Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Bump Topic Topic Closed RSS Feed
10 Pages « < 4 5 6 7 8 > » Bottom

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Austral Yaara Link Homes, at Bandar Metro Puchong

views
     
TSbryanyeo87
post Nov 20 2007, 04:47 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(wision @ Nov 20 2007, 01:22 PM)
Sorry for my poor translation. It should be Ministry of Housing and Local Goverment instead of land Office. 

Below i share with u a news in The Stars dated 15/05/2007.


In a fix over project stalled for 10 years

15/05/2007 The Star By Geetha Krishnan


AFTER 10 long years, purchasers of factory lots for a project that was later abandoned in Puchong are still in a dilemma.

On Friday, the Committee for Abandoned Project by Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd held a press conference in Puchong and appointed Puchong MP Lau Yeng Peng and Kinrara assemblyman Dr Kow Cheong Wei as facilitators.

"Back in 1996, around 200 purchasers bought lots under the Serangkai Emas Industrial Zone project, subsequently developed on a piece of land behind Tesco Puchong in Pusat Bandar Puchong.

When the project by Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd stalled in 1999 and SESB eventually wound up, the purchasers were left in the lurch. The project was completed halfway," said committee vice-chairman S. Mahalingam.

Based on two payment options, purchasers either paid 10% or 20% of the purchase price by securing bank loans or paid up the entire amount. The price for an intermediate unit started from RM382,000.

Subsequently, Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Bhd took over the project in 2002 under the 6th Property Tender and offered only the unsold lots for sale.

Score Option Sdn Bhd bought the lots and received the master title to develop the land into a residential area.

"But the problem didn't end there. Recently, we made a land search at the Shah Alam Land Office and found out that SOSB had made three charges on the land, including the sold lots belonging to us," said committee chairman Syed Zainal Rashid.


"We are being kept in the dark while the banks are chasing us for payments. Some of us have been blacklisted for not servicing our loans because it was pointless paying after the project stalled," said one purchaser who declined to be named.

Dr Kow said he would help them liaise with the relevant government agencies and the Subang Jaya Municipal Council.

"The reason for this press conference is also to ascertain our strength in numbers. The committee is only in touch with around 100 purchasers and we hope more will come forward after this," said Syed Zainal.

They can contact Mahalingam at 012-288 7070 or Liew Lee Lee at 019-334 4555.

When contacted, a spokesman for SOSB said the company's attempts to contact the purchasers had been futile.

She declined to comment further except to say that the matter was now with their lawyers.
*
@ The bolded part,
If the master title has been subdivided and sold to them as claimed, it cannot be combined back into 1 master title so easily without the consent of the owners of the subdivided lots as per registered with the land office.

If the master title has never been subdivided, therefore, they do not own any part of it as claimed and they should take it up with Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd (part of MBF Properties) or its liquidators if they truly feel they have a case since they signed a contract with Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd (part of MBF Properties) and not Score Option Sdn. Bhd.

And the master title has never been subdivided, so what claim are they talking about that it is their land? hmm.gif

==========================================================================



If what the newspaper report is true, I am sure, upon a police report, the culprits would be arrested and charged for selling their "rightful lots"

Surely the ministry would be very upset if their instructions in their letter were ignored.

We have laws in this country you know, and laws must be upheld. I await the news on the arrest of the culprits, if the report is true la. On the other hand, if no arrest is made i assume all the shouting and screaming are just hot air.









Footnote:

1)Who did they pay too and is it in full? Im quite sure upon payment the title would be transferred to them
They paid to Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd (part of MBF Properties) which did not deliver, so go after Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd or its liquidator to get their claims la.

2) Why did they not submit a caveat with the land office when Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Bhd auctioned it off or when Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd (part of MBF Properties) went into liquidation ? Or the fact that they did not even file claims with the liquidator?
It is because they have no interest onto the land.

3) Serangkai Emas Sdn Bhd (part of MBF Properties) did not even complete 5% yet alone half. Just a few stilts and they were charging these people up to 70% already. Therefore these people complaining should sue the bank for negligence in disbursing the loan to the developer.

4)The Land ownership system in our country is an inherited British Thorren system. All interests and ownership in land are registered with the land office.



We can easily establish who is the the real registered owner by a land title search with the land office.

