Share
- The proposed Property Management Bill is a costly and unnecessary duplication of BOVAEP’s existing mandate. It distracts from the real problems afflicting Malaysia’s strata sector, and risks wasting public funds without delivering meaningful reform.
Back in April, the Minister of Housing and Local Government (KPKT), Nga Kor Ming, said that a proposed Property Management Bill was in the works—to address what he perceived as current gaps, and to “ensure the maintenance of buildings nationwide”. However, this has raised serious concern, and many have voiced their objections.
The news has simmered off over time, but the minister seems bent on going ahead with the plan even though the professional property management community have written vastly against the Bill, and held discussions with KPKT to explain their rationale. In fact, over the years, similar debates have risen, and we hope that this article could help put some of the issues in perspective.
While the stated intent of improving strata housing conditions means well, the proposed legislative approach is fundamentally flawed. It risks creating legal confusion, weakening professional standards, and misdirecting resources away from the root issues facing strata properties—particularly in the low- and medium-cost categories.
The proposal, if pursued, will also risk duplicating existing regulatory functions, waste public funds, and misdiagnose the root causes of building neglect.
Existing laws are more than adequate
Malaysia already has two cornerstone statutes that govern strata property management and professional regulation:
1. Strata Management Act 2013 (SMA): This governs the management, operation, and maintenance of stratified developments, and lays out the roles and responsibilities of the Commissioner of Building (COB), joint management bodies (JMBs), management corporations (MCs), subsidiary management corporations, developers, and owners, including occupiers and tenants.
2. Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers Act 1981 (Act 242): Enforced by the Board of Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers (BOVAEP), this law regulates the licensing, standards, and ethical conduct of professional property managers.
Together, these provide a comprehensive enough framework. The introduction of another new Act to regulate "building managers" under KPKT is redundant and unnecessary, creating overlapping jurisdictions and legal ambiguity.
The real issue is not the number of property managers
The minister’s argument rests on the assumption that strata buildings are poorly maintained because there are not enough licensed property managers. This narrative oversimplifies a complex issue.
Malaysia already has a competent regulator in BOVAEP, which ensures that practising professionals meet strict qualification, and ethical standards. The real problem lies not in the number of professional property managers but in chronic underfunding, weak enforcement, and fragmented governance, particularly in low-cost and low-medium-cost strata schemes.
The poorly-maintained strata developments that are often cited as justification for the Bill are, in fact, predominantly found among low-cost and low-medium-cost properties that are self-managed with unqualified personnel because of the lack of funds. Without sufficient collections, these JMBs and MCs cannot even afford to engage professional property managers, let alone carry out proper maintenance and repairs.
Even the most qualified property managers cannot maintain a building if owners default on their contributions, or if JMBs and MCs lack financial capacity. These structural problems cannot be solved by merely increasing the number of licensed professionals, or creating yet another regulatory board.
In fact, the current strong participation in tenders called by medium- and high-end strata schemes shows that there is no shortage of professional property managers.
Duplicating regulatory roles wastes public funds
BOVAEP already performs the regulatory and disciplinary functions envisioned under the proposed Bill. Creating a new board under KPKT will only lead to duplication, confusion, and unnecessary large expenditure on administration, staffing, and enforcement infrastructure.
At a time when the government is pursuing fiscal prudence and cost rationalisation, such duplication would be irresponsible. The focus should instead be on strengthening collaboration between BOVAEP, KPKT, COBs, and local authorities—improving enforcement, training and enhancing competency standards within the existing framework.
Underfunded low-cost strata developments are the real challenge
The real crisis lies within low-cost and low-medium-cost strata housing, where collection of maintenance charges is chronically poor, and sinking funds are almost non-existent. Without adequate financing, even basic repairs such as lift servicing and plumbing replacements become impossible. When this happens, it can lead to deteriorating building conditions, safety risks, and depreciating property values.
Injecting government funds into these properties from time to time has also proven ineffective. History has repeatedly shown that such injections produce little to no meaningful or lasting impact on the conditions of these developments. In fact, funds often dissipate without transparency or measurable outcomes.
