1. You can't just change the padlock until your lawyer gives you the green light to do so - check with him first if all the proper documentation has been done to the effect that you've been confirmed as the registered proprietor of the property.

2. Yes. You bought it on an 'as-is-where-is-basis'. All things - good or bad - that comes with the house belongs to you.

3. Yes. See above.

4. He can't remove anything. Once he vacates the premises, he can't come back and state that he wants to remove such and such. Once you have taken vacant posession of the premises, everything in it belongs to you. That's when you change the lock and it's game over for the previous occupant.

The seller has the right to appoint his own lawyer as he wishes. Sometimes the seller would not want to appoint his own lawyer and would 'tumpang' the purchaser's lawyer.

Yes there's nothing wrong to compare quotes nor to ask for a quote from a lawyer. It's always been done so. Quite prudent to do so too. But don't equate cheap fees to good quality.

There's no way of saying that there would be a problem or otherwise just by referring to the number of lawyers involved in the transaction. It all depends on the quality and efficiency of the lawyers involved.

You may have one lawyer running the whole show, incl your loan doc, but if he's slow and inefficient, things will not move fast at all.

You may have three lawyers in the transaction (vendor, purchaser, purchaser's financier) - but if they are all super efficient and there's good communication between them, things will definitely move fast.

So, there's really no justification to generalise things. The choice is ultimately up to the parties involved.

Hope that puts things in perspective for you.

More often than not, the solicitor would wait at least for a confirmation that the loan solicitor has advised for drawdown of the redemption sum first - before submitting the DOA/14A for adjudication. Once it has been submitted for adj, and the Notice from LHDN has been issued - you would have to pay for stamp duty. What if in the interim, the purchaser's financier decides to pull the plug on the loan and decide not to issue the cheque for redemption? Then there would be a problem.

Yes, and it's Jalan Duta, not Datu.

No you can't apply online.

Yes, you'll get your tax file number on the spot.

They've every right to do so,mate

Technically he is still the registered owner of the property until your solicitor finalises the transfer of ownership in your favour. Legalities aside, he has the existing keys and as such, he can go in and out and deal with the fixtures and fittings as he sees fit - up until your lawyer gives you the green light and you proceed to change the locks. Up to that date, whatever in the house still belongs to him. But once you change the locks - you're considered to have taken over posession of the property as the new owner (normal vacant posession would involve the handing over of the keys to signify change of ownership). He has no right over anything left in the house by then. You can stake your claim to it by then - but most people either throw it out or donate to charity, from what I know.

The ex-owner has no right to demand a single cent from you. Do not pay him anything. In fact, it would appear that he doesn't even want the stuff in the house and this may seem like a desperate attempt to squeeze some money out of you by making these baseless threats. Perhaps he can't afford to even hire movers to remove his belongings. Go lodge a police report that he threatened you for your record purposes. Perhaps next time when you change the locks you can bring it to the attention of the police and they can send someone to accompany you to ensure that the ex-owner does not cause any problems.

The problem which you are facing is the reason why a lot of people shy away from buying houses on auction, despite the temptation of lower-than-market-rate prices of same. The hassle can be too much to bear when there is someone still occupying the premises, which is often the case.

Facing a belligerant ex-owner is one thing - there have been instances where the ex-owners completely destroy the fixtures and fittings of the house before leaving and the new owners faced a huge repair/reno bill which would be more than the savings you made when purchasing the property below the market rate. Ex-owners who literally 'paint' the wall with faeces, ex-owners who leave mysterious small puppets, miniature altars, ornaments, etc in the house. Trust me, I've heard it all.

Best if you also speak to your lawyer and see if they can assist you in any way. Perhaps send a notice of eviction to the ex-owner and see if that shakes him up a bit. Pray that he just gives up and go away in peace.

That's the grey area right there. Legally the ex-owner is still the registered proprietor, so he can do as he wishes. If the ownership is still in the process of transferring, as you put it, then the new owner is still not yet the registered proprietor, right? So she can't really do anything to stop the ex-owner from doing whatever he wants to the property. Be that as it may that the property has been auctioned off, the new owner is still not the legal owner.

The important thing to bear in mind is that the property would be sold on an 'as is where is' basis. And as it where is would be when you finally get the green light to obtain vacant posession of the property - if it means getting a locksmith to break the locks, then what you see when you step inside is what you get - it is as is, where is. That is the risk attached to purchasing auction properties.

dariafoo is my sister. I'm dariofoo

The situation you are in is that you are unrepresented and you are using the purchaser's solicitor as a common solicitor, i.e. to assist you to redeem your loan, prepare the discharge of charge/deed of r&r, submit CKHT forms, etc.

With regard to legal fees - it would be RM400 for discharge of charge/deed of r&r, RM300 for each seller's CKHT form and the rest would be disbursements. I think you better ask for a breakdown of the charges as some unscrupulous purchaser's solicitors like to 'pass' certain charges from purchaser to an unsuspecting vendor. Things like bankruptcy search, land search, etc all must be borne by the purchaser, and not you. It's hard to say if it is reasonable or otherwise with the round figure given as such. Ask for an itemised bill.

