>Aggravatedby confusion, lack ofmeaningful direction, evasion andequivocation
B
uying
a house or land to
build a homemay come as
quite the norm for many.
After all, howoften dowe
hear about or meet someonewho
has bought a property that was
abandoned soon after.
Log on to theNational House
Buyers Associationwebsite
and click on the
abandoned projects section. You
will be shocked to see the number
of abandoned local property
development projects throughout
the years.
The figures are
disconcerting, scary and
alarming.
Sifting through the
individual “cases”, published
comments and articles
tearfully penned by the
owners
will expose how lives,
finances and confidence have
been adversely affected
.
SaranKaur and Bob Steedman
are two such persons whose
resilience has been put to acid test.
For years, they have had to
sacrifice fulltime jobs in order to
fight for justice, to obtainwhat
they, alongwith their fellow
Genting Valley property
purchasers, had paid for but are
yet to receive.
GENTING VALLEY CASE
The Genting Valley project was
launched in the year 2000, offering
bungalowplots of various sizes in
Batang Kali (Hulu Selangor
district). BesidesMalaysians, the
buyers also included some
foreigners via theMalaysiaMy
SecondHome programme. Many
were intending this to serve as
their retirement homes. However,
12-13 years after the "supposed
launch", none of the purchasers of
this
abandoned development
project,
own or possess the
land they invested in
. Instead,
they have a running bank loan
whichmust be serviced. Besides
frustration and exasperation
aggravated by the lack of
willingness of all relevant bodies
and authorities to resolve the
problemor even provide savvy
advice and guidance.
Background
Jade San Realty Sdn Bhd launched
the Genting Valley project some
13 years ago. It consisted of FIVE
phases – 1, 2, 2A, 2B and 3. The
development site initially bore
the title “agricultural land”.
Previously a rubber estate*, it was
later converted to an oil palm
estate. The land area of the entire
mentioned project amounts to 740
acres. Under this project, within
200 acres of the development,
plots of land in various sizes were
offered to purchasers between the
years 2000 and 2003, sold at RM13
to RM20 per sq. ft.
*Note: “Within theNational
Land Code, estates are given
special treatment. The intention
was to ensure that estateworkers
were “protected” and developers
could not just move in and take
away their livelihood for some
trivial reason. each State, within
theNational Land Code, has its
own Estate Land Boardwhich
ensures that workers are not
displaced fromestates.
If the area involved ismore
than 40 acres (in some Statesmore
than 100 acres), the developer
needs to get consent from the
Estate Land Board. This was not a
casewhere the developer did not
get the required consent. The
developers
DIDNOT even
APPLY for it.
Bob questions how andwhy
the relevant Selangor state
government body allowed this
kind of dubious operation during
2000 to 2003. Also, what this state
government, and its senior
office-bearers, are doing now
(in 2013) to resolve the problemby
specifying unequivocal policies
andmeaningful direction.
Purchaser Saran informed
theSun that The Genting Valley
property scheme encompasses
fourMaster Titles:
1) Geran 40535 consisting of
Lot Nos. 2527 and 2528;
2) Geran 47606 consisting
of Lot Nos. 2529
and 2530;
3) Geran 46247
consisting of
Lot No. 1342; and
4) Geran 39990
consisting of
Lot No. 1333.
"At the time of
purchase, the
developer was Jade
San Realty Sdn Bhd
withDato' Seri Lim
Chong andDatin Seri
Ng Yok Sant listed
among the company
directors. The
institution financing
this development was
Hong Leong Finance
Berhad, nowknown
as Hong Leong Bank
Berhad (HLBB). End
financiers involved
in this property
development scheme
included several
prominent banks",
Bob informed.
Non-Delivery
Nightmare
The gist of the real estate
nightmare: “Purchase of plots
of bungalow landwith
infra-structure (which should be
equippedwithwater, electricity,
sewerage system, roads,
pavements, streetlights etc)
specified in the sale and purchase
(S&P) agreement, was nowhere to
be found," Saran reveals. Instead
they encountered nightmarish
non-delivery.
Just consider thewater supply
and electricity functions:
•
Therewas nowater supply
•
Thewater tank that was
to serve all 665 plots was never
built
•
The pipeline to serve the tank
was never made
•
Sewerageworks were never
completed
•
The connection to TNBwas
never done
So howdid the engineer sign off
documents confirming 100%
completion, questions Saran.
Four houses were built on Phase
One (including two showhouses).
But owners cannot occupy them
since basic utilities, electricity and
water had not been connected.
Material bought to refurbish the
homes have been stolen, including
windows, gates, fencing.
Contractors who built the house
were happy to connect all the
pipes, water, electricity et all...
till
facedwith the frightening
reality of abandonment
.
Purchasers are still paying for
their plots of land. Yet, they are
unable to build homes, reside in it
or get onwith their lives. Some
have been coerced to declare
bankruptcy, unable to service
bank loans. Others have had to
look for alternative places/homes
and pay for that instead.
Several purchasers who had
intended this to be their
retirement home, have already
retired but still do not have a
home. Some spouses have passed
away and surviving partners still
have no home.