Hence, what Malaysia urgently needs is not a new regulatory board, but a proper central agency with full transparency to manage and maintain vulnerable strata properties.
JPPH: The logical central agency to undertake management of low- and low-medium-cost stratified developments
The Valuation and Property Services Department (JPPH) is the ideal candidate to undertake this national role. JPPH already possesses a strong foundation of estate and property management expertise, supported by its associated institutions: the National Institute of Valuation (Inspen) for professional training, the National Property Information Centre (Napic) for data and market intelligence, and the National Real Estate Research Coordinator (Narec) for policy research.
With these resources, JPPH is uniquely positioned to establish a transparent, accountable, and professional framework to manage and rehabilitate low-cost strata developments on behalf of the government.
Fragmentation will result in confusion
If the proposed Property Management Bill proceeded, along with the new terminology “building managers”, Malaysia would end up with two parallel regulatory systems:
- BOVAEP: registered Property Managers under Act 242
- KPKT: certified "building managers" under the proposed Bill.
This duality will confuse stakeholders across the board:
- JMBs and MCs won’t know which class of managers to appoint.
- Residents and owners will be unsure about accountability and recourse.
- Local authorities may face conflicts in enforcement, especially where responsibilities overlap.
From a legal standpoint, this fragmentation introduces compliance uncertainties, risks contradictory rulings, and ultimately undermines investor confidence in the strata market.
Professional standards must not be compromised
- Property management is not a general administrative task. It requires:
- Financial acumen (budgeting, collections, sinking funds)
- Legal literacy (compliance with the SMA and house rules)
- Technical know-how (building systems, repairs, preventive maintenance)
- Conflict resolution, and stakeholder communication
These are not skills that can be picked up casually or certified with minimal training.
Peninsular Malaysia already went through a controversial phase, when in 2018, BOVAEP threw open a registration window (aka amnesty period), allowing temporary provisions for non-qualified individuals to register as property managers. Many registrants were accepted without written examinations. Thankfully, the registration window had since closed.
The current proposal under KPKT echoes that same risky logic—that we can "solve" property management problems by allowing more, less-qualified individuals into the profession. This is akin to “back door registration”. This will dilute competency, weaken public trust, and potentially worsen strata living conditions. The market should not risk a situation of quantity over quality. Expanding a pool of “unqualified” building managers would risk compromising service quality.
BOVAEP should be strengthened, not sidelined
Instead of bypassing BOVAEP, the government should:
- Expand BOVAEP’s enforcement resources.
- Partner with educational institutions to produce more qualified graduates.
- Fund continuing professional development, and certification subsidies to widen the talent pool without lowering standards.
This would align with national goals of professionalism, governance transparency, and public service excellence.
Let’s fix the right problem
The problems of urban decay and strata mismanagement stem from financial incapacity, poor governance, and weak enforcement, not from the absence of a new regulatory board.
Instead of creating overlapping institutions, the government should:
1. Empower COBs with adequate qualified manpower, stronger enforcement powers, and adequate budgets.
2. Strengthen collaboration between KPKT, BOVAEP, and local authorities.
3. Establish a central maintenance and rehabilitation agency under JPPH to manage vulnerable strata housing.
What we need is policy integration, transparent administration, and institutional accountability—not another board nor a new class of loosely defined “building managers”. By empowering existing bodies and establishing a transparent central agency under JPPH, the government can address the underlying causes of building neglect while safeguarding public funds, and professional integrity.
The government must resist the temptation to legislate for the sake of headlines, and instead, focus on evidence-based policymaking that respects the rule of law, professional integrity, and the long-term welfare of residents.
Let’s fix the system—not break it further.
This article is written by Datuk Chang Kim Loong, honorary secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association (HBA).
HBA is a voluntary non-government and not-for-profit organisation manned wholly by volunteers.
HBA can be contacted at:
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.hba.org.my
Tel: +6012 334 5676
The views expressed are the writers’ and do not necessarily reflect EdgeProp’s.
Unlock Malaysia’s shifting industrial map. Track where new housing is emerging as talents converge around I4.0 industrial parks across Peninsular Malaysia. Download the Industrial Special Report now.
