Legal Options Against Builders

[Adarsh Aggarwal]

Also, I have seen that builders are asking for huge amount to transfer the flat in the name of new buyer. For example, Shiv Sai is charging 150 Rs per Sq, Ft. For 1500 Sq Ft flat, we need to pay 2.25 Lac as transfer fee. Is it legal. What is GFWA doing about this.

Dear Asia pole

Is Shiv Sai is charging and getting the payment of Rs.2.25 Lacs under the head by Transfer Fee and giving a receipt for that by saying it the Transfer Charges?

Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate

[shubhohere]

Nice post by s3.3army

I am sync with you that builders do such wrong practice with the help from Govt whether directly or indirectly.

Dear Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate
Yes I agree that every thing is according to agreement and every thing was hidden in the agreement !!!!!!!
like 1)build up area is tentative
2) administration charges will be charged but how much not mentioned
3) EDC may increased
4) And not only this if construction cost increases during the period of construction they can charge additional but how
much additional not mentioned
Believe me the flat prices now after 2.5 years are going to cross 28 lacs
we in the time of ressession booked this flat when they proposed the cost of flat 15 lacs
now as the time is passing they are charging aal the hidden cost to it
Tell me if I booked my flat in the highlighted figure of 15 -16 lac and sanctioned the loan amount
upto 14 lacs then tell me now additional charges are going to be burden on me or not ?
I do not at all agree with the argumenr you proposed ......
Because of this agreement they can not charge upto maximum ...... They are charging every charges upto their maximum
How and why before addvertisement of the flats they could not measure the constructed area
they increased the build up area later on and charged us in last installment . Were they sleeping before ?
If they were then credit goes to government only why they can not do check these builders flat before letting them a launch in market .
I think gov. people knew all this happen and they were sleeping because of some resons ............
And I strongly believe that we are not first who are facing such problems and GOVT. know this very well ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[dheerajjain]

Dear s3.3army, what you are saying may be correct. But, the reality is that Courts may go by written contract executed between builder and buyer. If the written contract has so much ambiguities, then in my personal opinion, then it may be better not to buy that property. I did not buy flat in BPTP Park Elite Premium project after reading their agreement (I thank my wife for pointing out ambiguous clauses in car when we were on our way to do payments). We met Director General of Town and Country Planning (body that provided licences to builders) in Chandigarh previous week and he expressed his helpnessness quoting Supreme Court judgment. Need for the hour is Real Estate Regulation Law and Body which has regulations and powers for real estate industry. All, please sign petition for real estate regulation bill by going to:

http://www.myfaridabad.in/petition/real ... tory-body/

[asiapole]

Dear Adarsh Aggarwal,

I am not sure about the description in receipt but they have published this in their website very clearly.

UNIT TRANSFER CHARGES Rs. 150/- Per Sq.Ft.

You may also see above text on their website- http://shivsai.com/The_Ozone_Park_Apartments.

In my opinion, this is unfair trade practice and completely illegal. Please advice.

Thanks,
Aditya Gupta

Also, I have seen that builders are asking for huge amount to transfer the flat in the name of new buyer. For example, Shiv Sai is charging 150 Rs per Sq, Ft. For 1500 Sq Ft flat, we need to pay 2.25 Lac as transfer fee. Is it legal. What is GFWA doing about this.

Dear Asia pole

Is Shiv Sai is charging and getting the payment of Rs.2.25 Lacs under the head by Transfer Fee and giving a receipt for that by saying it the Transfer Charges?

Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate

[BlessU]

Dear s3.3army, what you are saying may be correct. But, the reality is that Courts may go by written contract executed between builder and buyer. If the written contract has so much ambiguities, then in my personal opinion, then it may be better not to buy that property. I did not buy flat in BPTP Park Elite Premium project after reading their agreement (I thank my wife for pointing out ambiguous clauses in car when we were on our way to do payments). We met Director General of Town and Country Planning (body that provided licences to builders) in Chandigarh previous week and he expressed his helpnessness quoting Supreme Court judgment. Need for the hour is Real Estate Regulation Law and Body which has regulations and powers for real estate industry. All, please sign petition for real estate regulation bill by going to:

http://www.myfaridabad.in/petition/real ... tory-body/

Hi
Greetings

Some awakening from slumber of the official machinery after being slapped "refraining orders" by Supreme court at the behest of builders

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city ... 574657.cms

its high time punitive action (not only deterants) be issued against erring builders by DTCP and HUDA....

Its absolutely ridiculous to believe that certain builders are ignoring the licencing guidelines blatantly and have the dexterity to even challenge the institutions responsible for granting licences to them.. If still the departments dont awaken,, it would be better not to expect anything from the official machinery anymore.. Only option left then would be to move court/lokayukt both against certain corrupt govt officials and builders..

Cheers

[Adarsh Aggarwal]

Dear Aditya,

I have seen the Shiv Sai Website, Unit Transfer charges is illegal trade practice and definitely can be challanged.

Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate

[ddamitav]

Adersh,

Every where in india Builders charge Transfer fee till the time society in formed. In Mumbai Builder charges from Rs. 600 psf to 1500/-psf as transfer fee depending on the location.

best thing is hold on your investment till society is formed in shiv sai the do the transaction.

regards,

amitav

[asiapole]

GFWA leadership,

With below legal opinion it is evident that builders are charging illegal transfer fees. What is your stand on this?

Thanks,

Aditya

Dear Aditya,

I have seen the Shiv Sai Website, Unit Transfer charges is illegal trade practice and definitely can be challanged.

Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate

[Adarsh Aggarwal]

Dear Amitav
Charging by all builders do not make it legal. There will not be any clause in the agreement to charge such a fees. so any amount beyond agreement is illegal.

Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate

[mnhasan]

DEAR ADVOCATE Sb,
THERE IS CLEAR CLAUSE IN THE AGREEMENT THAT THE PRICES ARE SUBJECT TO REVISION BY THE GOVT and also that it is sole descretion of the builder.AGREEMENT IS ALWAYS SIGNED IN FAVOUR OF BUILDER AND THE CUSTOMER IS BOUND TO SIGN IT.
PLEASE GO THROUGH THE AGREEMENT AGAIN.

THANKS,
M N HASAN
9899027860

[anujgarg]

Dear Adarshji

Thanks for your previous reply. I am currently taking possession of my flat and need to give this affidavit ( Pure blackmail by Omaxe).
Can I still stand in court of law after giving this affidavit.

Is there a way that before giving this affidavit, If I can show my discontent or complain to Relevant authorities, My chance in court of law does not stand diluted.

Query:-

I would like to have one more info from your side. Before Possession Omaxe is asking for Affidavit asking that buyer will not have any claim against delay in possession ( He refused to give penalty to buyer on a clause that possession will be given 36 months after date of signing of agreement and himself delayed the agreement signing).

And without giving handover asking us to state that flat is in working condition and I am satisfied with that.

If I give affidavit on that effect, will i not be able to file any case against Omaxe.

Answer:

Dear Anuj Garg,
This is another common example of fight of an individual against an Institution such as Builder. In legal language, this type of act, like getting affidavit asking that buyer will not have any cliam against delayed possession, can be called coercive act on part of the Builder. But the problem is that actually nobody is willing to fight, either out of 1000 flat owners, 5 to 10 will fight, or they will fight by making an association, in first case, either builder settles the matter or pays up when he loses, in case of association, he proves that he donot have any agreement with association and every agreement is an individual agreement, he wins the case after dragging it for 5-6 years.

The proper Course of action is to file civil suit and then pay the proceeds, if you have to, if any, before Court, so that claim of refund can be made escaping this type of action, where Omaxe, BPTP, or any other builder can say that you have agreed and waived claim for delayed possession, now you cannot claim them again.