This post has been edited by bryanyeo87: Nov 21 2007, 11:14 PM
schizophrenic
post Dec 4 2007, 03:10 AM

Tribute to Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim (1917-2000)
******
Senior Member
1,645 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
From: London

QUOTE(wision @ Nov 20 2007, 01:22 PM)
Sorry for my poor translation. It should be Ministry of Housing and Local Goverment instead of land Office. 
It is commonly referred to as the Land Office even within the legal fraternity.


Added on December 4, 2007, 3:17 am
QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Nov 20 2007, 04:47 PM)
We have laws in this country you know, and laws must be upheld. I await the news on the arrest of the culprits, if the report is true la. On the other hand, if no arrest is made i assume all the shouting and screaming are just hot air.
Footnote:



4)The Land ownership system in our country is an inherited British Thorren system. All interests and ownership in land are registered with the land office.
We can easily establish who is the the real registered owner by a land title search with the land office.
*
The 1st statement quoted is very naive.

It is the Australian Torrens System not the British Thorren system.

Note the exceptions to the indefeasibility of title.

National Land Code
Section 340. Registration to confer indefeasible title or interest, except in certain circumstances.

(1) The title or interest of any person or body for the time being registered as proprietor of any land, or in whose name any lease, charge or easement is for the time being registered, shall, subject to the following provisions of this section, be indefeasible.

(2) The title or interest of any such person or body shall not be indefeasible -

(a) in any case of fraud or misrepresentation to which the person or body, or any agent of the person or body, was a party or privy; or

(b) where registration was obtained by forgery, or by means of an insufficient or void instrument; or

(C) where the title or interest was unlawfully acquired by the person or body in the purported exercise of any power or authority conferred by any written law.

Nb: Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd vs Boonsom Boonyanit; Au Meng Nam v Ung Yak Chew

This post has been edited by schizophrenic: Dec 4 2007, 12:35 PM
b00n
post Dec 4 2007, 09:20 AM

delusional
Group Icon
VIP
9,137 posts

Joined: Jun 2007
From: Wouldn't be around much, pls PM other mods.
Will help post a query here:
http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/583542
QUOTE(phenom_stingray @ Dec 3 2007, 12:45 AM)
Hi, im an interested party in glomac's LakeSide Residences, I received this letter last saturday, below is quoted the letter, did anyone get it too?
Can anybody enlighten me on the truth of the above letter? I can scan the hard copy and post it here too
QUOTE
Date: 1 December 2007


Dear Sir/Madam,

Closure of Road by Glomac Leading to Your Unit in LakeSide Residence(LR), Bandar Metro Puchong



Here is something picked up from the Internet where some LR home buyers expressed concern on the road closure leading to our unit in LakeSide Residence, Bandar Metro Puchong.

From what I have discovered, despite their pretences the closure and blockade was done by Glomac themselves. That Portion of the road access is owned by Berapit Utama Sdn Bhd a wholly owned subsidiary company of Glomac and this can be seen in Glomac's website at this link
glomac.com.my/corporate/about_structure.asp

Why did Glomac do this?

I hear that Glomac is embroiled in a dispute with the Landowner as a result of their failure and non performance under the Joint Venture Agreement. This has led to the Landowner terminating the Joint Venture with Glomac.

If the above said is true, the Landowner from my observation has decided to go alone without Glomac by launching their own development, "Yaara Link". Glomac hit back like a sore loser by closing the access road to frustrate the sales by the Landowner.

I express concern for you as what Glomac has done was both unethical and unprofessional. That was why they had, up to now, denied that they were the very people closing the road and created the blockade. It's like a sore loser shooting his own foot but it is us the buyers, who are going to be limping around.

Let me ask you this. What will happen if they, the Land Owner is provoked enough by Glomac and decides to respond by closing up the roads to our homes within LakeSide Residences? Can you imagine how we buyers will be affected? I hope Glomac will do the right thing before we suffer further. We want our houses delivered on time.

Please call, SMS, email or better still go on to Glomac Head Office and ask for a written explanation on what exactly is going on.

Please spread the news and give a copy of this letter to other LakeSide Residence house buyers and get them to take action as well before we the innocent house buyers suffer the consequences.

What do you guys(gals) think??
*
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 6 2007, 06:30 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(schizophrenic @ Dec 4 2007, 03:10 AM)
It is commonly referred to as the Land Office even within the legal fraternity.


Added on December 4, 2007, 3:17 am

The 1st statement quoted is very naive.

It is the Australian Torrens System not the British Thorren system.

