Premature VP & Compensation/Claim

Hi,

I am creating this topic for the matter of premature VP.

Questions that circulating around are
Is the VP premature? What is the supporting evidence? What action can be taken? Individual or collective? Can we file a claim? How? What is the procedure? What is needed?

Some of you who have been running around and got some of the answers, perhaps can share so that the rest can focus the next step.

Moderator, please delete this topic is you feel this is duplicate.

since like tis CF is going to be delayed until no time...hope everyone can share info about wht is the action can be taken to protect ourselves...

I would like to know regarding this also but really didn't have this kind off knowledge.I'll share out wat i know when i get some extra info regarding this matter ^^

Read this.

http://aplikasi.kpkt.gov.my/akhbar.nsf/8521d968204e8b454825697400224ca6/e9c6726c180285c848256f850015d264?OpenDocument

Wow...... this is also a good one

Scroll to the middle and look for "the waiting game"

http://globalmalaysians.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=362&PN=1&TPN=2

Hi,

During VP, did the developer show you the confirmation letter from local authority (MPSJ) that it had been duly approved and accepted developer's form E application for CF?

I understand from some buyers from other projects that this is what usually the developers do.

Just cut and paste the document into this forum for easy viewing.
btw.....this article so damn......suit to our situation OMG....This article is like explaining what are we facing currently ^^

THE National House Buyers Association of Malaysia foresees many pitfalls
if the certification of residential buildings for the issue of the
Certificate of Fitness for Occupation (CF) is implemented without a
thorough study.
The main fear we have is that the adverse effects of self-certification
by professionals would be more far-reaching for buyers than any of the
benefits that may be derived from such a stream-lining exercise.
Under the Housing Development (Licensing and Control) Act, architects
are the fiduciary guardians of the regulated Sale and Purchase Agreement
(SPA) between buyers and developers.
We have argued in the past that this system is not good enough because
of the large number of complaints buyers have, not just against errant
developers, but also against the professionals they hire.
Judging from the high incidences of shoddy workmanship, premature and/or
inaccurate certification and handing over of vacant possession before CFs
are applied for, there is no indication that such complaints will
diminish.
In certain instances, architects even assist, or allow, developers
wishing to avoid exposure to liability for late delivery and other
defaults to make premature and unlawful claims from unsuspecting
purchasers. In fact, some banks are known to have released payments to
developers based on the certification by architects of the progress of
construction, without even verifying the situation.
If there is a common thread that can be found in such instances, it is
that these architects have been coerced into submitting to the developers'
wishes, through arm-twisting tactics. These are not isolated cases,
considering that even the regulatory body, the Architects Board of
Malaysia, issued a very stern circular on this matter to members on Feb
15, 2002.
What the current system requires is an external audit that would serve
as a prerequisite to the issuance of CFs. This is a system of "counter-
checking" that can be slow and time-consuming, but buyers have to bear in
mind that removing the last tier of verification without any check-and-
balance in place will give errant developers and professionals a free rein
to act according to their own interests.
Even with statutory penalties and a host of other deterrents, incidences
such as breaches of trust are on the rise. The question is: Where would we
be if these were removed altogether?
Architects aside, self-certification also brings engineers into the
equation. Take the complaints about "slower" inspection of roads and
drains by the local authorities as an example. If the Government
inspectors were sceptical of compliance with the road specifications, they
would "core" the relevant section for laboratory tests.
Imagine the removal of this line of defence. An errant developer may be
tempted to cut corners with the compliance of specifications by getting
its "obliging" consultants to certify that the roads are in order.
It will be difficult for these consultants to resist when confronted
with harsh realities of the business world today, where only the
"obliging" can survive under such market forces. Consultants with
integrity may find themselves out of business if they do not toe the line.
These are very real facts.
It is pertinent to note that the Ministry of Housing and Local
Government as well as the local authorities monitor each and every
construction project. They have in the past admitted that they do face
problems policing, monitoring and enforcing compliance with various
legislation. It is therefore not uncommon to hear complaints about
defective delivery of vacant possession. Among the many complaints
recorded over the years are:
* Vacant possession granted without CF application;
* Vacant possession granted even though access roads have not been
completed and the facilities for the connection of amenities such as water
and electricity are not ready;
* Long delays in obtaining permanent CFs because of continued non-
compliance with approved plans;
* Buyers not able to move into their units even 18 months after delivery
of vacant possession because their developer has not complied with
breaches of approved plans or not rectified defects. This is despite the
full purchase price having been disbursed;
* Remedies slow in coming; and
* No provisions against developers that have gone into insolvency and
liquidation, whether compulsorily or voluntarily. In such an event, buyers
are ranked as unsecured creditors.
Complete deregulation will only work when all parties learn to respect
the rights of others, which in HBA's view is a Utopian dream.
Perhaps a combination of self-certification for some technical aspects,
with rules clearly set out and mandatory checks on those aspects that
involve life and safety could be adopted. Insofar as liability is
concerned, the party that verifies a building as fit for occupation must
accept legal liability.
The National House Buyers Association (HBA) is a non-profit, non-
government and non-political organisation manned by volunteers. Its
website is www.hba.org.my. E-mail: info@hba.org.my

The waiting game


Many house buyers complain of having to take over of vacant possession (VP) of their new houses when they are not ready for occupation.

