Lessons from Penang affordable housing

AS we all know, affordable housing is the saving grace for the middle to low income group in our common dream to pursue the “roof over our heads”.

Most often, aspiring homebuyers are sandwiched between increasing property price and developers’ tendency to build high-end apartments especially in greater KL for the last decade.

The introduction of PR1MA and other affordable housing agencies by the federal government is aimed at addressing this gap and to promote better home ownership as part of the prime minister’s national transformation programme. Nonetheless, not many realised that affordable housing is also a state initiative whereby state governments are free to introduce affordable housing schemes given that land and development are within the exclusive power of the state under the Federal Constitution. For instance, Penang is fully behind the notion of affordable housing by placing their top priority on increasing homeownership ratio within the state.

Checking online, there are currently 29 affordable housing projects in Penang with 12 being developed by the state government and the other 17 by the private sector. Penang is delivering a commendable amount of affordable housing by trading plot ratio of built-up area in exchange for more units to be built.

The state government is constantly reviewing and updating the criteria for the purchase of affordable housing in Penang. A person who already owns a property can still purchase affordable housing in Penang provided the person can satisfy the conditions imposed.

For example, the house to be purchased must be of higher value than the one already owned.

In addition, for those who are not born in Penang, under the talented and skilled category, they may also purchase affordable housing in Penang provided they undertake to reside there for a minimum of five years. In short, affordable has become a driver for talent retention. This ultimately helps to upgrade living standard in Penang.

On the flip side, Penang has uncovered a problem. Those who are entitled to affordable housing may not qualify for financing, especially those from the lower income group as they are considered as high risk by banks.

Job and income security at this level are extremely vulnerable given the high cost of living that in effect reduces disposal income. Bank and financial institution are after all profit-making entities. Loan disbursements below a certain threshold amount does not always generate their desire margin. Many expiring home owners are left helpless.

While nothing is perfect, one can only achieve success through lessons learned along the way and from history. The federal government is aware of the high loan rejection rate. It has, therefore, provided a 10% loan guarantee and First House Deposit Financing to help purchasers with their downpayments. The “Rent to Own” scheme was also introduced to circumvent the stricter loan financing situation.

Penang has introduced a similar Rent to Own scheme. Under this scheme, the state government provides 30% of the home price so that the house buyer can seek a 70% loan margin.

PR1MA, on the other hand, is facing difficulties finding suitable land as land is state matter. There is also a tendency for the state government to allocate land for this purpose in areas they want to urbanise, but which are often far from amenities and transportation links.

We all know that to develop affordable housing is not the best commercial decision to make because profit margins are definitely lower. As such, we cannot expect private sector developers to always bear the cost.

Penang, on the other hand, is able to overcome this problem by reducing the development charges via an increase in plot ratio. This then attracts private sector developers to come in.

A recent survey conducted by PR1MA shows that buyers prefer to purchase residential projects close to schools, clinics and shops. They also prefer access to transportation. Penang is closer to achieving its objective in the affordable housing arena because it “focuses on the homeowners”.

Under the recently announced Penang Transport Master Plan, the state government is mulling over RM8bil worth of projects that will enhance connectivity.

The development of an underground tunnel from Gurney Drive to Bagan Ajam, Gurney Drive to Jelutong Expressway and an alternative road connecting Gurney Drive right up to Batu Feringhi will really improve connectivity.

Penang is ambitious in executing its affordable housing plans. It is also spot-on when it comes to addressing the different issues connected with this subject.

The banking sector must buy into it. Banking and financial institutions are governed by the fiscal policy of the federal government. Maybe some mandatory quota or corporate social responsibility initiatives can be imposed on banks to provide loans to deserving house buyers. So it is timely that Bank Negara has called for a comprehensive and carefully designed National Planning Policy to support the Government’s aim in delivering more social housing in its recently released annual report.

By Chris Tan

Chris Tan is the founder and managing partner of Chur Associates.


Related posts:


Real estate crowdfunding in Malaysia

Nov 23, 2015 ... By Chris Tan Real legal viewpoint. Chris Tan is the founder and managing partner of Chur Associates. Related posts: High cost under new law ...

High cost under new law may affect property investors ...

Aug 17, 2015 ... By CHRIS TAN Real Legal Related posts. Property prices will hold ... 2015 WHILE last week's article cove... Posted by Richard Tan at 4:46 PM.

The allure of Penang heritage properties

 

Prized property: The Chimes Heritage building at Jalan Bawasah, Penang. The value of heritage properties has increased by 37 to 157 per sq ft since 2008 due to the investments made by Penangites staying overseas and by Singaporeans.

Value of such assets has jumped by as much as 157% psf

THE heritage property segment is still attracting strong interest from investors despite the softening of the overall property market in Penang.

The value of heritage properties has increased by about 37% to 157% per sq ft (psf) since 2008 due to investments made by Penangites staying overseas and by Singaporeans.

Depending on the location, size, and condition of the heritage properties, the present pricing on a psf basis ranges from RM550 per sq ft (psf) to RM1,800 psf, compared to between RM400 psf and RM700 psf in 2008.

According to the National Property Information Centre (Napic), a locally registered company, World Class Land Sdn Bhd, snapped up over 60 pre-war houses in George Town’s heritage areas for about RM122mil.

Raine & Horne Malaysia senior partner Michael Geh says the properties were sold between late 2013 and August 2015.

“The most expensive pre-war property, with a 1,363q ft land area and located in Chulia Street, was sold for over RM2,000 psf,” he says.

It is learnt that about RM30mil would be spent for restoring the properties, as the cost of restoration is about RM500,000 per unit.

The company also acquired a 30,000 sq ft of land in Magazine Road for about RM36.9mil. “This was the highest transaction for a vacant land in 2015, as the sale was transacted at RM1,250 psf,” Geh adds.