Note the exceptions to the indefeasibility of title.

National Land Code
Section 340. Registration to confer indefeasible title or interest, except in certain circumstances.

(1) The title or interest of any person or body for the time being registered as proprietor of any land, or in whose name any lease, charge or easement is for the time being registered, shall, subject to the following provisions of this section, be indefeasible.

(2) The title or interest of any such person or body shall not be indefeasible -

      (a) in any case of fraud or misrepresentation to which the person or body, or any agent of the person or body, was a party or privy; or

      (b) where registration was obtained by forgery, or by means of an insufficient or void instrument; or

      (C) where the title or interest was unlawfully acquired by the person or body in the purported exercise of any power or authority conferred by any written law.

Nb: Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd vs Boonsom Boonyanit; Au Meng Nam v Ung Yak Chew
*
Thank you for your correction on the torrens system, however, the case example may not be entirely relevant to issue on hand.







@b00n,

Hmm, im just as curious as you are.
Can anybody tell us more? rclxub.gif

b00n
post Dec 6 2007, 06:36 PM

delusional
Group Icon
VIP
9,137 posts

Joined: Jun 2007
From: Wouldn't be around much, pls PM other mods.
It should be the dispute between Glomac and the landowner.....
thought you might know more about it.
Am just a messenger boy..... hehe
schizophrenic
post Dec 7 2007, 12:21 AM

Tribute to Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim (1917-2000)
******
Senior Member
1,645 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
From: London

QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Dec 6 2007, 06:30 PM)
Thank you for your correction on the torrens system, however, the case example may not be entirely relevant to issue on hand.
QUOTE
The Land ownership system in our country is an inherited British Thorren system. All interests and ownership in land are registered with the land office.
We can easily establish who is the the real registered owner by a land title search with the land office.



I am addressing what you quoted above with this

QUOTE
Note the exceptions to the indefeasibility of title.


Therefore, it is relevant to your statement and it is not a case example.

This post has been edited by schizophrenic: Dec 7 2007, 12:22 AM
jejes
post Dec 14 2007, 10:06 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
81 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
I pass by that area last week, the road go in to Austral & LakeSide is totally CLOSED! Full cover, with sign "JALAN MATI"!!!

How they going to sale there unit?
yewkhuay
post Dec 14 2007, 06:53 PM

I don't even belong here....
*******
Senior Member
6,657 posts

Joined: Jul 2006
QUOTE(jejes @ Dec 14 2007, 10:06 AM)
I pass by that area last week, the road go in to Austral & LakeSide is totally CLOSED! Full cover, with sign "JALAN MATI"!!!

How they going to sale there unit?
*
wah, from realestate.net.my u come over here ar?
jejes
post Dec 17 2007, 01:55 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
81 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
why not? anywhere got interest topic, then go where lor. Not only this, also some SG, Aust & US forum...
I saw so happening about this topic past few week... some more I want to know more what happen between Glomac & Austral.... since our bryanyeo87 have some close relation to the Austral director... so should have more info on that kua!

Same to u lar, have few post in realestate...

not that far also from pandan indah (Hileytech) to Lowyat... hahaa

But after some reply from schizophrenic... not news liau... shakehead.gif

This post has been edited by jejes: Dec 17 2007, 01:58 PM
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 18 2007, 07:29 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(schizophrenic @ Dec 7 2007, 12:21 AM)
I am addressing what you quoted above with this
Therefore, it is relevant to your statement and it is not a case example.
*
Then why have they not put a police report that the developer is selling their "lots"?

It is because they know it cannot hold water in court nor that the police can charge with a criminal offence mainly because the land was bought by the current owner to be as legal. If they had an legal interest onto the land, they should have put a caveat on the sales of the land to block the sales from danaharta. Period.

But again, the issue with them has been resolved since 2 weeks ago. laugh.gif

And austral has also found black and white documentations that glomac was behind the instigation of the "203's"



QUOTE(jejes @ Dec 14 2007, 10:06 AM)
I pass by that area last week, the road go in to Austral & LakeSide is totally CLOSED! Full cover, with sign "JALAN MATI"!!!

