Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Lawyer's Corner v2, One-stop centre for any legal queries

views
     
jackychuah
post Nov 30 2012, 02:38 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
9 posts

Joined: Jun 2012


Hi Dariofoo,

I have some issues on my MOT (Strata Title). The developer claims that my condo square feet is actually more that what it stated in SPA. I bought my house direct from the developer. Now the developer actually asking for additional money on the additional square feet.

Can I know the developer have the right to demand money for this additional square feet?
jackychuah
post Nov 30 2012, 03:18 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
9 posts

Joined: Jun 2012


QUOTE(dariofoo @ Nov 30 2012, 02:51 PM)
No such thing. It should follow the terms of the SPA where all the terms, price and size have been agreed upon. How can they demand for more now? They are amending the purchase price. Have they shown any proof to you about this? Or did they sold you a bigger unit by mistake, ie signed wrong SPA?
*
Thanks for your reply. They are actually demand for more money now.

I didn't signed wrong SPA and they didn't proof to me on the extra square feet. They are now request me to make payment, else they will not sign the MOT.

I ask around my friends, this is the first time they heard about this! and I don't feel like being an idiot...


Attached thumbnail(s)
Attached Image Attached Image
jackychuah
post Nov 30 2012, 03:48 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
9 posts

Joined: Jun 2012


QUOTE(dariofoo @ Nov 30 2012, 03:27 PM)
Why did you not put in the attachments earlier?

A reading of that seems quite clear that you have to pay. Request for a copy of the title and plan to ensure that the measurement stated is correct. If it is in order and the calculation correct, then you have to pay as it is stated in the SPA.

Do it fast to prevent further delay in the MOT.
*
Sorry for not attached the attachments earlier.

Is it normal that in SPA the clause stated that way? or that is an additonal clause in my SPA?

Can I argue on the said issues? as our all 4 blocks of condo having the same issue....
jackychuah
post Dec 3 2012, 04:07 PM

New Member
*
Junior Member
9 posts

Joined: Jun 2012


QUOTE(dariofoo @ Nov 30 2012, 04:03 PM)
With regard to your SPA, it should follow the Schedule H template in the HD Act.

The relevant section is as follows.

Position and area of Parcel
13. (1) No error or misstatement as to the description of the area of the said
Parcel shall annul the sale of the said Parcel or entitle the Purchaser to be discharged
from the purchase.
(2) Any error or misstatement as to the description of the area of the said
Parcel shall give the Purchaser an entitlement to an adjustment of the purchase price
in accordanc e with the provisions of this clause.
(3) If the area of the said Parcel as shown in the strata title when issued is
less than the area shown in the Building Plan, there shall be an adjustment of the
purchase price for the difference (if any) in excess of three (3) per centum of the area as
shown in the Building Plan calculated at the rate of Ringgit Malaysia
…………………………………… (RM………………..) only per square metre shall
be adjusted accordingly.
(4) The Vendor shall not be entitled to any adjustment of the purchase
price if the area of the said Parcel as shown in the strata title exceeds the area shown
in the Building Plan.
(5) Any payment resulting from the adjustment and required to be paid by
the Vendor shall be so paid within fourteen (14) days of the issue of the strata title.


If you look at subclause 4, it does say that the Vendor is not entitled to request from the Purchaser the excess, if the area in the strata title exceeds the area shown in the plan.

So, your argument would be that the provision in your SPA is in contravention of the template in Schedule H, and it thus void.

The developer's argument would be that you had signed the SPA with that clause in it, so you would be bound by it.

I think, bearing in mind the provisions of Schedule H - the law would be in favour of the Purchaser.

If you can rally all the purchasers together, perhaps via the JMB, then a collective voice against the developer would have a better effect.

Sorry for the conflicting advise with my previous post. I should've checked the Schedule H template before advising you further.
*
Thanks for your precious opinion, I will try to solve the problem based on your advice. Will update if any progress, thank Dariofoo

This post has been edited by jackychuah: Dec 3 2012, 04:08 PM

Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0594sec    1.29    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 18th December 2025 - 11:32 AM