One of the reasons for this is that prior to amendment, the Housing Developers Act allowed developers to hand over VP upon application for the Certificates of Fitness for Occupation (CF). Many developers exploited this tenet of the Act by rushing to hand over the properties the minute the architect declared ractical completion?

Problems for buyers

The hand over of VP without a confirmed date for occupancy has created numerous problems for house buyers. First, the new owners would have to make all outstanding payments as stipulated in the Third Schedule of the Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) upon taking VP. Next, the 18-month defect liability period would start to run 14 days from the date of notification of the hand over of VP, and third, the buyers would have to take over the responsibility for the security of their properties.

This state of affairs is grossly unfair to buyers. Imagine not being able to stay in your property after youe made all the outstanding payments, including maintenance charges. And if youe not able to stay in your house, how will you identify and rectify faults that may be caused by the developer? Supposing the CF is issued six months after you receive your keys; this means six months of the defect liability period would have been wasted. Another point is that if you cannot stay in your home, how can you prevent vandalism and theft of your fittings, short of hiring a security guard, which many cannot afford?

Besides these, the house Buyers Association has come across other complaints from buyers who have been shown CFs from other projects that have been presented as theirs or CFs with falsified endorsements! Some buyers have taken VP, only to find that the developers have financial difficulty in fulfilling their obligations to apply for the CF!

Developers?responsibility

The application for CF is governed by the Building By-laws Act. As the name implies, the CF is an official document issued by the local authority to acknowledge that a building is safe for occupation.

It is the responsibility of the developer through its appointed qualified professionals, chiefly the architect, to make the application according to the Building By-laws and other conditions imposed by the appropriate authorities.

When complaints surface, both developers and the appropriate authorities point fingers at each other. As explained by Ministry of Housing and Local Government legal adviser Shamsulbahri bin Ibrahim, and advocate and solicitor Toong Gek Fong, in an article on the Malaysian Law Journal website (http://www.mlj.com.my/free/index.asp): he crux of the problems relating to delay in issuance of CFO could be because:

1. The developer application for CFO is incomplete or not in compliance with all the requirements necessary for the issuance of CFO, resulting in the application being rejected by the appropriate authority. For instance, some developers fail to submit the Form E together with copies of all letters of clearance or approval (surat sokongan) from the relevant technical agencies, which are required by the appropriate authority for issuance of CFO, or

2. The delay or inefficiency of the appropriate authority issuing the CFO.?BR>To exonerate the local authorities from blame, the Ministry of Housing has issued directives to the effect that:
?All applications for CF submitted by developer are to be checked and confirmed to be in compliance with all requirements for issuance of CF before such applications shall be accepted by the appropriate authority;
?Upon acceptance of the Form E, the appropriate authority is to issue its written confirmation that the Form E submitted by the developer has been duly checked and accepted by the appropriate authority;
?Once such applications have been duly checked and accepted by the appropriate authority, the CF shall be issued or deemed to be issued within 14 days from the date such applications are accepted by the appropriate authority; and
?The appropriate authority will submit a written report/explanation to the Housing Ministry in respect of such cases where the CF is not issued within 14 days from the date the relevant application is accepted by the appropriate authority and in any other cases of undue delay in the issuance of the CF by the appropriate authority.

By-law 25 of the Uniform Building By-Laws 1984 was amended to provide for the issuance of the CF by the appropriate authority within 14 days from the date of acceptance of Form E, failing which the CF shall be deemed to be issued to the owner of the building.

Under the amended Housing Development Act, developers?responsibility with regard to VP and the CF has been expanded to include the following:

1. Conditions for delivery of vacant possession
It must submit a supporting certificate signed by its architect certifying that the building has been duly constructed and completed in accordance with all relevant Acts, by-laws and regulations and that all conditions by the appropriate authority in respect of the CF have been duly complied with and a supporting letter of confirmation from the appropriate authority certifying that the Form E (the application form for CF) has been duly submitted by the developer and checked and accepted by the appropriate authority.

?Duties to the Controller of Housing:
It must inform the Controller of the handing over of VP to the buyers and submit a certified true copy of the architect completion certificate and that water and electricity supply are ready for connection. It must also inform the Controller if the appropriate authority has refused to accept the submission of any document relating to the issuance of the CF and submit the refusal letter from the appropriate authority.

