5 Strangers Purchase a 700k property

Lowyat.NET forums

Lowyat.NET Kopitiam Garage Sales

Lowyat.NET Rules and Regulations FAQ Help Search Members

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Lowyat.NET -> Property Talk -> Property Q&A

Bump Topic Add Reply RSS Feed

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

Investment 5 Strangers Purchase a 700k property, Is it feasible?

views

cherroy	May 1 2016, 12:56 PM Return to original view \| Post #1
20k VIP Club Staff 25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang	QUOTE(ZapZapk @ May 1 2016, 12:10 PM) Ya, you guys are right and I quite agree with you .I have thought of that, the risk of default and so on. Of course, I do not mean buyers are students. It's a group of 5 adult who earn RM 4 k or above a month. Non-technically speaking, if I am wrong or if it is not feasible, please correct me . IF there is a legal agreement was set at the outset and lay down all the condition to tackle all the possible risk. For example, » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « 1) If anyone of the member don’t contribute their share of loan repayment for 3 month over the total period of loan repayment, the fella would have to “out of the party” automatically and immediately. He/she can sell “his share of the property” to someone at the amount of he/she had paid or below/ higher than that amount. The person can be from the “insider of the party” or “outsider of the party”. 2) For sure, in order to be the member of the “party”, we would have to filter the applicants’ ability to pay. 3) Agreement also set the rental of the property must be used to pay the loan instalment. a) The rental amount is set at the market value and would be increase 2 % from years to years. 4) The shareholder couldn’t or could stay at the property provided he/she pay rent. 5) The agreement also laid out the condition to sell, for example : a) sell the property once it appreciated to 120- 150% b) sell the property when the shareholder reduce to 3 people c) sell the property after 6 years no matter whatever the price From the technically point of view [legal side and the bank (i.e., loan transfer?)], 6)is it possible that an agreement is set to override the S&P agreement for including all the above condition? And, 7}what is the other risks that might cause this investment to fail? The main problem is the legal owner side of property registration or in other word, the property is registered under whom. If register with 5 person name, then you need to have 5 person so sign off the transfer of property when selling the property time. Either one doesn't want to sign, it is a standoff, no transfer can be made hence no S&P can be proceeding, disregard what kind of other legal agreement signed. Also, you can't draft another legal agreement (fail to pay etc) to "force out" any legal owners from the property. It violates the existing land code/property ownership law, which may result in the agreement made can be considered null and void. Loan also cannot be transferred simply by drafting "another agreement". Never ever "joint name" to buy property, it potential asking for trouble in the future only. Even husband and wife, my personal view, also no. If really want to "joint name", use a company or holding company to own the property.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

cherroy	May 2 2016, 10:43 AM Return to original view \| IPv6 \| Post #2
20k VIP Club Staff 25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang	QUOTE(ZapZapk @ May 1 2016, 10:48 PM) Hi cherroy. Thanks you for your reply. Really informative and valuable. That is what I am looking for. If it's not workable to draft another legal agreement to "force out" any legal owner, is it possible if the 5 people including all the conditions in S&P agreement? (ie: the one who failed to pay the installment have no right share the profit of share and have must sign off the transfer of property when selling the property time?) How does a company or holding company work to own the property? and what is the different compared to individual? There is no such thing of S&P of 5 people that can force out 1 owner if he/she fail to pay the installment. S&P is between the purchaser and seller to facilitate the sales of property, once executed and the property title being transferred to the buyer, that's the end of the S&P function. While, ownership right of the property is on the property title registration. If hold through the company, the subjected to company law, you just need to get more than 50% approval during the resolution of the company to sell off the property, then the property can be sold already, instead of need all 5 people to sign off the sale of property. And the proceed of property selling is back to the company, instead of individual. By then how to distribute the money, then it is under company regulation.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

cherroy	May 2 2016, 11:33 AM Return to original view \| IPv6 \| Post #3
20k VIP Club Staff 25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang	QUOTE(nookie188 @ May 2 2016, 11:18 AM) terms of an agreement has to be accepted by all before it can be executed so meaning everyone is going in with their eyes opened..the same term of being "forced out" applies to all...so don't see why cant this be legal..only way to know for sure is to get the advice of a real lawyer.. But I do agree that buying it under a company is the best route to go in the end but all possible scenarios still need to be covered .. S&P is a legal document to facilitate the MOT of the property, aka between purchaser and seller issue, (not among purchasers themselves) Why seller want to care to sign such an S&P in the first place, as it may complicating the MOT afterwards. Somemore, the being "forced out" owner may able to challenge the legality of the agreement in the first place. When a property already registered under his/her name or 2 names, then the property cannot be sold without all the signature required, except through bankruptcy liquidation, which is another story. A lot of dispute arised on the joint name property, is because the property transfer need all joint owner to sign off before the property can be sold/rent, not simply any 3rd party agreement that can already make the property being transferred/sold without the need of real owner to sign off the MOT/S&P.
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

cherroy	May 2 2016, 12:15 PM Return to original view \| IPv6 \| Post #4
20k VIP Club Staff 25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang	QUOTE(nookie188 @ May 2 2016, 11:56 AM) ok ok lah..I was not referring to the SPA .. got such thing as presigned POA.. already said ma - best way is to use company via shares .. It is always good to have counter argument in such issue, which only raise awareness and benefited to all. POA also not workable in this situation. You have A,B,C,D,E 5 people. You have 5 people to sign the POA (which required to be endorsed by high court), mean 5 donor. Who is the donee then? If A is the donee under the POA, mean A has full in charge on the property. By then, A can do whatever on the property, as BCDE already gave POA to A to act on behalf. A become like "boss to others". Why BCDE want to sign such an POA in the first place? Also POA is intended to act on behalf only, aka it may settle the sign off the signature related to the property issue, but it doesn't settle the "force out" clause the intended for this case. The proceed the selling the property still need to go back to the original owner. Still a very messy situation. This post has been edited by cherroy: May 2 2016, 12:15 PM
Card PM	Report Top Like Quote Reply

« Next Oldest · Property Q&A · Next Newest »

Add Reply Options

Change to:

0.0193sec

0.54

6 queries

GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 28th November 2025 - 02:41 AM

All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)

Removal Request

Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.