DETAILS UNRAVELLED
Bob, who chairs the Pro-Tem
Committee of the Genting Valley
Purchasers Group, informed
theSun: “There were 665 plots on
offer, 627 were sold. The 400 to
500 people under our Group are
amongst owners of these 627
plots. Ten percent of the S&P was
collected, after which
intermittent payments were
made, depending on the works
carried out. In the case of Phase
One which involved over 200
buyers, the engineers and the
developer signed off the job as
100% completed. We paid 100%
along with other purchasers.
Unfortunately realising later that
although we could see at each
plot, the water pipes, the
electricity cables, the sewage
pipes etc, we didn’t know that
there was nothing completed at
the other end.”
After many tedious hours of
pleading and pursuing relevant
parties, the people/companies
involved, banks, organisations,
government, semi-government
bodies and ministries,
the group
learnt that:
•
The (application for)
conversion fromplantation
land to residential landwas
never applied for;
•
The sub-division of themaster
titles into individual plotswas
never completed;
•
Although the State
Government had given approval,
the developer had not paid all of
the premiums.
"Sowhat we have until today is
a plot of agricultural landwith no
title!” Bob declares.
Today, BatangKali is
flourishing as a township.
Development has also attracted
many city dwellers tomove in
with thousands of houses in the
area, both planned and under
construction. Real estate prices
have shot upwith Ligamas Sdn
Bhd being among themain
developers operating in the area.
“Members of
our group
bought plots of land from
Jade SanRealty between the
years 2000 and 2003. In 2004,
the developer apparently
abandoned the project, all
five phases,” informs Bob.
Avoiding further discussions
and allegedly even stationing
bouncers at their office
premises toward off irate
purchasers.
Finally 10 exasperated
purchasers got together in
2005-06 and formed
The
GentingValley Purchasers
Group
.
InMarch 2007,
group
members
requisitioned a
meetingwithHLBB,
themain financier, enquiring
about their purchased plots.
Theywere informed that the
developer’s firmhadwound
up and the companywas going
into liquidation. The bank later
disclosed the names of the
liquidators (Dr Ler Cheng
Chye andMr LumTuck
Cheong), and arranged a
meetingwith thema year later.
Very shortly
the group
swelled to include 400 to 500
aggrievedmembers.
InMarch 2012, HLBB
apparently agreed in principle to
a rehabilitation proposal froma
white knight
sourced by
the
group
. Non-completion of
neccesary documentation seems
to have derailed the process.
Following ameeting chaired by
YBTeresa Kok in January 2013,
rehabilitation discussions
returned to the table. Talks are
currently in progress to explore
rehabilitation and other
arrangement schemes, though
their execution timeline
remains uncertain.
QUESTIONS ARISING
and NEXT STEPS
Nowentering its seventh year,
the group
is still groping in the
dark, copingwith evasion,
confusing finger-pointing,
equivocation, non-answers and
aggravating bureaucraticmodus
operandi...
with not even
the apparition of a
tunnel in sight,
forget
about the proverbial
light at the end
.
Such home investments are
largelymade by hard-working
PMEBs, hoping to ensure some
decent comforts during the
evening of their lives.
Consequently,
this group
,
other suffering purchasers
of abandoned projects, potential
property purchasers, the
real estate industry and
theSun readers are seeking
unequivocal answers to 7 issues/
questions arising.
ON
friday
DEC 13, 2013
X
X
Please email your queries to us:
Abandonedprojects
real estatenightmare
PART 1
CLARIFICATIONS sought...
From the Selangor
Government
1) The
Ministry of Housing
has
allegedly informed that this
does not fall under their
purview, since these are plots
and "not houses".
Is this correct?
2) Consequently, which Selangor
state government ministry (or
body) is the appropriate
authority under whose purview
this problem falls?
3) Even so, does the
Menteri
Besar's office
have a role to
play towards ensuring the rights
and welfare of law-abiding, tax
paying citizens and voters, who
are being
accidentally victimised
by an establishment of which he
is the current CEO?
From the Banks/
Financial Institutions
4)What are the roles and
responsibilities of the main
bank and other institutions
financing the development and
purchases.
•
Towards (a) the developer,
and (b) the purchasers who
are ultimately producing the
funds which will earn the
bankers' profit.
•
In the Genting Valley Group's
case, this list includes several
prominent banks.
5) Can at least some of these banks
provide a check-list of basic
guidelines for potential
purchasers to ensure they are
well-informed and protected
before signing S&P documents.
6)What is the role of the official
liquidator(s)? Do the liquidators
require seven years to table and
execute a pragmatic proposal to
resolve a problem?
From the Legal Experts
7) Finally, when a project "
is
abandoned
" what steps and
measures should the aggrieved
(or duped) purchasers take to
regain their legitimate rights
and financial investment.
*Follow our column next week to
learn more about this and other
abandoned projects, the latest
twists in the liquidation process
and any unequivocal answers
which can be extracted from
relevant bodies.
INSIGHTS
CUT AND KEEP