How they going to sale there unit?
*
Being resolved. Where in the world can you block off a 2km road in the middle sweat.gif




QUOTE(jejes @ Dec 17 2007, 01:55 PM)
But after some reply from schizophrenic... not news liau...  shakehead.gif
*
Too much things happening, and i prefer to give information based on facts on the current situation mar.. not on speculation sweat.gif

This post has been edited by bryanyeo87: Dec 18 2007, 08:43 PM
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 18 2007, 08:54 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
Update

Glomac was summoned to MBSJ office to answer to the YDP himself and was reprimanded for doing such a silly thing as well has been given an order to have that blockade removed effectively immediately (starting today)

So i guess that rumour about glomac being sore losers by closing up that road after their termination is true after all. laugh.gif laugh.gif

And to top things on that, they told those glomac Lakeside residences owners that the road does not belong to them, what lies they can give to their own buyers doh.gif doh.gif shakehead.gif shakehead.gif


So, does that answer your question jejas?

This post has been edited by bryanyeo87: Dec 19 2007, 10:10 AM
schizophrenic
post Dec 18 2007, 10:45 PM

Tribute to Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim (1917-2000)
******
Senior Member
1,645 posts

Joined: Oct 2005
From: London

QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Dec 18 2007, 07:29 PM)
Then why have they not put a police report that the developer is selling their "lots"?

It is because they know it cannot hold water in court nor that the police can charge with a criminal offence mainly because the land was bought by the current owner to be as legal. If they had an legal interest onto the land, they should have put a caveat on the sales of the land to block the sales from danaharta. Period.
You misunderstood the entire statement quoted and typed above. No where in my reply did I offer a statement of opinion as to the situation involving the property you are interested to sell. I am merely informing you about the misrepresentation you gave and that it is not always as easy as you think it is.

The title on the register may not be an accurate representation of the rights and burdens attached to the land despite it being a wholly registered system.

You are telling the public a general statement about reliance based on the title and I am merely doing you a favour by increasing the accuracy of your statement.

This was quoted by you.
"We can easily establish who is the the real registered owner by a land title search with the land office."

I am merely showing that there are circumstances where the actual owner's name could be replaced by a new owner through certain circumstances like fraud. You need not necessarily have a police report or a police investigation for this as this is a civil matter.


PS: I am still waiting for your reply with regard to the panel law firms for that project considering you told me that the disbursements for the S & P are subsidised.

Thank you.


TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 18 2007, 11:45 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(schizophrenic @ Dec 18 2007, 10:45 PM)
You misunderstood the entire statement quoted and typed above. No where in my reply did I offer a statement of opinion as to the situation involving the property you are interested to sell. I am merely informing you about the misrepresentation you gave and that it is not always as easy as you think it is.

The title on the register may not be an accurate representation of the rights and burdens attached to the land despite it being a wholly registered system.

You are telling the public a general statement about reliance based on the title and I am merely doing you a favour by increasing the accuracy of your statement.

This was quoted by you.
"We can easily establish who is the the real registered owner by a land title search with the land office."

I am merely showing that there are circumstances where the actual owner's name could be replaced by a new owner through certain circumstances like fraud. You need not necessarily have a police report or a police investigation for this as this is a civil matter.
PS: I am still waiting for your reply with regard to the panel law firms for that project considering you told me that the disbursements for the S & P are subsidised.

Thank you.
*
ouhh ok, sorry didnt really understand your post, but the land was sold by danaharta, an gov linked company, where things like fraud dont go unnoticed, as well as it is actually quite hard to commit such a case sweat.gif

yeah the panel lawyers are... wait i need to check, but the s&p is subsidised. bank loan processing fee etc, is set by the bank.
jejes
post Dec 19 2007, 11:25 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
81 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Nov 5 2007, 10:12 PM)
Good questions, here are the answers smile.gif

1 & 2.
Access road leads to USJ / SJ Toll free.
Bridge issue has been resolved by selangor government and will proceed.
MBSJ is the agency implementing. Yang Di-pertua MBSJ confirmed that road is public but MBSJ has yet to compensate land owner.
*
Sorry, I'm confuse now.... rclxub.gif

Your reply above see to be so sure "Yang Di-pertua" confirm about that road is belong to land owner and will be past to MBSJ as public road later. But now you saying that road is belong to Glomac?

Which of your statement is true?

Just want to know more about that... since you have many connection to those ppl. wink.gif


Added on December 19, 2007, 11:31 amAfter all, I remember that whole develpment land only own by the Land Owner. Even the Glomac LR & Austral also not own the land, and Glomac & Austral is just an developer for that 2 housing project.

So, how come Glomac own that small piece of road?
Who can tell more?


