The Future of Property Management


Hot on the heels of #Budget2019 as Malaysia moves into the new year, an ongoing debate between the Board of Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers, Malaysian Institute of Property and Facility Managers (MIPFM) and the Malaysian Institute of Estate Agents (MIEA) will determine the future of property management in the country.

The controversy follows on a statement by MIPFM President Sarkunan Subramaniam at the MIPFM Conference 2018, held on 25 Oct, calling for property and facility management to be treated independently from valuation services.

Such a move, he is reported to have shared, would address jurisdictional overlaps between the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Works, which currently regulates facilities managers under the Construction Industry Development Board, as well standardising the application of relevant legislation between local Councils.

A Historical Perspective

Currently, valuers, appraisers, estate agents and property managers are registered under BOVAEP, which operates under the purview of the Ministry of Finance. Previously known as the Board of Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents Malaysia, it began regulating registered property managers in Malaysia following legislative reform in October 2017.

“Prior to this, the General Surveyors Act 1967 covered all surveying professions, including valuers, land, building and quantity surveyors, which provided the services of valuation, estate agency and property management,” said BOVAEP Board Member Kamaruzaman Jamil, elaborating on the historical grouping of the professions under its scope.

BOVAEP’s existing members include 1,500 valuers who also practise property management, with an additional 1,414 new property managers coming onboard since registration with the Board was opened earlier this year.

20181102 BOVAEP-MIPFM 2

A new board would require millions of ringgit in public funds, says Ishak.

“To create a new regulatory board would require a budget using public funds, running into not thousands, but millions of ringgit. You’d also need to have different legislation. Why is there a need to duplicate roles and waste resources?” says BOVAEP Board Member and Immediate Past President of MIPFM Ishak Ismail.

Other reasons cited against the formation of a separate board confusion among the public as to which board to refer to, along with possible jurisdictional overlaps between the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Works as well as the danger of overfragmentation of interest groups among stakeholders.

While the jury is still out as to how the ongoing debate will be resolved, the issue will have far-reaching consequences for both investors and property purchasers in Malaysia, determining how their assets will be built and managed in the future.


About Author

Comments are closed.