With the amendments to the Housing Development Act and the Building By-laws, it would seem that when house buyers receive notice of hand over of VP, they can assume safely that the occupancy of the property can be confirmed within 28 days of the notice. If not, the hand over of vacant possession can be considered premature, and the house buyer has every right to challenge the notice and asked the developer to withdraw it.

With the amendments too, the HBA sees no cause for local authorities to issue temporary certificates of fitness as it is not to the house buyers?advantage to occupy a home based on such a certificate.

We hope the Ministry of Housing is confident enough to implement further amendments of the Act, such as imposing that the delivery of VP comes with the CF. It is only right that a buyer should be able to take vacant possession of a home that is certified fit for occupation.

The National House Buyers Association is a non-profit, non-governmental, non-political organisation manned by volunteers. Our website is www.hba.org.my. E mail: info@hba.org.my

- Property Times 1st March 2003 issue -

pg wrote:Hi,

During VP, did the developer show you the confirmation letter from local authority (MPSJ) that it had been duly approved and accepted developer's form E application for CF?

I understand from some buyers from other projects that this is what usually the developers do.

No, never even bother to show to us. I asking one of my developer fren, he mention normally for his company, VP issue will automatic attach a copy of borang E summission and acceptance document.

My intention is to ask the developer to show us the confirmation letter above as a proof or evidence of E form submission for CF application. If the document is not there, then the VP should be premature and void, and the affected purchaser should request the developer to withdraw the VP and to instate the correct LAD until the next successful VP.

While waiting for the CF stuff, wonder we should form a group on this in case the CF matter is going back to square one.

3. Vacant Possession

Q: I have received vacant possession but till now, there is still no sight of the CFO. What should I do?

A: These are the steps that you may take:

i. Check with the developer and the issuing local authorities on the cause of the delay.
ii. If you are not satisfied with the response that you have been given, you may make a complaint to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government together with the following documents:

a) a copy of the notice of handover of vacant possession
b) a copy of the certificate of completion issued by the Architect
c) a copy of the letter from the local authorities regarding the issue of CFO

iii. Form an action group with other affected buyers for a cohesive voice and also to share task and to show how concerned and serious this group of affected purchasers in wanting to move into their homes.
iv. Check if similar complaints on the same project has been received and also on whether an action group for that particular project has been formed and if not, to learn on the steps on how to form one

How to check : Check here for groups formed; Join HBA's Online Forum or Contact Us.

That's exactly what I asked for but until today only 2 or 3 person have responded. Sigh....

Just checked my S&P is stamped on 27 May 2007

http://www.kpkt.gov.my/kpkt/borang/lesen/Schedule_H.pdf

New amended clauses.

Manner of delivery of vacant possession
27. (1) Upon the issuance of a Certificate by the Vendor's architect certifying
that the construction of the said Parcel has been duly completed and water and
electricity supply are ready for connection to the said Parcel and the Vendor has
applied for the issuance of the Certificate of Fitness for Occupation from the
Appropriate Authority in compliance with the relevant provisions of the Uniform
Building By-Laws 1984 and the Purchaser having paid all monies payable under
clause 4 in accordance with the Third Schedule and all other monies due under this
Agreement and the Purchaser having performed and observed all the terms and
covenants on his part under this Agreement the Vendor shall let the Purchaser into
possession of the said Parcel.
(2) The delivery of vacant possession by the Vendor shall be supported by-
(a) a certificate signed by the Vendor’s Architect certifying that the
said Building has been duly constructed and completed in
accordance with the relevant Acts, by-laws and regulations and
that all conditions imposed by the Appropriate Authority in
respect of the issuance of the Certificate of Fitness for
Occupation have been duly complied with; and
(b) a letter of confirmation from the Appropriate Authority
certifying that the Form E as prescribed under the Second
Schedule to the Uniform Building By-Laws 1984 has been duly
submitted by the Vendor and checked and accepted by the Appropriate Authority.

Something similar that Saujana Residency faced on premature VP.

#

On Oct 05, 2009, I met Ms. Tay and En. Zul at their new office at One-Residency.
I have brought up three major concerns:-
a. Please refer to S&P clause 26 - once the notice is given , two weeks later property is deemed to have handed over whether you are taking possession or not . There are hardly any security in SJ. Thus Lion Group is protected by their S&P when all our air-cond units, toilet fixtures , doors and windows are all disappeared which are very very likely with the current Malaysia security situation.
b. Three months to get CF. I attended a few property talk and were given the understanding that the Vendor / developer’s architect ( after 2007) are empowered to issue CCF w/o the the 3 months waiting . Are there anyone who can counter check this point with your legal advisors ? Otherwise , we can only move in after Chinese New Year.
C. The management Fees- they have not decide which month to start . My question: What management fee when there are no security? There are no CF etc. Are all these the responsibilities of Lion Group until they get us the CF ?
They told me to hold on to the final payment which I have handed over to Ms Tay until their project management get back to me .
Would suggest please call Ms. Melissa Liew , Ms. Tay and Ms K.P Loh to have your problems answered. I notice most of the Lion Group staff are taking hands-off attitude toward the issues. Can we demand a meeting with them in group to get some comfort?
May be it is time to form the pro-temp JMB to take care of out property . En. Zul has just called me that there are security and the property is in its final touch up works - please judge for yourselves. Thanks

