Contributed by Datuk Chang Kim Loong

The concept of redevelopment—where homeowners exchange their current property titles for a future home unit or monetary compensation—is relatively new in Malaysia. Despite this, many Kuala Lumpur residents have already experienced years of haphazard redevelopment attempts by developers and unscrupulous middlemen.

The anticipation of the upcoming Urban Redevelopment Act (URA) has further fueled a surge in redevelopment activities, particularly in areas where many B40 and M40 communities reside. For instance, residents of Flat Rajawali (Taman Segar, Cheras), Taman Seri Endah (Seri Petaling) and Cantik Apartments (Cheras) are either currently experiencing or have previously encountered aggressive efforts by purported agents or developers seeking consent for redevelopment. Similar trends are expected in the 91 residential sites identified in the Kuala Lumpur Structure Plan 2040.

Lack of proper guidelines

Due to limited public awareness of their rights as property owners and the legal processes involved in redevelopment, many homeowners are easily swayed by agents using various tactics to obtain consent.

In many cases, the process is skewed from the start, with residents being led through steps designed by agents and middlemen. It is common for these agents to distribute so-called survey forms containing legalistic terms such as early agreement, often requesting signatures and MyKad details under the guise of informal gatherings, sometimes even over free lunches. In some locations, excerpts from official letters are selectively shown to create an illusion of legitimacy. Additionally, some neighbours are enlisted to promote redevelopment through word of mouth.

Often, when middlemen are involved, the identity of the actual developer is not formally disclosed. Worse still, residents who refuse to provide consent may face harassment or intimidation.

Homeowners exposed to risk

Amid rushed and high-pressure circumstances, it is difficult for residents to assess whether they are making informed decisions objectively. Homeowners approached for redevelopment proposals are often enticed with promises of larger condominium units, maintenance fee-free periods, additional parking bays and other perks.

However, few are made aware of critical details such as the actual maintenance fees they will need to pay once the grace period ends or the selling restrictions/moratorium imposed on the units they receive.

Beyond this, there is the looming risk of abandoned projects, particularly when smaller developers without strong financial backing are involved. The possibility of losing one’s home in a redevelopment deal is a harsh reality—one that could turn into a nightmare over time. Even more concerning, some developers act merely as intermediaries or middlemen, with the real project sponsors remaining undisclosed. In many cases, for nothing more than a promised future unit and a modest rental allowance during the construction period, residents are exposing themselves to significant risks.

Without proper guidelines, transparent approvals and regulatory oversight, redevelopment can be easily exploited for commercial gain at the expense of already vulnerable communities. Lower-income earners, single parents, the elderly and retirees are particularly at risk. While redevelopment is often promoted as a means to provide better housing for urban residents, in reality, it has turned many neighbourhoods into battlegrounds, pitting those who support redevelopment against those who oppose it—creating a persistently tense living environment.

Agents pressuring owners

A recent Star Metro report highlighted concerns from homeowners in three Kuala Lumpur residential areas, where unknown agents have been using scare tactics to pressure them into consenting to redevelopment projects. These agents have reportedly resorted to misinformation and harassment.

Additionally, residents have reported breaches of privacy, alleging that their personal details had been published on flyers distributed throughout the neighbourhood. A Cheras resident also noted that these agents spoke at length about the benefits of redevelopment but failed to disclose hidden costs, such as increased maintenance fees for the new buildings once completed.

Many residents worry that senior citizens—who may be unfamiliar with legal procedures or the details of the upcoming Urban Redevelopment Act—are particularly vulnerable to exploitation. The three affected housing developments are among 139 locations across Kuala Lumpur identified by Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) for potential redevelopment under KLSP 2040.

A recent report highlighted the experiences of homeowners like Dzulkarnain Ariffin, whose 36-year-old walk-up flat in Apartment Taman Sri Endah, Kuala Lumpur, represents years of hard work and sacrifice. Having fully paid off his bank loan, Dzulkarnain was looking forward to a peaceful retirement with his wife, Jamilah Hashim, while raising their grandchildren. However, the government’s push for the proposed URA has left him—and many others—feeling uncertain about the future.

Their home in Sri Petaling offers amenities such as a football field, a recreational park and ample parking—features that are essential to their current lifestyle. A retired government servant, Dzulkarnain is content with his living environment and is deeply concerned about the drastic changes that the URA may bring. These concerns reflect broader fears surrounding gentrification, displacement of low-income residents and the potential for land grabs under the guise of redevelopment.

The impact of URA

The URA aims to facilitate the redevelopment of strata schemes by lowering the required threshold for homeowners’ consent, which currently stands at 100%. Under existing laws, the government must obtain full consent from all residents before redeveloping ageing buildings. However, in Kuala Lumpur, the Land Acquisition Act is sometimes used to bypass this requirement, allowing redevelopment projects to proceed with lower consent thresholds.

With the URA, the government is proposing a revised owners’ consent threshold:

• 80% consent for buildings less than 30 years old
• 75% consent for buildings older than 30 years

This shift has raised concerns among residents, particularly those who fear being forced out of their homes despite strong community ties and well-established living environments.

A holistic regulatory framework is crucial

The Kuala Lumpur Residents Action for Sustainable Development Association (KLRA+SD) has emphasised that redevelopment, though relatively new in Malaysia, is set to become more prevalent in Kuala Lumpur in the coming years. However, rushing its implementation without a proper framework could have disastrous consequences.

KLRA+SD argues that the government must not outsource redevelopment planning entirely to private developers. Instead, authorities should first establish a robust regulatory and monitoring framework to safeguard homeowners’ rights, as enshrined in the constitution. Until such safeguards are in place, all redevelopment processes should be put on hold to prevent undue hardship for affected residents. After all, if the social costs of redevelopment outweigh its benefits, is it truly worth it?

Datuk Chang Kim Loong is the honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association.

This article is written jointly by JS Han, a policy advisor who regularly works with KLRA+SD.

Stay ahead of the crowd and enjoy fresh insights on real estate, property development and lifestyle trends when you subscribe to our newsletter and follow us on social media.