The public’s appetite for aspirational living has made property development a sphere rife with seductive, yet often misleading, narratives. From glossy brochures to virtual reality tours, the marketing of a new project is less about the brick-and-mortar reality and more about selling a dream.
For the serious investor and the hopeful homeowner, the ability to discern genuine value from the illusion is their most potent defence against the disappointment of their decision, which is sadly often the case. This endemic issue is rooted in what property strategists term the “short-term way” to business success. This philosophy is fundamentally one of expediency, of the developer focusing on securing immediate capital and achieving quick sales with less regard for the project’s long-term utility, sustainability and value.
In his talk to REHDA Institute, Peter Chan elaborated that “short-term way” depended on the leveraging of “Connections,” embracing “Use of short cuts,” and, most detrimentally, relying on “Exaggerated marketing” and deliberate “Misrepresentations”. The immediate success generated by this approach—rapid sell-outs and high initial returns—can easily influence the developer and blind the trusting purchaser in his decision.
The exaggeration used in the short-term approach is rarely crude; it is creative and often a nuanced manipulation of facts. Developers may utilise selective images or photography to eliminate views of encroaching developments, overstate the future impact of planned infrastructure, or promise luxurious facilities that are either scaled back or never fully delivered due to cost constraints. The buyer commits to a multi-year investment based on a fleeting vision, only to find the reality compromised by delays, downgrades, or outright omissions.
A perpetual point of contention lies in the delivery of common amenities. When a development faces hopeful expectations or unreasonable demands, the developer is often placed in a defensive position. Although frequently misled into complicated situations, the decisive and conclusive determinant must be what is detailed in the Sales and Purchase Agreement (SPA). What is provided in the SPA is the indisputable requirement of what has been contractually accepted, agreed and binding on both the developer and the purchaser. We would highlight that Peter Chan and The Haven had bequeathed to the development way beyond what was contractual and listed in the SPA. When the development was completed, he revealed to the purchasers in an AGM the list of additional facilities—which were not contractually stipulated in the original Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) amounting to RM 36 million.
The condition of this world is indeed exposed when one of the purchasers chose to find fault and claimed at a Tribunal that a tennis court had been promised and not provided for. This was indeed untenable and shocking as the decision and approval to build and pay for the tennis court was proposed by the participants themselves in the AGM and was voted on and approved. Appallingly, 8 of her collaborators took up their case in the High Court on the same claim. As the burden of proof and substantiation borne by the consumers is illogical, heavy and onerous, their intention of initiating the claim must be suspicious.
As the talk delivered, Peter Chan presented the viable counter to this endemic practice as the “long term way” to development, a strategy based on “Effort, Commitment, Creativity, Perseverance and Truth.” He emphasized that truth is not a negotiable ethical addendum; it is a foundation to life and to real success – success in proper business. When a project is built on transparent, verifiable facts, the marketing naturally becomes a sincere reflection of its quality, design, and assured durability. This consistency ensures that buyer expectations are not just met at the point of handover, but maintained over the property’s lifecycle. Such was the delivery of The Haven to its purchasers. Every promise made to the parcel owners was not only met but exceeded. It is little wonder for one renowned publication to have pronounced Peter, the legatee, “Developer Extraordinaire”.
