Usual practice is that there are two separate legal fees - one for SPA and one for the loan documentation.

As for whether you are overcharged or not, use the calculator at the first page of this thread to calculate your legal fees. Then, go through the numerous samples of legal fees quotations in this thread and compare with yours.

If still got doubt do come back here and ask.

Thanks a lot for your kind reply sir. I was confused for a moment why I had to pay twice.

On a side note, I was charged Stamp Duty during the S&P, and I'm charged again for Stamp duty for the Loan documentation. Is that the usual practice? Sorry for being such a bother, I really have no clue when it comes to matters of legality.

Thanks in advance.

Yes you have to pay twice, i.e. stamp duty on the MOT/DOA for the transfer/assignment, and also ad valorem stamp duty on the facility agreement (loan agreement) for your loan documentation.

Hello.
I would appreciate any advice or suggestions.

I've just completed the purchase of a condo which comes with a parking lot A (Subsale, not from developer). To my horror, I discovered that the parking lot A was actually sold to 2 owners, myself and my new condo neighbour.
My neighbour informs me that for his case, the developer also screwed up his parking lot and gave him this lot A as a replacement. He has the S&P and supplement agreement for the parking lot to prove. He has been there for the past 3 years.

The vendor who sold to me the condo unit was unaware of the double sale of the parking lot A as he purchased the condo as investment and never stayed in the condo/ used the parking lot.
In fact, up until today, even the condo management office or developer had not updated the parking lot info to indicate it belongs to another condo unit.

Now I'm at a loss.
To me, I am being cheated as what I paid for is not according to the agreement. I look at the purchase as the condo + the parking lot as a whole package.
One of the reasons I purchased is because the parking lot is located near the entrance of the lift and on a lower floor.
Given the high occupancy of whole condo, if I were given a replacement parking lot, it would not likely been in or near the same sweet spot.

And if I had known right from the beginning, I may have decided not to purchase/ or negotiate further the purchase price, etc but now, being "nasi dah jadi bubur", who can I do?

Please advise. T.T

Hi Dariofoo,

My Bank Panel lawyer told me there is a clause that if one of the borrower unable to attend to sign the perfection of charge for HSBC loan document due to she is in UK. The HSBC bank officer in HQ can sign on her behalf at Borang Gadaian 16A form.

Is it true?

Hi Dariofoo,

RPGT period is between 2 SPA's dates OR their stamping dates?
Example:
1) Bought
Property bought and SPA dated 1 Aug 2006.
Stamped on 2 Sept 2006

2) Sell
Property was sold and SPA dated 2 Aug 2011.
Stamped on 9 Aug 2011.

Does the owner still need to pay RPGT considering SPA has been signed after 5 years (refer to SPA date)?
Or
the owner needs to pay RPGT because it was stamped within the 5 years?

What I'm sure of is that you can't get that particular parking lot back as it was never owned by the vendor in your case in the first place. Nemo dat quod non habet - "he cannot give what he does not have".

If you were so particular about that parking lot you ought to have asked your lawyer to call the JMB or developer's office and make sure that the particular lot is the corresponding lot in the principal SPA with the vendor. Have you asked your lawyer with regard to the predicament you are in?

If you want to start suing your avenue is against the vendor, who will in turn sue the developer, etc etc etc. An utter waste of time and resource as you surely cannot get back that particular lot.

Best to just swallow the bitter pill and move on.

There must be a Power of Attorney duly executed, stamped and registered in the High Court before the holder of the PA can execute docs on behalf of the borrower. Can't just rely on a clause. Surely there's a PA.

Reference is always made to date of the SPA.

In your above case, no RPGT would be payable

Thanks Dariofoo

Thanks for the kind advice. Seems I'll have to pay again then

So you mean not only HSBC can do that but also PBB, Maybank and other bank can do it as well.

---

Added on August 12, 2011, 10:19 pmAnother question to ask, My father leave me a will stating that the company business own pass to me according to his last will. What if a mistress suddenly claim against she have a share of the company base on proprietary estoppel (Chun v Ho) similiar case.

Will the judgement from the judge follow the last will from my father or there is a case for the mistress to claim if she goes to court fighting.

This post has been edited by hsbc.jason: Aug 12 2011, 10:19 PM

Dear Dario,
Thanks for the reply.

In the SPA between vendor and I, the parking lot indicated attached with the condo is A
In the original SPA between vendor and developer, parking lot is also A
Up until today, the condo management office still indicates parking for this condo is A.

When my lawyer submitted the documents, the consent letter from developer to allow and confirm the subsale also indicates parking lot A.

Isn't this a basic breach of agreement? A fraudulent sale?
What are my rights?
Am I not entitled to a good parking lot just because they screw up?
Why should I be forced to swallow a bitter pill when I paid my part in good faith?