Geh says locals tend not to pay attention to the capital appreciation of heritage properties, although the value had risen substantially since 2008.

“They should invest because the supply of heritage properties is limited.

“There only some 3,853 units of such properties in George Town’s heritage core and buffer areas, according to George Town World Heritage Inc.

“Because the supply is limited, it is safe to invest, as the value would tend to rise than fall.

“I urged Penangites to acquire heritage properties for own use and enjoy the capital appreciation that would occur incrementally,” he says.

Because of the strong appreciation in the value of pre-war houses, the rental yield of such properties has remained unattractive.

In 2008, the rental of heritage properties, depending on the location, size, and condition of the heritage properties, ranged between RM1,000 and RM3,000, compared to the rental today which is between RM3,000 and RM8,000.

“Calculated on a yearly basis, the rental yield is not attractive.

“Today the yield is about 4.8%, compared to about 4.5% in 2008

“This shows that the value has appreciated faster than the rentals, as there is very little demand to rent properties in the state,” he says.

According to Geh, local investors should pay attention in particular to the heritage properties in the Prangin Market or Sia Boey area, as it has been earmarked for the location of the central LRT station on the island, which would boost the value of the properties in the area.

Meanwhile, the Malaysian Institute of Architects (PAM, Northern Chapter) chairman Datuk Lawrence Lim says the cost of restoring heritage properties has increased by about 40% since 2008.

“Today the cost to restore such houses ranged between RM150,000 and RM500,000 per unit.

“A simple restoration for a heritage property with a 2,000 sq ft built-up area can cost about RM150,000.

“It cost just RM50,000 to restore the roof of a heritage house,” he says.

Despite the increased in the cost of restoration, there are local investors who are still investing in heritage properties.

Lim, who is also East Design managing director, says the company was now undertaking restoration projects for heritage houses in Hong Kong Street and Magazine Road.

“We will be restoring the Koon Kee office building at Hong Kong Street, the manufacturer of Penang’s famous white coffee.

“The other project involves the restoration of 10 pre-war units in Magazine Road for commercial usage,” Lim says.

Datuk Ooi Sian Hian, who is also Ghee Hiang group executive chairman, says he will be restoring the heritage property of his family’s maternal grandparents at 123 Macalister Road.

The property, measuring 3,600 sq ft in built-up area, sitting on a 30,000 sq ft site, was built in the 19th century, and came under the ownership of Ooi’s maternal grandparents in the 1950s.

“We are getting local architects and architectural students through the assistance of PAM to come up with a suitable design concept to restore the property.

“It will be up to the architectural fraternity to decide on the appropriate design concept for the property.

“Whether it will be restored for commercial or residential usage will depend on their design.

“We plan to kick off the project in two year’s time,” Ooi says.

Ooi’s family has 10 properties at Prangin Lane, nine of which he will restore at a later date for commercial re-use.

“The properties have been passed down from the maternal grandparents.

“We want to wait and see what the market for restored heritage properties is like first, as there are already in the market many such restored heritage projects.

“We also want to wait for the state government’s Sia Boey project to be completed first, as the site has been earmarked for a LRT project hub,” he adds.

Ooi says he is submitting a plan to restore the tenth heritage terraced property located in Prangin Lane, which has a built-up area of 1,620q ft.

“We are naming it Jumpa@41PranginLane, which will be restored as a event centre for pop-up markets, seminars, stage plays, and culinary events,” he says.

Under Ghee Hiang, the group is now restoring its heritage property at 61 Beach Street, which has over 3,000q ft in built-up area.

“It is the Ghee Hiang Group’s Concept Lifestyle In-Store, which will be designed to accommodate a living heritage museum showcasing the history of the group’s history and tau sar pneah products and a lifestyle themed cafe,” he says.

Khoo Kongsi trustee Datuk Khoo Kay Hock says the clan association has restored 16 pre-war properties and had leased them to a hotel operator.

“The properties are undergoing interior refurbishment now, and scheduled for opening in the second half of 2016.

“About RM4mil was invested to restore the properties, which were completely restored two years,” he says.

According to George Town World Heritage Inc general manager Dr Ang Ming Chee, there are 3771 heritage properties in George Town belonging to category II.

“Category II properties are those residences and business premises that have existed for generations.

“They were built to support the traditional beliefs of the inhabitants and users.

“In the George Town’s World Heritage Site (WHS), there are 82 buildings, gateways, cemeteries, and sites categorised as Category 1.

“Category 1 buildings and monuments are important because they reflect the authenticity of the cultural landscape and therefore the outstanding universal values of the world heritage site (WHS),” she adds.

By David Tan The Star

Related:

Penang Heritage Property - Residences Heritage Property Penang Malaysia

Penang Heritage Buildings / World Heritage Sites

Little by little, a little becomes a lot

NOW that Christmas, New Year and Chinese New Year are over, many of us have started to reconcile the amount spent for these celebrations.

Not surprisingly, many have underestimated the current cost of living and have therefore overspent.

Hence, it did not come as a surprise to me when I overheard one of my relatives saying that the price of an eight-course Chinese New Year package at the restaurant that she often frequents has increased by 15% from RM898++ to RM1,028++ within a year. Not only has the price increased, she also noticed the serving portions were smaller than the previous year.

The rising cost of living caused by the depreciating ringgit, hike in transportation costs, the goods and services tax implementation, etc, was the hottest topic of discussion during these festive gatherings. Among the various counter-measures, some young ones welcomed the option to reduce the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) contributions, citing that it would help relieve their burden.

The reduction in EPF contribution came about early this year when the Government announced that employees had the option to reduce their EPF contribution by 3% from March 2016 until December 2017 to spur economic growth and at the same time, put more money into the rakyat’s pockets. According to our Prime Minister who is also the Finance Minister, this move is expected to increase consumer spending by RM8bil a year.

It sounds good as we now have the option to have more disposable income. Yet, should we encourage spending or saving during this challenging time.