Hoping it solves your query,
Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate
9810240789, rpalegal@hotmail.com

[shubhohere]

Yes, you can send a notice asking them why they have asked to sign the affidavit...

[dheerajjain]

My personal stand is that practices like these can be handled once we are having Real Estate Regulator.

[Adarsh Aggarwal]

Dear Anuj Garg,
Definitely if you give affidavit that you will not claim anything after getting the possession, same can be used against you.

You have to issue him a letter that this affidavit is not required as per terms of agreement and then issue him a legal notice to cease and desist from such practice,
Even after that he demands such affidavit, you have to sign the same under protest, then your claim will be alive.

Regards
Adarsh Aggarwal
Advocate

[yomkippur]

Judgement of Competetion Commission of India (CCI)
If this has worked, our consistent complaints would not go waste. - Therefore keep complaining at every available platform. This case of DLF is well known in terms of malpractice. The judgement can be termed as landmark by CCI
Read on......
Sometime ago, the competition commission of India (CCI) imposed a penalty of Rs. 630 crores on the largest real estate company of India, the DLF. This was hailed as a landmark judgement. CCI is an institution created to ensure that no institution or company exploits its dominant position to create a monopolistic situation in the market by unfair means. CCI has taken a serious stand against DLF and termed the violation as the “grossly abusing its dominant position”.

What was the issue?

There have been complaints against real estate developers over the last couple of years on incomplete projects, delays in possession, and in some cases, irresponsible responses to critical situations. This has left home buyers confused and exasperated. Some of the affected home buyers lodged a complaint with CCI regarding a project undertaken by DLF. The project was supposed to be completed in 2009 but even after 2 years past the stipulated timeline of 2009, the status was not clarified according to the home buyers.

The second deviation that buyers indicated was that of DLF indulging in increasing the number of floors. This has resulted in more number of apartments in the same area. This is very common to many developers who promise something but deliver a completely different product.

Apart from these violations, there were many terms and conditions, which were unfair to the home buyers. For example, buyers will have to pay a high interest rate if buyers delay payment while DLF will pay a negligible amount if they delay possession. This condition is termed the punitive penalty clause by builders.

What this means is that if the buyer delays the payment they will have to pay with an interest rate. For example, if the buyer is supposed to pay 1L by December 28th, 2011 and delays, he will have to pay 15% charges per annum on this amount. While if the builder delays giving possession of apartment, he doesn’t pay much penalty.

The CCI, in its judgement, has also clarified that they can issue penalties against other developers if found guilty on similar violations. This has opened up other cases as well and CCI is actively looking into such cases.

[u]Implication for home buyers[/u]

This significant judgement by CCI will have larger implications for the home buyers. DLF, in its response, said that these are industry practices and hence they cannot be singled out. Essentially what this means is that the judgement can be used by home buyers who have been forced into similar situations by other builders.

Home buyers can go to CCI for situations where builders have increased the number of apartments than what is promised originally. They can also question the builders on changing the super area and charging extra.

Home buyers can question the exit clauses for them and for the builders. The exit clause is usually not in favour of the home buyers. In the case of DLF, the exit clause gave unprecedented right to DLF to exit without providing adequate compensation to the home buyers. Not only this, buyers can question changing any clause which puts them at an unfair disadvantage.

What is next?

After this judgement, CCI has been studying other cases where such violations have happened. Since DLF has made it clear that these are industry practices, CCI is conducting a thorough check on builders who follow the same practice. This will provide relief to home buyers who have not got their units as promised.

There is another regulation to be discussed in the parliament very soon. The real estate authority bill envisages far-sweeping changes in the real estate industry. This regulation will enforce transparency in real estate dealing, reduce unaccounted for transactions, enforce accountability and sanctity of contract, and ensure that home buyers are not taken for granted.

Together, with real estate authority bill CCI judgement against DLF will have a big impact in the realty segment. This will encourage serious players in real estate, discourage unscrupulous practices, and attract foreign players which will help the industry as a whole.