While I am more than open to accept an amicable solution and settlement out of court, I believe that the developer and vendor must be responsible.
Yesterday, when I called the developer's office and spoke to their assistant manager, asking how they could have sold one parking lot to two different purchasers, she just answered "I don't know" and push on the responsibility to other staff.
When I met with the senior manager at the developer's office today, they tried to fob me off with a replacement lot at a poor location, as I had feared and even implied that I was just there to stir trouble and try to get "benefits".

If I am truly forced to pursue the avenue of seeking damages, can you advise how I can start?
Thanks again.

The lender bank will be the holder of the PA. If no individual title then the Bank will always insist that a PA is executed in their favour. All banks practise this, if i'm not mistaken.

What is Chun v Ho? Never heard of that case before.

The major case involving proprietory estoppel (PE) is Cheng Hang Guan (am not sure of exact spelling) v Perumahan Farlim. If I'm not mistaken it was the late Edgar Joseph Jr SCJ who wrote the written judgment for that case.

I doubt if PE is a valid ground in the current case because:

1) PE always involves land
2) PE is an equitable remedy
3) PE, like any equitable remedy, cannot operate as a bar to statute, i.e. it cannot contravene statute.

In Malaysia, there is a Wills Act which governs wills. If the will was validly executed, witnessed and the mental capacity of the testator is not challenged, the will can be enforced. PE can't come in and operate as a bar to the will.

It doesn't matter if a mistress comes into the picture or any other party - bare reliance of PE will not assist the person.

Cheers.

Ok now the facts are clearer, although not 100%. So the Nemo dat quod non habet - "he cannot give what he does not have" - principle will be applicable in your favour as the developer cannot purport to sell it to another person (the neighbour) when it has sold it off to the vendor in the first place. So the purported sale to the neighbour would be null and void and of no effect. So my earlier advice would not be 100% applicable, in light of the factual matrix which you have just stated above.

It's breach of contract by the vendor against you. It is not fraud though. Don't merely use the word fraud as it is a bigger word than you think. It is not easy to prove fraud and in this case, from the basic facts stated, I doubt if the vendor is a party to fraud. I'm sure he is as ignorant about the purported subsequent sale as you are.


As explained earlier - you sue the vendor for breach of contract - the vendor will subsequently bring the developer in as a third party, and perhaps the neighbour as well. It's messy, and would cost you quite a bit of money in legal fees as well. Whether or not you can recoup the legal fees from the other parties in this case once it's over is another issue.

If you're going to reside in the unit after this, bear in mind that going on the warpath against the developer and your neighbour, albeit indirectly, may not be the wisest option.

However, if you are going strictly on the principle that you ought to get what you paid and contracted for, then by all means go all out to get that parking lot assigned in your favour.

From the facts presented herein, you do have a good case. The neighbour's remedy would be to sue the developer for damages only, as he can't get back the parking lot.

I'm going to pre-empt you at this stage before you ask me and inform you that legal fees for litigation (court) matters are subjective and differs from firm to firm. There's no market rate, usual rate, normal rate, etc etc etc. So if you want to find out, you need to see a litigation lawyer, set out your facts, and ask for a quotation for legal fees.

I wish you all the best.



This post has been edited by dariofoo: Aug 13 2011, 04:04 AM

hi dariofoo,

a question need your help here, and thanks to your earlier help.

If the developer has wound up, and now to sell the property, vendor has lawyer for 1st MOT, buyer has another lawyer for 2nd MOT and S&P. When the time to submit 1st & 2nd MOT together to land office, which lawyer to submit? As vendor pay his own lawyer for 1st MOT, and buyer pay his own laywer for 2nd MOT and S&P, whose lawyer has to submit both MOT to land office? will there be an extra charge for submitting the MOT?

Thanks for your help!!

From the Purchaser's side. No additional legal fees is allowed to be charged for presentation of MOT. It's part of scaled fees.

Thanks! But whose lawyer is going to submit the MOT? as 1st MOT and 2nd MOT need to be submitted concurrently?
In this case, (I am the vendor), can I have my lawyer to do the 1st MOT and pass it to buyer's lawyer to submit both MOTs? Can I NOT have a lawyer to act for me in the S&P, but only do 1st MOT for me?

Thank you very much for you help.

Hi dariafoo,

Recently I boought a new terrace house with 400k. I only loan 250k.

The lawyer from the bank has issued me a letter to settle the balance of differential sum to developer immediately.

Does it mean that I have to pay the differential sum now?

At the same time, I also received a letter from developer to pay for the 10% after the completion of the foundation of said buildings.
..

This post has been edited by aska01: Aug 14 2011, 12:05 AM

Hi dariofoo,

wish to trouble you again.

understand that bankers usually source for their panel lawyers to prepare the loan agreement. for this, can we request the banker to nominate another one of their panel lawyers or request for "discount" if the fees are deemed too high?

thanks first