Before answering this question, let’s ask ourselves what we should do with the extra disposable income. Repay credit card instalments, go after items such as expensive household goods, electronic gadgets or gourmet food?

If we are not careful, we will end up spending based on our desire instead of necessity. Hence, having more money to spend is not necessarily good. It depends on how we plan our future finances, and whether we spend the money on “good debt” or “bad debt” as explained in my previous articles.

If we unnecessarily spend the additional income on luxury goods such as a new car which depreciates over time, we are practically paying for “bad debt”, as these items are liabilities instead of assets.

In contrast, if we convert the additional income into “good debt” such as investing in commodities/ shares or to fund our housing loan, we can enjoy the long-term benefits as the value of these assets will likely appreciate over time.

At a glance, 3% taken out from the EPF per month may not be seen as a lot. However, it will become a significant amount in the long term.

For an individual earning RM5,000 a month, 3% equals to RM150. As such, the total amount is RM3,300 for the duration of 22 months (March 2016 to December 2017). Assuming the average EPF interest rate at 6.5% per year (based on the dividend declared this year), the compounding rate for RM3,300 could potentially become RM23,190.64 after 30 years!

Therefore, unless there are really good reasons to use this additional disposable income, it is better to retain this seemingly small amount as retirement funds, giving its potential to grow significantly in the longer term. Besides, the savings in the EPF can also be withdrawn during rainy days to fund the payment for children’s education, purchase a new home and payment of medical expenses for treatment of critical illnesses.

At this testing time when many are faced with the burden of rising costs and economic slowdown, it is important to resist the temptation of instant gratification, be prudent in spending, and be able to differentiate between “good debt” and “bad debt” in making financial decisions.

For those who have yet to opt out from reducing the EPF contribution from 11% to 8%, it is important to use the additional money wisely so as to ensure that your retirement fund is not affected. Every ringgit saved or invested is essential in making a difference in our future financial position.

When I was a kid, my parents encouraged me and my siblings to save. Each of us would have our own piggy banks and they would continue to remind us about the beauty of saving. Until today, I still like this Malay proverb – ‘Sedikit, sedikit, lama-lama jadi bukit’ (little by little, a little becomes a lot).

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He is the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

Related posts:
 

 A challenging year ahead

Feb 16, 2016 ... It is therefore crucial to invest to fight inflation especially monetary ... Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. 

How to allocate your money wisely: lessons from my father

Datuk Alan Tong was the world president of FIABCI International for ... Property investments: good Infrastructure a way to huge profits and

Penang is best for property investment in Malaysia

Penang has dislodged Kuala Lumpur's Golden Tringle as the top investment choice GEORGE TOWN: Penang has now overtaken the Klang V...

Penang is best for property investment in Malaysia

Penang has dislodged Kuala Lumpur's Golden Tringle as the top investment choice

GEORGE TOWN: Penang has now overtaken the Klang Valley as the most attractive place for property investment.

In its Malaysia Commercial Real Estate Investment Sentiment Survey 2016, global property consultancy Knight Frank Ma-laysia said the state had dis-lodged Kuala Lumpur’s Golden Triangle as the top investment choice.

Penang garnered 67% of the overall responses while the Golden Triangle slipped to fourth position with 49%, finishing behind KL Fringe/ Klang Valley (56%) and Johor/Iskandar (55%).

The survey took litmus test for insights and preferences of key players namely fund managers, developers and lenders in the commercial sector for the Year 2016.

It targeted 700 respondents in senior management levels across the property industry.

Half of them (55%) were deve-lopers while the rest were commercial lenders (24%) and fund or real estate investment trust managers (21%).

Last week, George Town was picked as the sixth ‘Best place to retire abroad in 2016’ by CNN Money.

Source: Knight Frank Malaysia/The Star

That’s Right, Penang Just Beat KL To Become The Top Choice For Investments

 It appears that more people are keen to invest in Penang than in Kuala Lumpur, as a survey by Knight Frank Malaysia shows that Penang garnered over 67 percent of the overall response.

The survey also revealed that Kuala Lumpur Central Business District (CBD) (Golden Triangle), which was the top investment choice in 2015, was dethroned and dropped to the fourth ranking with 49 percent of the responses, coming after Kuala Lumpur Fringe/Klang Valley (56 percent) and Joh

• Penang was also voted as the most attractive investment region for hotel or leisure and healthcare or institutional developments, possibly due to George Town being inscribed as one of UNESCO’s World Heritage Sites and the popularity of the state for medical tourism
  

  • 
    • Image via Travel2Penang George Town is recognised as one of Unesco’s World Heritage Sites. 
  • 
    Penang garnered the highest vote from respondents by getting 86 percent of the votes for most attractive investment region for hotel or leisure and 79 percent of votes for healthcare or institutional developments.
    
    Kota Kinabalu came in second for the most attractive investment region for hotel or leisure with 67 percent while Johor clinched the third spot with 59 percent.
    
    As for the healthcare or institutional developments, Klang Valley and Johor gained 72 percent and 69 percent of votes respectively to be the second and third most popular region.
    
    
    
• These results came from the Malaysia Commercial Real Estate Investment Sentiment Survey 2016, which was conducted by global property consultancy Knight Frank Malaysia
  • • Image via Knight Frank Malaysia
       
  • The Malaysia Commercial Real Estate Investment Sentiment Survey 2016 was conducted using an e-survey mechanism distributed throughout Knight Frank’s vast database as well as in-depth interviews with key players in the local commercial sector.
    
    There were some 700 respondents in senior management levels this year, with 55 percent of them being developers, 21 percent fund or real estate investment trust (REIT) managers and 24 percent lenders.
    
    
    • Home of a UNESCO heritage site, Penang's landscape is the perfect blend of old and new. Take a look at how the city has beautifully transformed over the years!
      

