Payback time for developers

03/07/1999 NST Editorial Voice

In the 33 years that the Housing Developers act 1966 has been in force, some black sheep in the industry have found as many ways to sidestep minimum acceptable standards in the construction and delivery of houses. Frustrated and helpless housebuyers, having paid money upfront, have had no recourse to quick or simple redress.

Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Ting Chew Peh is hardly revealing a secret when he refers to the doubling of complaints. House buyers have, after all, been openly contemptuous about shoddy workmanship, late or encumbered delivery of houses and misleading advertisements.

Complaints channeled to the ministry have to follow the tortuous course of the bureaucratic response. This, combined with insufficient legal clout, has meant a protracted wait for a conclusion satisfactory to both parties.

Clearly, something has had to give and it is apparently the Minister's patience with both outdated legislation and developers who refuse to honour their obligations to housebuyers. Hence, the pledge to review the Act and bring the housing industry to heel.

The in-house review committee will prepare a working paper and hold discussions with industry associations, professional bodies, consumer groups and legal experts. Only then will the Act be reviewed to plug loopholes, increase penalties and protect consumer interests. This move is also necessitated by the proposed tabling of the Consumer Protection Bill in the Dewan Rakyat later this month.

The committee cannot afford the luxury of an open-ended time frame to complete its job, for two reasons. Firstly, housebuyers have been kept waiting for redress of cumulative grievances. They deserve better than a solution that is so tantalising near, and yet so far. Secondly, should the Consumer Protection Bill be passed, there cannot be occasion for conflict with related laws.

There can be no denying that the ministry's own lenience has contributed to this unsatisfactory state of affairs. Had it not looked the other way for so long, it might have instilled discipline within the industry.

Despite the increase in complaints. it has blacklisted only 23 of the 2,000 registered builders. In the last three years, too, it has made concessions to ease the industry's burdens purportedly arising out of administrative bottlenecks. Developers have been shielded by the "sell and build' arrangement, no doubt a prime factor behind their disinterest in rectifying defects in newly-completed houses. But it is payback time.

If the review is manipulated by industry interests to delay the process, the ministry will have to be firm and proceed with provisions that are fair and just to housebuyers. Vacillation disguised as consensus-seeking can only lead to the ministry  being held as hostage, as it must surely be aware.

For too long now, the odds have been stacked in favour of an industry lobby which has been able to negotiate its way out of stringent legal conditions that might have otherwise been imposed. The lopsided Sale and Purchase Agreement provides ample proof of this.

The point at which institutionalised "nannying' of business interests ends, will be where effective consumer protection begins. The ministry cannot have it both ways. It must declare where it stands and act accordingly , if it is not to be accused of pork-barrel politics in the pre-election period.