QUOTE(ronn77 @ Jul 25 2012, 09:10 AM)
LH or FH used to be some concern but not a big issue for nowadays market. The only negative I can think of is it takes longer to transfer the property to new buyer when you decided to sell later. As some people may worried of depreciation in value for LH property, govt is willing to extend the lease for all properties in future for a small premium. Even if your house located at FH land and if govt decided to takes away the land possesion for future development or infrastructure, nothing much you can do as they will compensate you based on your current property value. So in another words, you are not fully protected despite bearing FH or LH title.
the potential of LH FH is market driven IMHO..
I was pretty pantang LH before bcos of the market perception at that time that LH is hassle and investment potential is lower..
Fast forward nowadays with rocket high prices and limited land in prime area, seems market dont really concern much about land tenure (I ask a couple of frens dont mind at all as long as location is good). Location is still the top criteria for a good property, new launch leasehold property are snapped up instantly nowadays.
Having said that, the nature of how LH work cannot be ignored at all. Transferring of name for LH property commonly take longer than FH. LH with lesser remaining years will have some hassle in disposing or acquiring as bank might not offer credit for such property..
As long as lease tenure is still long enough, it will still has potential..