      • Penang Then And Now: 35 Photos That Show How Much Has Evolved In The Past Century

        From one of the region's first trading ports to home of a UNESCO heritage site, Penang manages to preserve its old-wo...
        

        says.com 

        
        
    • Making a trip to Penang? Don't forget to check out these places!
      

      • 15 Heritage Boutique Hotels That Add to The Unmistakeable Charm Of Penang

        Come for the food, stay for the hotels. You probably won't bear to leave by the end of your trip!
        

        says.com 

        
        
    • Born and bred in the Pearl of Orient? You'll know what we are talking about! ;)
      

      • 15 Things A #PenangKia Has To Say About Other States (And Their Food)

        Penangites are really proud of their island, aren't they?
        

        says.com

A challenging year ahead

AS the Fire Monkey swings in to take its place, many have predicted this year as a challenging one. So, what’s in store for everyone in this particular year?

Many came to me for advice on how to deal with this challenging period. Frankly speaking, I am not a feng shui master or an astrologist who can somehow predict the future. Neither do I know how to read a crystal ball and tell you what lies ahead. Having been through a few round of recessions and bad times during my early days, I can, however, only share my own experiences and observations.

As shared in my last article “Lessons from my father”, I have learnt how to live frugally since young from my late parents. I recalled starting up my own architectural firm at the worst possible time. The year was 1964, and it was during the time of the Malaysia-Indonesia confrontation. The country was experiencing an economic recession and it is not hard to imagine how tough it was to make a living. I basically lived on “char kuey teow” as my lunch for two years! Being frugal and practising delayed gratification somehow helped me sail through that rough period.

While it is wise to spend prudently, it is even wiser not to be in debt during times of uncertainty. I read an article which highlighted that Malaysian household debt as of August 2015 was 88.1% of gross domestic product against only 60.4% in 2008. The figure was among the highest in the region. It is rather alarming considering most young people tend to be indebted with at least a car and a huge outstanding of credit card and personal loan repayment.

It is important not to put ourselves in a vulnerable financial situation, in order to face the challenges ahead. Most items purchased with the use of personal loan, credit card and hire-purchase are likely to depreciate over time. As a result, if repayments are not made on time or at all, these items with depreciated value becomes a loss. Such loans are then dubbed as “bad debt”. A “good debt” is one that brings returns. It is time to re-look into our debt categories and reallocate our resources appropriately.

Conserving funds, while important, is not enough to withstand the inflation impact. It is therefore crucial to invest to fight inflation especially monetary inflation (money printing) which is a real problem in today’s world economy and is currently also causing asset inflation to continue. It is difficult to know the best form of investment during uncertain environment. However, I believe each of us has areas of expertise, and we should focus on those areas.

If you are planning to own a property, a good inflation-hedging tool, do creative searching for your dream home.

Muhamad Azree Abdul Rahim, a 26-year-old Malaysian, solved his problem of owning a property by thinking-out-of-the-box. He turned a used shipping container into his home by taking a RM75,000 loan and buying a plot of 2,400 sq ft land some 25km from Shah Alam. He was able to build a decent, fully-functional home with a garden next to it. His unconventional way of building his own house without being manacled to a 30-year housing loan is something that we should learn.

While everyone would love to stay near to the city centre and preferably, own a big comfortable home, we need to be realistic in order not to be financially overstretched. Start with a smaller home, and buy a home that you can afford, not what you like. It is absolutely fine if you chose a house next to the last MRT station, far away from KL city centre, as long as you find it easy to commute. No point being near the city yet having to endure the daily routine of traffic madness and at the same time, forking out a large sum beyond your means.

In the 1986 recession (the worst recession that I could remember), I had a team of 20 sales team members. Instead of waiting for customers to drop by our office, we went door-to-door and street-to-street to look for customers. Imagine swimming against the current, you may feel very tired and exhausted, but at least you are few steps nearer to your destination and you become a much stronger person. Hence, building resilience and perseverance in weathering the storm during challenging times is just as important.

Back to the year of the Fire Monkey, I realised that there are similar characteristics that we can learn from those who are born in the year of the Monkey. According to Chinese zodiac analysis, monkey is the mnemonic symbol associated with intelligence, creativity, perseverance and flexibility. Perhaps, take the cue from the monkey and brave through this challenging year by applying some of its traits.

Land & Property Food for Thought Alan Tong

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He was the World President of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia Property Award. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.
Related posts:

Developers of toppled Taiwan building detained

Executives face charges over professional negligence resulting in death Questions are being asked about the building’s construction (..

Start work on Friday for better luck? Sink or swing with the Monkey: Pay peanuts, get monkeys!

THE fifth day of the Chinese New Year, which falls on Friday, is the best day to start work in the Year of the Fire Monkey, China Press re...

Hard work the key to realising 2016 goals; Events that shaped China in 2015

Hard work the key to realising 2016 goals President Xi Jinping looked forward to 2016 in a speech calling for confidence and hard work f...

Penang property market to be resilient on sustained demand

PETALING JAYA: Penang’s property market is expected to stay resilient on the back of sustained demand, especially from Penangites working abroad planning to return and prospective retirees eyeing homes in the state.

“There has been a slowdown in the last year. There are a few categories of investors in Penang; those who are owner occupiers, those who are investors for the cultural developments, those who are in the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) and Penangites who work abroad but would like to settle in Malaysia,” said Penang Institute CEO and head of economics studies Dr Lim Kim Hwa (pictured) at the National Real Estate Convention (NREC) 2015 yesterday.

“For the last two categories, the properties in Penang would be priced significantly cheaper, thus I believe the demand in the property sector in Penang would remain rather constant,” concluded Lim during his presentation entitled “Penang: The Next Metropolis”.

In terms of the wider economy, Penang is expected to register a 5% to 6% growth in its gross domestic product (GDP), outpacing the overall country’s growth by 1%, he said, noting that last year, Penang’s GDP grew by 7.4% while Malaysia’s grew by 6%.