Comment by Makgniv — October 5, 2009 @ 3:42 pm
#

for Item 697, for common areas / properties , all power, water, and maintenance are cover in the management fees. We should not pay any deposit for the common areas .
I lived in Apartment before, theft and break-ins are weekly affairs if not alternative days even when the service apartment is 90% filled up, I move to landed property after one year. This is the current home safety hazard we have to face in Malaysia. Sad story.

Comment by Makgniv — October 5, 2009 @ 3:50 pm
#

how do we meet? Suggestions? Time is running out. I’m in SJ. I will check this site twice or three times a day and will join any meeting at the site or nearby.

Comment by Jo — October 5, 2009 @ 6:31 pm
#

Post 696 : Julie, thanks for your excellent advice which I have noted. Additional advice on this matter by anyone else would be much appreciated.

Comment by Cobra — October 6, 2009 @ 12:09 am
#

I found this site very informative on rights concerning late possession and CF.
http://www.hba.org.my/faq/list.htm

Comment by meridien — October 6, 2009 @ 7:49 am
#

All,

I would like to propose we meet up this coming Friday at McD Subang Parade say around 4:00PM to discuss way forward as well as going over to SR for inspection. Can I have a show of hands if you’re available and interested for this meet up?

Comment by Outsider — October 6, 2009 @ 8:52 am
#

Dear ALL,
Please read the following. Does this means that Suajana Heights Sdn Bhd and Lion Group shoud use CCC instead of CFO to deliver the parcel? Is it Saujana Height Sdn Bhd use CFO as an excuse to evade further responsibility ??? Is it interesting if some lawyers among the unit Owners can provide free cost interpret on this new law .

CCC Ensures Full Accountability, Says Ong
14/04/2007 Bernama

KUALA LUMPUR, April 13 (Bernama) — The parties that issue the Certificate of Compliance and Completion (CCC) for building projects will be held accountable for its safety forever, said Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting.

He said this was because the trust had been placed in the issuing parties who are from professional groups like architects and engineers unlike previously under the Certificate of Fitness for Occupation (CFO) system that was handled by local authorities.

“The people who put down their signatures on the CCCs know what is required of them and any false representation will lead to their professionalism being questioned,” he said when interviewed by Malaysian National News Agency (BERNAMA) Chairman Datuk Annuar Zaini in the 60 Minutes With a Minister programme on the RTM1 television channel tonight.

Ong said more than one person will be responsible under the CCC system, which requires 21 forms to be processed for each part of the building process.

“For example, when an engineer has completed a structure, the architect will have to verify that it is to specifications and countersign the appropriate forms. The same will apply for the other aspects of a building like piping, wiring and others.”

“Thus, for every stage of the building, there will people responsible for it and the professional groups will have to make the appropriate verifications until all the 21 forms are completed,” he said.

Ong said the CCC system provided better guarantees compared to the previous one.

However, he said, the local authorities still reserved the right to inspect the buildings to ascertain that they are safe.

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi today when announcing the steps to be taken to improve the delivery system of local authorities said the CCC would help resolve many of the problems that were faced under the CFO system.

He also said that a commissioner of buildings post would be created to look into problems faced by buyers of high rise units.

— BERNAMA

Comment by Makgniv — October 6, 2009 @ 10:55 am
#

The counter to that is the news article below:

Only New Projects To Follow New CFO System
13/04/2007 Bernama

PETALING JAYA, April 13 (Bernama) — New projects from now on will be subjected to the Certificate of Compliance and Completion (CCC) system which replaces the Certificate of Fitness for Occupancy (CFO), Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting said today.

“Projects which have already started or are halfway through will still follow the old CFO system,” he told reporters when asked to elaborate on the initiatives announced by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi regarding steps taken by the government to reduce bureaucracy at the level of the local authority.

Ong said all relevant officers at his ministry had received the new guidelines and were ready to implement the new system.

“We will also monitor it,” he said, adding that he would elaborate on the initiatives at a news conference by his ministry tomorrow.

Ong was at the special news conference when Abdullah announced that the “one-stop centre” concept practised by some local authorities formed the main thrust of improvements that would be made in the public delivery system at that level.

Abdullah, in his announcement, said the replacement of the CFO by the CCC for the handing over of completed structures to buyers of buildings and the provision for a commissioner of buildings were also steps in the right direction to resolve problems between buyers and developers.

— BERNAMA