PPAM buyers not happy with quality of houses - audit report

The majority of house buyers under the civil servant housing scheme (PPAM) in Putrajaya are happy with the location and price of their houses but not with their quality.

According to the Auditor-General's Report 2018 Series 3, an audit analysis of feedback obtained from 535 respondents involving 3,447 questionnaires that were distributed to residents of Pudina, Larai and Palma PPAM, it was found that 75.33 percent of them were not satisfied with the parking facilities provided by the developer.

The report also stated that 47.62 percent were not happy with the elevator facilities and this was supported by the data on callback reports which showed a total of 77 complaints on damage were reported in the two months the elevators were in operation, namely in December 2018 and January 2019.

"The majority of the respondents at the three projects are satisfied with the location, price and public amenities in their respective areas, but the range of dissatisfaction in terms of quality of PPAM houses in Putrajaya is between 32.89 per cent to 88.22 percent,” said the report.

Overall, it said, the respondents were satisfied with the implementation of the PPAM programme and agreed for it to be continued, but the percentage of buyer satisfaction was still low as the Putrajaya Corporation (PPj) did not emphasise on the quality of construction work by developers.

The audit also found that the evaluation of the outcome and impact on the PPAM projects have not been carried out, although based on Instruction No.1 2010 (National Action Council), the evaluation outcome acts as an early warning system to help the ministry to re-coordinate the strategy of the project to achieve the desired outcome.

The report also found that the management of complaints about PPAM Pudina, Larai and Palma was inefficient because there were still complaints not resolved within the stipulated period, as well as issues on the common area where the facilities developed were not disabled-friendly.

The report also found that there were weaknesses in the selection process of buyers during the preliminary selection as there were a total of 23 applicants from Phase 1 and Phase 2 who had not been offered PPAM houses in Putrajaya despite earning less than RM8,000.

However, feedback received from Perbadanan Putrajaya later confirmed that 18 applicants were finally offered PPAM houses between December 2016 to December 2019, while the other five did not pass the eligibility requirements.

The report also stated there were weaknesses in the process of managing buyers, involving the action of PPj, as the implementing agency, in buying the housing units in PPAM, which was contrary to the stipulated conditions as the PPAM home buyers should be members of the public service.

The audit analysis found that the sale had caused losses to the government for having subsidised RM243,259 for three units of PPAM houses through the distribution of Dana Mudahcara to the developer.

The practice resulted in the opportunities given to qualified civil servants to own the houses being used for irrelevant purposes, it said.

However, according to the report, based on feedback, the developers agreed to bear the cost of the government subsidy on units purchased by PPj and PPj itself also intended not to continue with the procurement of houses for which the sale and purchase agreement has not been signed. - Bernama