According to Lim, Penang contributes 21.8% of the balance of Malaysia’s trade surplus, specialising in machinery, transport equipment and miscellaneous manufactured articles.

“Penang’s economy is more export-orientated, and now there is a better demand for electrical and electronic goods,” he said.

The export sector is expected to improve with the recovery of the US economy and the weaker ringgit, he added.

“It is important that Penang provides the best environment to attract more investments. Penang is the main manufacturing and economic hub for electronic and electrical items. Bayan Lepas is already full. It is important to provide more space for industrial growth.”

Some of the projects and initiatives that are expected to contribute to this growth is the IT-BPO at Bayan Lepas, BPO Prime at Bayan Baru and Changkat Byram, south of Batu Kawan.

Other projects that will benefit Penang overall include the Penang Transport Master Plan, Penang Heritage Arts District – Ilham Penang at Sia Boey, Creative Animation Triggers at Wisma Yeap Chor Ee, and Komtar refurbishment. “All of these projects involve the private sector,” added Lim.

“The Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) is the catalyst to [turning Penang into a] metropolis, as it involves alleviating a lot of the problems locally in Penang, especially traffic congestion,” said Lim.

Expected to be completed in 2030, the RM27 billion project would include amenities such as trams for the heritage zones, LRT for the island and mainland, and water taxis.

Lim said Penang is on track to achieving its metropolis status.

“It is an ongoing process, and there is no deadline. Penang aims to transform into an international, intelligent city filled with life. To create a great metropolis, it has to be unique, and it has to attract people to want to live and expand the growth of the city,” he said.

NREC 2015 saw more than 250 participants from the banking, development, property and consultancy industries.

NREC is organised by the Royal Institution of Surveyors Malaysia (RISM) and co-organised by the Association of Valuers, Property Managers, Estate Agents and Property Consultants in the Private Sector Malaysia (PEPS).

Themed “Homes For Generations – Redefining Development Trends”, the convention highlighted concerns for the future of the real estate industry in Malaysia.

By Hannah Rafee / theedgeproperty.com 

Malaysian income: bread and butter, affordability of owing a house

JUST a few months back, a social media post on food price comparison between United Kingdom and Malaysia went viral and attracted plenty of attention.

This interesting post offered a peep into the average cost of living and purchasing power of Malaysians nowadays.

A Malaysian, Rysherz Rayn, posted on his Facebook that with about £5 (around RM33.50), he could purchase bananas, a box of grapes, 10 apples, an ice lettuce and five packets of his favourite chocolate in London. In Malaysia, the same items would add up to about RM44.

He went on to share that £5 is an hourly pay for a part-timer in UK. While in Malaysia, the average hourly pay for a part-timer is at about RM4. In other words, to afford the same items that a British buys with an hour pay, it may cost an average Malaysian 11 hours of work.

The post created a lot of discussions, some expressed shock and disappointment, others thought UK is too far away for comparison. To make it more relevant and familiar for Malaysians, I did a quick price check on Australian food.

Based on online information and personal experience, buying essential items such as a dozen eggs, 1kg of apples, a lettuce, and a loaf of sliced bread cost about A$9 (RM28) in Australia; on the other hand the same items come up to about RM20 in Malaysia.

In Australia, the minimum wage per hour is A$17.29 (RM53.50), while ours is only RM4.30 based on the minimum monthly wage of RM900.

Though this situation doesn’t paint the overall picture of the living standard in Malaysia, it does illustrate our average cost of living and purchasing power.

If we take a bigger picture, our issue of bread and butter relates closely to brick and mortar, which is the roof over our heads. When our wages are stretched in purchasing daily items compared to other countries, there is no surprise that our housing affordability level is also low.

According to the “Making Housing Affordable” report released by Khazanah Research Institute (KRI) in August, Malaysia’s median house prices were 4.4 times median annual household income in 2014. This signifies a “seriously unaffordable” housing market because an “affordable” market should have a “median multiple” (median house prices as a multiple of median annual household income) of 3.0 times based on global standards.

If we only take Kuala Lumpur into the computation, the median house prices is even higher at 5.4 times (based on annual median income of RM91,440, and the median for all house prices in Kuala Lumpur at RM490,000). Housing for Kuala Lumpur is categorised as “severely unaffordable”.

It is good that KRI reported the issue and highlighted that our country should gear towards improving the elasticity of housing supply and respond to the needs of all segments. However, other than supply, we should also look into the fundamental issue of our income level.

I remember when I first started working in 1961, my salary was RM628 and my first car was a Peugeot 404 which cost RM7,724. A single-storey house in Klang during that time was RM13,000. It cost me only one year of my salary to buy a car, and less than 2 years’ salary to afford a house.

Young graduate

However, a similar car today costs around RM100,000, and a landed house in Klang easily costs RM350,000. Looking at the salary of a young graduate which ranges from RM2,000 to RM3,000 nowadays, it takes 3 to 4 years of their salary to buy a similar Peugeot or equivalent car, and 10 to 15 years to purchase a house.

A recent news article pointed out that, only one out of two PR1MA housing loan applications are approved. It is ironic that even with affordable housing, the rakyat can’t afford a home.

The scenario and comparison above show the challenges of our young generation in securing a house today. It is unfortunate that when our car and house prices grow as a result of inflation and demand, our income doesn’t grow in tandem.

I also remembered in the 1970s, Malaysia and South Korea were started on the same level playing field in terms of gross domestic product (GDP).

According to data from International Monetary Fund (IMF), our estimated nominal GDP per capita in 1977 was US$1,084 (RM4,791), while South Korea was US$1,042 (RM4,605). During that time, when I travelled overseas with our strong currency, people in those countries looked up to me.