With regard to the S&P, you have every right to take it back and peruse it and make amendments as you see fit. Don't be bullied by the lawyers who say that you can't amend it. That is utter rubbish. They are just trying to save their time and effort but shoving it to you and making you sign it on the spot. They ought to have emailed it to you first and getting your approval before getting their client to sign it.

Whatever was stated in 'Cons' above is true. You are deemed to be unrepresented. However, you have the right to ask the purchaser's solicitor to explain any clause in the agreement to you if you don't understand it. There is however no obligation on their part to look after your interests or put in any clauses which might be in your favour. Read the agreement properly.

The pros is that you save on legal fees - as the scaled fees would set you back a bit, depending on the price of the property. You may read the earlier posts in this thread to see a discussion on the pros and cons of appointing your own solicitor compared to appointing a common solicitor.

Sorry for the delay in replying. Well, you'll just have to keep on bugging him and following up with him

Just kiddin', mate

Bro,

Why is your lawyer advising you to lodge a caveat? Is there even individiual titles issued for the project? I doubt so, so the caveat he's referring to would be a caveat upon the master title. You can't do that. What effect would a caveat have anyway? It's not like the developer is going to transfer the master title to another party. Most probably the master title is still charged to an end-financier for a loan to the developer. Please ask your lawyer to inform you the purpose of lodging the caveat. If he can't give you a satisfactory explanation, then probably it's just to squeeze more fees from you, unfortunately.

That's good. Problem resolved then.

You can apply at the Registrar of Societies (ROS) to be a society but whether the ROS approves your application is another story. There would be a reason why your org was registered as a company in the first place. Probably there were anticipated problems to obtain ROS status, hence the application to be a Sdn Bhd under the Companies Commission, M'sia (CCM)?

There are a lot of NGOs in M'sia which are registered under the CCM - Amnesty Int'l, SUARAM, etc. All these are Sdn Bhd. Why? Because they are so critical of the Govt, the ROS will never approve their applic as a society! It's a fact.

However, pro-Govt organisations like the WWF - are easily granted society status.

So, which side of the fence is your org on? Mind sharing the name of your org?

Hope I answered your question - basically you can apply to be registered as a society, but it may take ages to get an answer. That is probably why in the meantime, the org was registered as a Sdn Bhd.

Kochin,

Welcome back. Sorry bro I find it difficult to comprehend your situation. How can they have commenced leasing when VP has not been handed over the purchasers yet?

Perhaps the relevant clauses of the SPA in this regard would be helpful.

Perhaps your understanding of what VP means is different from mine,bro. My humble understanding of VP is vacant posession of the property - i.e. handing over of the keys to the property. So I don't understand you when you say, "they already got VP for the development but holding VP to purchasers".

Care to clarify? Sorry la bro. My IQ level quite low.

That aside, I think there is absolutely no reason why the developer would want to delay handing over of VP as they can claim for a further 12.5% of the progressive payment from the bank when they hand over VP. The longer they delay, the more detrimental it is to them.

Yes perhaps you can investigate further in this matter.

Oh you meant CF. Well...

But in your earlier post you mentioned that the clause mentioned that the property is to be leased back to the developer after VP has been given to the purchaser, so I think at the end of the day there's nothing to be worried as VP would still have to be handed over to the purchaser, who will then decide whether to lease it to the developer. Only then can the developer do the necessary renovations, with the purchaser's consent. I don't think they would dare to quietly renovate it and lease it out without the purchaser's consent. They would definitely get into trouble as the unit doesn't belong to them, and if the renos run into problems, they would have a bigger headache.

I think there's nothing to be worried about,chief.

Of course they would go for the 12.5%, chief. Once VP has been handed over they can start collecting maintenance as well. More money there to be made.

1) If they say free legal fees for SPA then yes, you pay nothing for that. With regard to the legal fees on the loan doc, you better check with them. Some developers absorb the fees if you take a loan from their panel banks. Some would not. Best to check with them as the policy differs from one developer to another.

2) The agreement is a standard format agreement based on the Schedule G or Schedule H agreement as provided for by statute. I have uploaded a copy of the Schedule G agreement in the earlier posts of this thread. Perhaps you can print it out and use it as a comparison with your SPA. However, I doubt if there would be any material difference from the standard agreement template as the developer can get into trouble if someone reports it to the authorities.

3) CF has nothing to do with individual title. It only has a bearing on when you can expect to get VP for your property. Individual title depends on the initiative and efficiency of the developer. Some developers even offer individual titles upon signing of the SPA. They offer it as part of the package to attract purchasers. It is very hard to estimate. Some get it done even during the launch of sales, while some developers drag their feet for years before eventually splashing the cash to apply for subdivision. Hopefully your developer has a good reputation. Some homework on the Internet to gauge their previous projects, if any, would be useful.

Good luck

Differential sum is separate from your loan sum. Your financier must be certain that you have the financial capacity to complete the transaction before they commit to redeem the vendor's outstanding loan. That is standard procedure. The diff sum will not be released to the vendor yet. It will be kept by your solicitor in their client's account as stakeholder.

Your SPA should state a duration of time for the vendor to obtain the redemption statement, failing which the completion date would be extended automatically. So there's essentially nothing to be afraid of.

If you deliberately delay forwarding the diff sum to your solicitor, it will delay the transaction indefinitely and things will not move.