Am not familiar with mix development...

Very interesting questio by TS....

My question though... Mixed dev or service apt/Condo sit on commercial land and has a commercial title to the parcel, if I can a business (making it into an office) from my apt/Condo, what's stopping me from short term renting?

What's the purpose of service apt/Condo in the first place???

You can set rules that regulate the common area and make it difficult to run commercial activities...

As for renting out, there is a landlord in my Condo (residential), he has about 50+ units... Its very difficult to moniyor who is on short or long stay, the best way would be to amend the house rules.

Just a thought...

This post has been edited by aurora97: Jun 19 2015, 09:18 AM

interesting... topic... let me go take my shovel and korek.

thanks!

To add:
Difference between DMC & House Rules



I think the question is firstly to address “is whether STR is legal in the first place”? Safety, fire insurance, number of occupants, pets, enforcement and so on… are only side issues. If you can show that STR is illegal (or unlawful) in the first place, you don’t even have to consider the side issues.

Haven’t sighted anything to the contrary, I do agree that there’s no specific definition in the law as to what constitutes STR and LTR.

As for quoting item 49 Schedule 1 of the Stamp Act 1949, it doesn’t really help your cause because the Stamp Act is a means in which the government uses to collect revenue.

I would suggest the National Land Code, a lease is recognized as term exceeding 3 years (s.221 National Land Code 1965) and is capable of registration (s.292 National Land Code 1965). A tenancy on the other hand which is for a term not exceeding 3 years is exempted from registration (s.216 National Land Code 1965).

Like Ascott and Sommerset Residence or any other hotel per se, I would class a STR is a form of License instead of a tenancy.

Not sure, hence I am taking out my shovel.

I am slanting towards the idea that the STR may be regulated by local by-laws instead of federal legislation.

The SMA governs the JMB and MC, it will not help you in this topic. Also to add, after perusing Schedule 4 of the SMA, the tribunal has no say in this issue as well.

As for a comprehensive or not SMA, i think cukup makan for now. Ask for more from Gomen now, you probably get nothing.

I have trained my thought as follows:-

1. I can establish that an “STR” is a license and not a “tenancy”.
You will know why I come to this conclusion because of the term “occupiers liability”. The rights and liability of a trespasser, visitor, licensee, tenant and lessor are all very different.

2. where STR is applied in a service apartment setting, is such “business activity” legal, unlawful or otherwise?

3. what does the law and rules say?

(a) is there a federal legislation?
(b) if there’s no federal legislation, is there any local by laws?
© if there’s no local by laws, what about DMC and house rules?

4. what is the solution or remedy?

In addressing the TS question, I will take the second response:

Another is run by “individual owners” that do not need a license but as long as the apartment is not private residential and is falls under service apartment like Regalia Resident in Kuala Lumpur.

Unfortunately, you statement lack of credible source to support your inference.

Assuming that is the case, then the remedy would be to amend the house rules to tighten the usage of the common area. (example access card to differentiate between owners and visitors, requiring owners who carry out business to take up additional insurance [ example what if the visitor dies in the service apartment after being hit by a falling flower pot])

I completely agree and I am not disputing the fact that DMC and House Rules have no say on this subject matter because it infringes basic human rights.

I have been highlighting from the beginning that the crux and the use of DMC and House Rules are to regulate the common areas. Unless he can somehow fly to his unit, he will need to use the common area. Gaining control of access points is key in discouraging people from carrying out business activities, on this score, one must also have support of the general population and also the management committee in order to succeed.

I further caveat my view that one should only resort to DMC and House Rules ONLY when all avenues have been exhausted (both Federal, State and Locality).

I just noted this pt.

Possible.

Although the DMC/House Rules may permit such activity to be carried out, you may also want to consider federal legislation/local (state/municipal) by laws. Federal legislation/local (state/municipal) by laws will trump your DMC and where necessary, you may be required to obtain license to carry out certain businesses (i.e. hotel/inns).


This post has been edited by aurora97: Jun 19 2015, 02:23 PM

To add:

Interestingly, while reading the Customs guidelines I noticed this:-

Under the Tourism Industry Act 1992, “accommodation premises” means any building including hotels, inns, motels, boarding houses, hostels, rest-houses and lodging-houses held out by the proprietor, owner or manager, either wholly or partly as offering lodging or sleeping accommodation to tourists for hire or any other form of reward, whether or not food or drink is also offered. Any person who carries on or operates accommodation premises shall be registered under such Act.

Read who is a tourist…. Believe me half the time you may be one LOL

“tourist” means any person, whether he is a Malaysian national or otherwise, visiting any place in Malaysia for any of the following purposes, namely— (a) pleasure, recreation or holiday; (b) culture; © religion; (d) visiting friends or relatives; (e) sports; (f) business; (g) meetings, conferences, seminars or conventions; (h) studies or research; (i) any other purpose which is not related to an occupation that is remunerated from the place visited;

So, what does this mean?

It’s possible for those who let based on STR may be subject to Tourism Industry Act 1992.

Heavy penalties await for those who do not have license to do such activities.

Hahahahahaa….

This post has been edited by aurora97: Jun 19 2015, 04:01 PM

I agree on this point.

My condo use to be occupied by students.

Every other month, you will be talking about damage to this and that.

You don’t feel it until you become a victim.

Based on what I have gathered… the line of attack should be as follows:-

1st step
Read up on your DMC or house rules

2nd Step
DMC or house rules
(a) silent on the issue
(b) expressly prohibit
© expressly allow
(d) poor drafting incomprehensible

3rd Step
For (a) lodge complaint with COB.
For (b) lodge complaint with JMB/MC to enforce. If they fail to do so, escalate to COB.
For © lodge complaint to Ministry of Tourism and COB. (try your lucklor) LOL.
For (d) lodge complaint with COB, JMB/MC and Ministry of tourism.

4th step
Response satisfactory = end
Response not satisfactory= raise in AGM/EGM.

careful HDA some of the articles Are out-dated.

Malaysian Bar Council

Does the definition of “housing accommodation” in the amended Act include serviced suites or apartments?

If the serviced suites or serviced apartments are intended for human habitation or partly for human habitation and partly for business premises, then they will fall within the definition of housing accommodation as amended. It does not matter if the accommodation is erected on a land designated or approved for commercial development as the Amendment Act has removed these words from the definition of housing accommodation inserted by the 2002 Amendment Act.