However, the IMF data shows the estimated GDP per capita in South Korea today is US$28,338 (RM125,256), while Malaysia is only US$10,654 (RM47,091). Other regional countries such as Taiwan and Singapore are also progressing at a fast pace, in which their estimated GDP per capita now are US$22,464 (RM99,293) and US$53,604 (RM236,935) respectively.

Back to the fundamental issue of our housing affordability, other than providing more affordable housing, the Government needs to move the rakyat up the value chain and increase the nation’s income level.

We know that the authority has been aspiring to do so under the 11th Economic Development Plan. One of them being to attain a per capita income of US$15,000 (RM66,000) by year 2020.

To expedite this, the Government and relevant authorities have to improve the competitiveness and productivity of the nation, so as to catch up with the other countries in the region.

When we talk about the affordability of our brick and mortar, the most fundamental way is to address the underlying problem of our bread and butter, i.e. our income. Until and unless our wages buy us more eggs and rice, it will be a challenge to afford a house.

- Viewpoint Food for Thought by Alan Tong The Star

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He was the world president of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia Property Award. He is also the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

Related posts:

Malaysia’s residential housing market ‘severely unaffordable’, said Demographia

Malaysian homes more unaffordable than Singapore, Japan and the US; Budget 2015 brings little joy

Malaysian homes more unaffordable than Singapore

, Japan ...

Malaysian homes more unaffordable than Singapore, Japan and the US; Budget 2015 brings little joy. File picture shows houses under construction in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia has a 'severely unaffordable' residential homes ...

http://rightwaysrichard.blogspot.com/

Malaysian property market likely to regain momentum post GST

Malaysian property market likely to regain momentum post GST 

03 Jan 2015

CIMB Research head of research Terence Wong said in a report that this would be a “tricky” year given the pick up in sales momentum in 2014 on expectation of property prices rising post GST. He points out developers have ...

http://rightwaysrichard.blogspot.com/

A strata property living nightmare: leakage

The party responsible is not your upstairs neighbour but the management

Stiff penalty: Whoever fails to give access to the party carrying out the inspection commits an offence. The fine imposed is up to RM50,000 or imprisonment of up to three years or both, under regulation 63(2).

IF you live in a high rise building and have an inter-floor leakage issue, you can be rest assured that you are not alone. Inter-floor leakage is without a doubt one of the biggest problems faced by many dwellers of high rise buildings.

Whilst the leakage may appear only in a particular parcel, the source of the leakage may lie in the parcel above or even elsewhere. The cooperation of more than one party is therefore required; without which one cannot even begin to identify the problem, let alone solve it.

Two issues must be identified when there is an inter-floor leakage. Firstly, the source of the leakage and secondly, the person or body responsible for repair or rectification. Who is supposed to identify the source of the leakage to start with? The person or body responsible of course, you may say, but how do you know who is responsible before the cause of the problem is ascertained? A bit of a chicken and egg situation arises.

New Act

Will the new management Act answer to all ceiling leakages?

In February 2013 the Strata Management Act 2013 (SMA) was passed by Parliament. With that came a presumption in law, under Section 142 of the SMA, that if the leakage is on the ceiling, then such leakage is presumed to be from the parcel above unless it is proven otherwise. So, if you have a leakage from your ceiling, go to your upstairs neighbour and tell him/her that he/she is responsible and must therefore find the source of the leakage and do the repair. What if he/she disclaims responsibility? Simple, You just quote Section 142 of the SMA. What a magical section with a “one fits all” answer to ceiling leakages! I thought so too when I first read Section 142, but I was not completely right for the law does not place the entire responsibility squarely on the upstairs parcel owner.

It was to be another couple of years before the SMA was implemented in June 2015 but the good news is that with that came also the implementation of the Strata Management (Maintenance & Management) Regulations 2015 (SMR). Many thanks to those (including HBA volunteers) who worked tirelessly on drafting and fine tuning the provisions of the SMR, we now have some definite answers on what to do if you have a leakage from your ceiling.

Who is responsible?

In dealing with inter-floor leakage one must not just look at Section 142 of the SMA but also Part XV of the SMR. Indeed it is Part XV of the SMR which tells you what to do if you discover dampness, moisture or water penetration from your ceiling or if you were to go home one day only to find that it is raining in your apartment.

Go to the developer if you are still covered by the defects liability provisions.

If the leakage is still covered by the provisions of your sale and purchase agreement (SPA), follow the provisions of your SPA. For homebuyers, these are typically cases where the leakage or defect occurs during the defects liability period, and which the housing developers are required to rectify, as provided in the statutory SPA.

JMB/MC/Management first in the line of responsibility – regulation 56

If the leakage is not one which is covered by the SPA, then notice may be served by the owner of the affected parcel on the developer or the joint management body (“JMB”) or the management corporation (“MC”) or the subsidiary management corporation (“sub-MC”), as the case may be.

This is provided for in regulation 56(1) of the SMR. What regulation 56 essentially means is that you serve notice on the body responsible for the maintenance and management of the common property, which for convenience I shall refer to as “the management”. So, now you see, the party first in the line of responsibility is not your upstairs neighbour but the management.

Once notice is received, the management must, within seven days, carry out an inspection to determine the cause of the leakage and the party responsible for rectification (regulation 57). Thereafter, the management must issue a “Certificate of Inspection” stating the cause of the inter-floor leakage as well as the party responsible for rectification (regulation 59). A standard form certificate for this purpose can be found in Form 28 under the Second Schedule of the SMR.

So, what is the purpose of Section 142, you may ask? Section 142 merely creates a presumption that the defect lies in the parcel above. In practical terms, this does nothing towards resolving any inter-floor leakage issues other than perhaps as a starting point for inspection. After all, one cannot possibly rectify a defect which causes the leakage until and unless the actual defect is identified. The legal implication of Section 142, however, is perhaps best left to those much more qualified than I but I do wonder if this statutory presumption alone can be a valid ground for holding the upstairs parcel owner responsible and if so under what circumstances in light of the provisions of the SMR.

