Another one


Attached thumbnail(s)

Nice... Thank you for the pictures!!!

Sifusss!

Finally got a copy of SPA from developer's lawyer. However, some of the clauses are loop-sided and tend to be highly beneficial to the developer.

Question is, can I propose for few changes here and there on the clauses which Im not comfortable with? Do we purchaser have the right to meddle with the SPA? I really want the unit but the SPA drawn really makes me feel eeeeurghh.. And I may end-up canceling if it cant be done.

Thanks!

This post has been edited by nyck: Oct 27 2014, 11:46 PM

What are the clauses that you think are loopsided benefiting the developer?
Mind to put an example here?

You can raise your concern, but I don't think developer will entertain you.
Good luck, bro.

Some of the clauses: -

Clause 12.2
Less than 5% differences in Parcel/Unit sizes, developer is not liable for price adjustment on the differences. Imagine if your unit is 1000sqft. 4% differences for 1000sqft unit is about 40sqft. And current value per sqft for my unit is about 650+, that about RM26k loss in value

Clause 23.4
In the event there's a dispute arising on defects during DLP, the developer's architect or engineer has the final say on whether the defects are within the developer's bound to make good. Since the party that has the final say are working for the developer, guess we'll know what is the outcome wud be no matter how much noise purchaser make.

Clause 29.1 & 29.2
Purchaser have to fully indemnify the developer if against action, proceedings etc in respect of injury/loss to person or property of tenant while in or upon any part of the parcel, common area etc. This clause doesnt make sense at all.

Clause 33.1
It should read as purchaser shall NOT be made liable, however for this development, the SPA says purchaser shall be made to indemnify the developer in case new laws or amendment of existing laws arises which imposed on developer which caused the developer to incur additional fees, charges or taxes. Meaning, they can simply transfer the increment of cost to purchaser directly when they shud be absorbing it.

I have alot more but too tired to list all down.. Any friendly lawyer who can advice whether such terms can be omitted from the SPA?



This post has been edited by nyck: Oct 28 2014, 10:29 PM

tengsterkochincheryee
Can give some advice ah?
Let us learn something if possible?
TIA!!

boss, the above are my interpretation. best to seek legal advise.
basically if it's a residential project, it is governed by HDA and the entire SPA need to comply without amending the clause and wordings stipulated. once any changes are made, it can be challenged.
commercial on the other hand are a totally different ball game altogether as it is not governed by any bodies currently.
cheers!

calculator2013

Kochin Gor, thanks alot for the clarification and sharing.

This post has been edited by Calculator2013: Oct 29 2014, 11:04 AM

by the way, from what i'd heard, this is a good developer lah.
so should not be any worries.

Thanks Tok Kochin! SInce u mentioned that commercial properties are abit different than usual, so I try my luck and ask for lawyers clarifications on the indemnity.. The rest like u said still got room to wiggle and got precedent cases whereby purchaser dragged developer into court altho in s&p covertly jaga developer's ass, im quite relief abit la..

however, for Clause 33.1 right, i compared it with Sime Darby Serini Melawati s&p, it says purchasers are not liable for any overrun cost due to new laws etc. but since urban360 is about 90% completed, then it shud be ok.. but for other development ar, i dun tink its fair for the purchase to be held liable. very unethical business practice. just my 2 cents lo

anyway, thanks for the heads up!

Thanks bro for highlighting this matter to Sifus here..


+1. Im gonna take a deep breath and go for it la.. last commercial property within my target location b4 GST hits..

This post has been edited by nyck: Oct 29 2014, 07:42 PM

Wow!! You are vested in Serini Melawati too?
Geng!!
kochin, your kaki in Melawati and Setapak area.

Congrats!

These are standard clauses in SPA. If these are not fair to purchasers, nothing is fair already.

No lah bro, one of my customer bought a unit there. I sibuk2 look into his SPA and compare it with mine.. Alot of discrepancies.. But then again, as brader Kochin mentioned earlier, commercial SPA is different with residential kan.. So, yeah hope for the best la..

Thanks bro! Rembat satu la, hehehe..

Not standard i think. Ive my fair share of vetting SPA for my customers, some says otherwise on the overrun cost and some dont even have the indemnity clause. Maybe bcoz this is commercial property, hence not subjected to hda kot..

How I wish it is Freehold, then I would have bought it..

its ok ma.. leasehold or freehold have no differences nowadays.. 98 years sounds good to me coz we never know whats gonna happened even 5 years from now.. gov might changed and abolished city council and leasehold/freehold crap.. hahahaha..

oh btw, any urban360 buyers here in lyn?? wanna check wat is the progress stage now. 80%? 90%?

Not vp yet? i thought ads say Nov '14. before this say Aug '14

The advertisement not saying VP on Aug14 or Nov14.
Developer just notifying that Completion of work on Aug14.
Now waiting to get CCC on Nov14.
Just to clarify.

Can get keys this month?

I have checked with developer SA.
Most probably getting keys early next year (maybe Jan2015 or Feb2015)