LETTERS: I refer to the article published by the New Straits Times titled "Irresponsible property developers dash housebuyers' dream".
The article raises concerns about defective workmanship and many other problems homebuyers face, especially when taking developers to court, which is the last thing homeowners would want to do as it requires much time and energy, not to mention the cost.
It further urged the government to step in to help such homeowners. Generally, developers do their best to provide quality houses. But there are some that just don't.
With regard to bringing developers to court, the article should have mentioned the Homebuyer's Tribunal (HBT), which was established under the Housing Development Act 1966.
I attended a seminar on dispute resolution involving stratified living recently, and the HBT's effectiveness was discussed. The most common complaint among homebuyers was that the HBT should be more effective.
The HBT needs urgent reform. The structure and system of the tribunal, which was created to make it an easier, quicker and more affordable avenue for homebuyers to file claims against developers, may seem to have the opposite effect.
Among the matters raised was that the HBT's monetary jurisdiction did not reflect the current costs of houses and repairs. As for the technical reports to diagnose house defects and workmanship, the lack of equipment and time has become a major hurdle for comprehensive inspection.
By virtue that water is intangible, diagnosis and testing tools, like an infrared thermographic imager, a pressure gauge, an endoscope and a hygrometer, can diagnose the possible causes that contribute to leakage.
Due to budgetary constraints, the technical team may not be sufficiently equipped.
If no proper testing is conducted, the quality of evidence will be low and unreliable and the HBT's decision may not be satisfactory.
Another problem is that some developers do not abide by the HBT's award. This is due to the lack of enforcement by the authorities, which reduces the award to a mere "paper tiger".
Then, there is the judicial review process, where developers file a request with the High Court to review the HBT's decision.
The homebuyer, who has spent all his savings on the house purchase, now has to fork out extra money for legal fees. And to make matters worse, although the tribunal's award may be in the homebuyer's favour, due to financial constraints, they are forced to drop it to avoid extra expenses.
Some homebuyers at the seminar suggested that the HBT be abolished and all claims be filed in court as it will make purchasers aware of the realities they have to face from the very beginning.
In short, homebuyers are misled into believing that everything can be solved by going to the HBT, when in reality it is not "easier, quicker and more affordable".
Alternatively, establishing a second or higher tribunal to "review" the lower tribunal's decision could be considered. The creation of a second tribunal would alleviate the burden of hefty fees for parties seeking final determinations.
Appeals on points of law should only be allowed to proceed to court after a decision by this tribunal.
This would involve detailed research on the structure that would not conflict with the courts' powers.
The Real Estate and Housing Developers Association and National House Buyers Association should help in the creation of the two-tier tribunal system.
ARIFF SHAH R.K
Penang
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect those of the New Straits Times