Renew of lease is no free.

For condo i think you need 100% consensus to renew.

It's the oldest example I could find wor...Malaysia is not that old...How to find highrise sebelum Merdeka

Seriously, are you following my question at all? I am saying why on earth will the owner of a condo does not want to renew the leasehold property they own but instead choose for total loss.

Are you trying to tell me all leasehold owner for condo will not renew their expired leasehold and take this whole thing as total loss and move? Sounds weird and unrealistic to me.

Everyone know that, refer to my article above for the fees, the same goes to any property with leasehold title. That is why I said who on earth will want total loss instead of forking out certain amount to renew the leasehold.

Not make sense to me if anyone rather total loss than to renew the ownership of their property.

Yes, I am just curious with some opinion here telling me that condos will be worthless as times goes which sounds weird to me, it is like total loss every 10 years goes like the car, how can that be actually?

So any condo build in the 1970s become cheaper to the buying price at that time? I don't think so. So many old buildings around, I don't see any of that become cheaper instead. All become more expensive and some even the land is more expensive that the building on top of it.

It does not make sense at all if someone telling me the condo price will be depreciating as the building become older especially till become total loss.

You think everyone can fork out 30k or so to renew for 30yrs where the condo almost runtuh?

Or everyone has the financial mean to do so? Many people still struggle to live from mouth to mouth. Beside if owner already in their twilight yrs you think they want to renew?

Property price may not depreciate but remain stagnant i.e real price falling behind inflation. this thread answer many of your questions.
https://forum.lowyat.net/topic/4524902

Actually the biggest problem with leasehold apartments is not renewal, it's liquidation.

Let's say that there are only 30 years to the lease left...easy to sell in the market? Not really.

But if you take all 30 - 35 years of your loan to pay off the house that's what you get. It also happens around the time you are vulnerable -- if you buy the house in your 20s or 30s, by the time you are 55 - 65 ngam ngam that is the time you need money for retirement and yet the property is hard to liquidate.

Your reasoning is weird, if they does not want to renew, they will choose to sell it off instead of total loss for anyone interested on the condo to price in the renewal fees along.

Who will want a total loss after years of cash to buy a condo? Imagine you have any property who is expiring and you can renew the lease, you will reject and wait for total loss instead? Not logic to me!

After left for example 30 years and below, your property obviously will be cheaper in range compare to the rest of the freehold and just look around after 30 years, the value will raise few hundred percent already. Look at 1970s, the houses can cost less than RM100k. Look around the years you mention, you will find everything raising to surely double up. I have no example of condo but I can see this from landed that have 10-20 years before expiring and if you in Selangor, you can apply earlier especially the recent scheme of just paying RM1K to renew with condition.

but its not easy to renew the lease for strata title condo... there are hundreds if not thousand of owners consent needed before the JMB proceed to help you guys to renew the land lease... what if some owner wanna pay to renew some owner duwan to pay to renew as they decide to stay til the day of their death? so far now there are no such cases on leasehold high-rise happen before yet.... but i believe its harder to renew than an individual title landed...

Yes, you will not want to forfeit your ownership till you get back you money. So if you are offer to renew, I doubt anyone will reject as if they does not want to renew, atleast they cash out to someone who interested to renew.

At that time, I don't think anyone will want forfeit their property to total loss into not renewing. You think all this people staying in high rise building will let go their investment just like that and restart again.

This post has been edited by stevenkkh: Apr 16 2018, 02:13 PM

There will probably be some owners who will sell their units after 20 years of staying there or probably before the remaining lease hits 60 years and pass that headache to the new buyer (if they can find one, that is).

I'm only aware of the PJ old town where the majority of the landed houses' lease are nearing expiry. Next-of-kin take possession of parents house after their passing only to find that only 20 years remaining in the lease. I wonder if the parents are not aware of this/forgot about it until their children have to bear this problem many years later.

well all in all... its easier to renew the lease of those PJ individual title landed than a land which are staying by hundreds or thousands of owners... haha.... most probably they wont let u renew to full 99 years as gomen might have other thoughts about those lands there... abit waste to let it there for just a few rows single storey landed aje... haha

Sounds like the gov't want to make it easier to acquire leasehold land if they don't allow you to renew it back to 99 years. But I do recall that the gov't can still acquire freehold land for their own development, but have to pay the owner the market price.

The joy of choosing and owning a property.

yea.... freehold land will only be acquired by them when they really have no choice... but for most redevelopment cases... i think they can decide to wait for those popular leasehold lands to run out of their lease and just retake it back for redevelopment...

having said that... wondering government should compensate for the building that was supposed to be on the piece of land or not... just compensate how much the building worth nett off the land price....

Not everyone think alike.

In 90+ years time, none of current buyers are likely to be around.

To renew lease for 99 years may cost as much as the value of the property. some may consider not worth the value (relative to contemporary units), some may not have the ability to obtain loan, some banks may not keen to take over one hundred years old building as collateral, etc. authority's offer of extension has a limited time, not everyone may pay in time.

Lease renewal is not a guarantee; authority may have other use or development for that piece of land and decided not to renew.


This post has been edited by icemanfx: Apr 17 2018, 12:58 PM

R&M buyers today don't have to experience lh expiry. here is example from sg, lesson is if you won't move, buy lh condo that covers you until death.

http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/hous...a-99-year-lease

if next of kin staying in condo until lease expire, assuming the building can even last so long, should just treat it as expenses. the above example, people watch their lh house value drop to zero. in pj case can just renew lease with rm1k. malaysia 1 - sg 0

but what happens in reality to old leasehold condos like >30-40 years old?

does management renew the condo lease back to 99 after certain years passed and spread cost to owners?

are old lh condos more prone to owners not paying maintenance due to feeling that they have no ownership of the land eventually?

sell what?

if lease left with few years, developer might as well wait til lease expired, then lease the land again from gov.....

why need to compensate current owners?

as for owners, you know that of a whole complex, how many owners are there? and the status of each owner?