Determining factor(s)

Under regulation 58 of the SMR, the management must take into account not just the aforesaid presumption but also the following matters which to my mind are far more relevant once the defect is identified:-

(1) that any defect in something which serves more than one parcel is a common property defect; and

(2) that any defect in something which serves only one parcel is a defect of that particular parcel even though that something is situated in common property or in void space.

In other words, the determining factor is not the location of that defective something but which parcels that something serves. If it serves just one parcel, that particular parcel owner is primarily responsible and must rectify the defect failing which the management shall carry out the rectification works and charge the expenses to that particular parcel owner. I say primarily because whilst regulation 61 of the SMR imposes the obligation on a specific parcel owner such obligation is expressly stated to be without prejudice to that parcel owner seeking indemnity from someone else.

That of course begs the question of who can be held liable for such indemnity; a question which is beyond the scope of this article but I certainly will not rule out any parcel owner, including the affected parcel owner, who contributes towards the defect or any delay in the rectification of the defect.

The decision of the management is, as expected, not final. Anyone not satisfied with a decision made against him/her may refer to the Commissioner Of Buildings (COB) who shall ascertain the cause of the leakage and the party responsible in accordance with regulation 64(1) & (2) and the decision of the COB shall be complied with by all parties concerned.

Grant access for inspection or risk prosecution

It goes without saying: that neither inspection nor rectification works can be effectively carried out without access to all relevant parcels and common property. Hence, the imposition of a statutory obligation on all relevant parties to give access as provided by regulation 63(1) of the SMR comes as no surprise at all.

Whoever fails to give access to the party carrying out the inspection commits an offence! And the punishment is severe too; a fine of up to RM50,000 or imprisonment of up to three years or both, under regulation 63(2).

Given that the lack of cooperation on the part of some parcel owners/occupiers has remained one of the main causes of delay in resolving inter-floor leakage problems, these provisions are definitely a step in the right direction. It does puzzle me, however, that whilst a failure to give access for inspection tantamount to an offence, the same does not seem to apply to a failure to give access for rectification.

Some of you cynics out there may be tempted to brush this aside as something unlikely to be enforced by the authorities but do you want to take that chance? Do you really want to risk prosecution over something as simple as giving access for inspection and/or rectification?

Beside, now that the Strata Management Tribunal has been set up you may be slapped with an order much sooner than you think.

By Chang Kim Loong Buyer Beware

Chang Kim Loong AMN is the honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association: www.hba.org.my , a non-profit, non-governmental organisation manned purely by volunteers.

Related posts:

• 

  By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 1

  Third Schedule of Strata Management Regulation 2015 WITH the demise of the Deed of Mutual Covenants, the Third Schedule of the Strata...

• By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 2 ... 

High cost under new law may affect property investors' profit margin

Strata regime: Return on investment will always be a consideration as higher cost would certainly affect the possible margin of profit in today’s buyers’ market.

Counting the cost: Investors' profit margin may be affected under new law

PROPERTY has topped the list of investment options for those who have extra cash. Property investors and those who prefer other instruments, are trying to gain maximum returns on their hard earned money.

Property investment has gained momentum because of the price boom in the last 10 years as seen by the massive development and high take-up rate.

Because the bulk of these properties are stratified residential properties, legislations have been updated for a more efficient delivery of strata titles. Essentially, these new legislations provide more protection to house buyers.

Among these are the Housing Development (Control and Licensing) (Amendment) Act 2012 (“HDAA”), Strata Titles (Amendment) Act 2013 and Strata Management Act 2013 (both “Strata regime”). The Strata Management Act came into effect on June 1, 2015.

Return on investment will always be a consideration as higher cost would certainly affect the possible margin of profit in today’s buyers’ market. While having new legislations are good news for house buyers, these new legislations could also impact the cost of any investment in strata residential property.

For a start, there is now higher compliance cost for the housing developers, as there is an increase in the amount to be deposited in the housing development account.

There is also the new requirement to maintain the common property defects account prior to the delivery of the keys to the house buyers.

This means that under the new regime, developers will have a higher compliance cost, which may indirectly result in fluctuations of property prices. This means developers need to be financially strong and there is the possibility that they may incur financial costs as they try to maintain a feasible and sustainable cash flow.

This will discourage the smaller players. Having fewer choices is definitely not good news for the investors.

In addition, there is also a higher transactional cost for those who plan to flip their properties.

The earlier issuance of strata title upon delivery of vacant possession will require investors to fork out expenses related to the stamp duty before selling the completed property to the next buyer.

In other words, there is no longer savings on the stamp duty on transfer for those investors who bought directly from the developers. This lowers the return on investment, not to mention having to bear with the longer and complicated process of double transfers for those who are eager to dispose of the property on delivery of vacant possession.

The new template of the prescribed sale and purchase agreement HDAA (Schedule H) also requires that the payment shall be in compliance with the schedule of payment and no person shall act as stakeholder to collect such payment.

In simpler sense, the developer is no longer allowed to collect booking fee from the investors for their preferred unit and the unit they have selected is only secured upon the signing of the sale and purchase agreement with the 10% payment.

As such, there is no turning back once you have signed on those dotted lines and there is no way to secure your unit of choice with lower amount while you are working on the full 10% deposit.

Another cost that will burden property investors is the maintenance fees charged by the management office when they get their keys to their properties. The new strata regime has provided for the possibility of limited common property usage and the exclusive use of certain facilities – a privilege – which comes with a price tag. If the management adopts any limited common property, they are looking at a two-tier service charges and sinking fund, with one for those who have the use of one set of common properties and the other for the use of limited common property, to be enjoyed only by a selected few.

