be filed from January 2005, what does the tribunal do to justify its existence?

As a tax-payer and house-buyer, I urge the Attorney General not to delay any longer in empowering the tribunal to hear complaints of house buyers who have yet to receive keys to their houses from developers, regardless of when the sales and purchase agreement was signed.

The plight of long-suffering house buyers should be the top concern of the tribunal. If the tribunal remains inactive, hundreds of house buyers would be short-changed not only by unscrupulous developers but, ironically, by the Ministry of Housing and Local Government as well.

Let fair play and justice prevail!

YEOH BEE LENG
Kuala Lumpur


SOURCE:
http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2003/1/19/focus/rumahx&sec=focus