URA's reply, 17 Sep

We refer to the letter by Mr Chen Qi Hua (“The invisible void area”; Sep 9).

Developers are expected to be transparent when providing information on void areas within non-residential units in sales documents. Since March 2014, developers are required to disclose the breakdown of the different areas in the unit, including the void area, to potential buyers via a separate letter.

We urge the public to do their due diligence to look through this information carefully before purchasing properties. It will help them make better-informed decisions.

Ling Hui Lin (Ms)
Controller of Housing
Urban Redevelopment Authority  

Letter, 9 Sep 2015, Lianhe Zaobao

The invisible “void area”

The writer is a foreigner, who has been working in Singapore for the past 20 years. His company bought two industrial units at Sunview Road in August 2013. Upon receiving the keys, he found that each unit was 52 sqm, or 25 per cent, smaller than what was depicted in the floor plan.

His lawyer repeatedly contacted the developer for a response. Eventually, a staff told the writer that the difference in area is a void area where buyers could extend the floor area by building a second storey. They also showed him a ZB article in 2013 on void areas and that buyers can only resort to legal avenues for this issue. The staff also told him that these floor plans had been approved by URA as well, hinting that they were “protected” by the Government.

The writer believes that developers should not submit their proposals with minimal mention of void areas and claim they were approved by the government. He said many buyers do not read the fine print and property agents would also keep mum about having to pay extra for the void area. He called on buyers to exercise vigilance, so as not to fall into the “void area” trap.

View the letter and URA's reply in Chinese