Added on December 19, 2007, 11:38 am
QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Dec 18 2007, 08:54 PM)
Update

Glomac was summoned to MBSJ office to answer to the YDP himself and was reprimanded for doing such a silly thing as well has been given an order to have that blockade removed effectively immediately (starting today)
*
Humm... Road Open already? rclxms.gif Thanks, will try to make a trip there this week to check out.

This post has been edited by jejes: Dec 19 2007, 11:38 AM
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 19 2007, 02:12 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
I dont have alot of connection la, just some research lor biggrin.gif


Part of the L shaped bend road is owned by Berapit Utama sdn. bhd, which is a fully owned subsidiary of glomac, which means they lying to LakeSide Residences owner that they dont own it.. For your question as to why they own it, well, that you need to ask them (glomac).



MBSJ allowed the road to be built because the land owner for that L shape bend has undertaken much earlier on to surrender the road to MBSJ


Land owner for the 200 acre, developer and turnkey contractor is Austral.
Glomac was the JV partner for lakeside residences for Lakeside residences. But they have been terminated since middle of the year for non performance to the JV.


Yeap, glomac was reprimanded for doing such a silly thing as well as ordered the road to be open to the public by the YDP MBSJ himself effectively immediately. Its good news for Lakeside residence and austral owners alike, because now, no need to worry that they cant access their homes
jejes
post Dec 19 2007, 05:35 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
81 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Dec 19 2007, 02:12 PM)
I dont have alot of connection la, just some research lor biggrin.gif
Part of the L shaped bend road is owned by Berapit Utama sdn. bhd, which is a fully owned subsidiary of glomac, which means they lying to LakeSide Residences owner that they dont own it.. For your question as to why they own it, well, that you need to ask them (glomac).
MBSJ allowed the road to be built because the land owner for that L shape bend has undertaken much earlier on to surrender the road to MBSJ
*
I know Berapit Utama sdn. bhd is belong to Glomac.
But may I know how you know that only L shaped bend road is belong to Berapit Utama sdn. bhd? Also from ur source "YDP"? blink.gif

Yap, it good news for everyone if the road is public.
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 20 2007, 08:02 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
After having seeing the letter from a lakeside residence owner, i did a land title search to see if the allegations are true or was it just rumours. Unfortunately for glomac, the allegations are true. Berapit utama owns the L shape bend, and glomac owns berapit utama therefore also proving that glomac are sore losers as the letter stated laugh.gif

ps. a land title search at the land office is only rm30 smile.gif

This post has been edited by bryanyeo87: Dec 20 2007, 08:05 PM
jejes
post Dec 21 2007, 10:40 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
81 posts

Joined: Dec 2007
QUOTE(bryanyeo87 @ Dec 20 2007, 08:02 PM)

ps. a land title search at the land office is only rm30 smile.gif
*
o.... Where is the Land office ar? Is it the main MPSJ office in USJ Taipan?
Should go to check out one day.


Ai ya, Friend, the road not open yet lar. I went to see yeaterday, still closed!
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 21 2007, 12:51 PM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
QUOTE(jejes @ Dec 21 2007, 10:40 AM)
o.... Where is the Land office ar? Is it the main MPSJ office in USJ Taipan?
Should go to check out one day.
Ai ya, Friend, the road not open yet lar. I went to see yeaterday, still closed!
*
its next to tractor malaysia in subang jaya

Well, the order has been given by mbsj's president since last tuesday, give it a few more days or so, u know how big corporate firms work la laugh.gif
TSbryanyeo87
post Dec 27 2007, 01:19 AM

Below the Belt
*******
Senior Member
3,175 posts

Joined: May 2006
Project website is now up and running, phew flash animation is tedious laugh.gif

http://www.am-el.net/austral/index.html


Added on December 27, 2007, 1:25 amand.... SURPRISE!.. i see TRUE lake side bungalows, those full length bungalows without a common boundary with your neighbour. yummy.. like those bungalows in scandinavia..

ps.
1) Full length bungalows for true lakeside has never been done in south east asia laugh.gif

2) the masterplan is actual approval from MBSJ and HDA board.

This post has been edited by bryanyeo87: Dec 27 2007, 01:25 AM

10 Pages « < 4 5 6 7 8 > » Top
Topic ClosedOptions
 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0245sec    0.53    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 21st December 2025 - 08:10 AM