Despite monetary cost, time cost is also a factor for investors. A purchase into a strata development now calls for more involvement in the management as the management corporation of the development is formed much earlier now with the possibility of having the title and the keys delivered at the same time.

The new strata regime requires the active participation of all owners, as the tenure of the office bearer is limited. Other owners are required to sit in the management corporation committee on subsequent years. Despite the fact that taking up the responsibilities of committee members offers monetary gains, any misconduct or negligence may now result in a penalty.

The new restrictions on advertisement and representation by the developers also mean that the investors are required to spend time on research and do their own due diligence to better understand the investment. There is no longer permitted representation such as time/distance from a particular venue, projected monetary returns/gains and rental income. Thus, before making decision to invest, the consumers have to do more personal research on the investment.

While property investment remains feasible over the longer term, investors are advised to take these legislations into consideration to come out with a realistic projection of investment return.

By CHRIS TAN Real Legal

Related posts

• 

  Property prices will hold as ringgit falls to new low against USD and S$

  PETALING JAYA: The depreciation of the ringgit will not lead to real estate prices crashing. The Malaysian Institute of Estate Agents ...

• 

  By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 1

  Third Schedule of Strata Management Regulation 2015 WITH the demise of the Deed of Mutual Covenants, the Third Schedule of the Strata...

• 

  By-laws governing strata property management in Malaysia, part 2

  General duties of a proprietors according to the Third Schedule of Strata Management Regulation 2015 WHILE last week's article cove...

Not wise to sell property or house to shore up ringgit Malaysia

ON Thursday, at a seminar organised by Malaysia Property Inc, the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) said it would continue to seek “opportunistic” investments abroad.

There are various reasons why EPF and the other funds absolutely need to do so if they are to provide a steady dividend stream to contributors over the longer term and to diversify risk.

As we have seen the last year or so, the ringgit has come under tremendous pressure and year to date, it has weakened against most currencies, especially the US dollar, the British pound and the Singapore dollar.

Had EPF not made forays abroad in 2009, its 14 million odd contributors would not have received dividends ranging between 6% and 6.75% between 2011 and 2014 and in the interim years of 2012, 6.12% and 2013, 6.35%.

Prior to this, EPF declared dividends of 5.8% in 2007, 4.5% in 2008, 5.65% in 2009 and 5.8% in 2010.

The Asian financial crisis in 1997/98 and the 2008 global financial crisis were costly lessons for EPF and the other funds.

Before its move to buy property abroad in 2008, less than 1% of its total funds were invested in real estate. Today, it has the mandate to invest up to 4% of its total funds of about RM700bil in local and foreign properties. It can also invest up to 26% of its available funds in non-ringgit denominated investment instruments including bonds, securities, properties and other others.

So far, EPF has invested more than £1bil in UK and more than 1bil euros in France and Germany. It also has properties in Japan and Australia.

Its core investments in Europe, excluding UK, are in the office and logistics sector. In UK, it has offices, logistics and 12 hospitals under the Spire brand. It also has a 20% stake in Battersea Power Station mixed used project. According to its head of global real estate in the private markets department Kamarulzaman Hassan, EPF would like to add retail hypermarket chain to its stable.

It is prudent and logical for EPF to seek opportunities in mature markets because although it knows the home market well, it is already in every sub-segment of the local real estate market - logistics, retail, office, residential.

As Kamarulzaman aptly said, EPF is “a big fish in a small crowded pond.” Other big fish in this small pond include Permodalan Nasional Bhd, Retirement Fund Inc (or KWAP) and Lembaga Tabung Haji, Perbadanan Hartanah Bumiputra among others.

There are several reasons why EPF has made forays abroad. It was badly hit in 1997 and 2008. Prior to this, it invested only in Malaysia. It had all its eggs in one basket.

Earlier this year, as the ringgit was weakening, certain parties in the government called on the various funds to bring their money home to shore up the ringgit. They were to curb investments abroad.

EPF subsequently sold 1 Sheldon Square, UK for £210mil (RM1.14bil), which it bought in 2010 for £156.7mi, giving EPF a net gain of £54 mil. Whether it made that decision to sell based on that call to bring the money home is a moot point. That property was tenanted out to Visa Services Europe until December 2022, with a 5.75% annual yield.

So far, KWAP and Felda have said they will not be selling their investments which gave them a good yield.

The thing is, if there is better yield to be had, and forex to earn, why dispose of them?

And why curb funds from investing abroad if they have done proper due diligence and are able to manage these investments well.

As it is, according to Kamarulzaman, London properties are so hot today that investors are willing to get 3.5% to 4% in annual yield.

Selling overseas real estate which were purchased when the pound was low, when it is offering a good yield, just to shore up the ringgit does not seem to be a wise call.

It is like killing the goose that lays the golden egg just to provide food for a day. Yes, London’s property prices are frothy now, but these property investment have long leases.

Besides, the markets it has invested in are mature markets with high liquidity. There is interest in these markets from around the world.

Because property sector is cyclical, the timing is important. EPF entered UK when the it was about RM5 to a pound. These investments came with long leases, which fit into EPF’s need for a steady income flow as it needs to pay dividends to contributors.

In short, going abroad gave it a much needed new investment platform which was not available at home.

These mature markets offer transparent legal and tax structures and clearly, governance was well established.

There is a clear exit option and this was demonstrated when it sold 1 Sheldon Square earlier this year.

UK properties have gone up in value considerably since. Whether EPF will continue to liquidate depends on various factors but to liquidate just to bring home the money to shore up the ringgit should not be one of them, especially when its investments are yielding good returns.

Property is today the biggest alternative asset class for institutional investors and forms the largest allocation for pension funds, insurance companies and sovereign wealth funds.

It is also not homogenous but in today’s volatile environment, it is more tangible than most other asset classes.

Comment by Thean Lee Cheng The Star/Asia News Network

Related post:

• The riddled Ringgit Malasia hits 17-year low again against US dollar...
•