Reader’s Letter: Without professional training, how does separate board solve property management issues?

• Introducing a new board of property managers doesn’t address any issues but instead opens doors to individuals lacking the education, credentials and qualifications required for property management. The only parties who would benefit are unlicensed, profit-driven individuals and cronies of contractors. 

Earlier, I have responded to Dr Foo Chee Hung’s article dated Sept 20, titled "Property manager vs building manager — Are they the same?", which claimed that a building manager is solely responsible for coordinating the maintenance and upkeep of common areas, while a property manager merely acts as an intermediary between tenants and landlords. In my article “Stricter regulation in property management needed”, I explained the professional roles, bodies, education and training required of a registered property manager.

In a second article titled “Separate board of property managers needed to address current weaknesses”, Foo claimed that "valuers-cum-property managers" lack experience in dealing with building maintenance regulations and rely heavily on contractors or site supervisors for routine maintenance.

However, he never responded to the education, training and institutional requirements supporting the valuation and property management professions, nor did he address the redundancy of a new board in which members would be without proper educational frameworks, professional institutions, qualifications and regulatory support. He also never provided proof or facts how a separate board without the skills and qualifications would resolve any issue. 

Professional training regulated by BOVAEP

Let me clarify: valuers and real estate professionals regulated by the Board of Valuers, Appraisers, Estate Agents and Property Managers (BOVAEP) undergo extensive assessments of their professional competency. To even qualify for professional assessment, one must have a degree accredited by BOVAEP, where real estate professionals study everything related to property—including property management, building maintenance, valuation, agency and property laws. They must then complete a minimum of several years of training with a registered person, keeping logbooks of their experience, before being eligible to sit for the demanding professional interview.

As mentioned previously, in Malaysia, the property management industry is well established through a robust combination of education, practice and industry standards. Higher education institutions such as Tunku Abdul Rahman University of Management and Technology (TARUMT), Universiti Malaya (UM), Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM), University of Reading Malaysia, University of Malaya-Wales, etc offer professional degree programmes in estate or property management. Many of these universities collaborate closely with industry experts and the senior experienced professionals are appointed as external examiners as part of the university accreditation framework. 

Several professional bodies have also been established to uphold high standards in the property management sector, for instance, the Malaysian Institute of Property and Facility Managers (MIPFM), Royal Institution of Surveyors Malaysia (RISM), and the Association of Valuers, Property Managers, Estate Agents, and Property Consultants in the Private Sector Malaysia (PEPS). With the increasing demand for effective property management, these institutions are essential in cultivating the expertise necessary to manage properties professionally, efficiently and sustainably, thereby contributing to the nation’s economic growth.

It is also important to note that various international organisations recognise Malaysia’s property management education standards. For instance, TARUMT and UM’s real estate management degree programmes are both recognised and accredited by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS).

  Introducing a new board of property managers to admit non-professionals without such rigorous assessment and educational support is detrimental. It doesn’t address any issues but instead opens doors to individuals lacking the education, credentials and qualifications required for property management. The only parties who would benefit are unlicensed, profit-driven individuals and cronies of contractors—certainly not the general public or the real estate profession.

Lowering qualification is not solution to shortage of professionals 

In the most recent article, Foo claimed there is a critical shortage of property managers in the country, with a ratio of one firm for every 38 strata schemes or 2,662 strata units. However, if we look at the numbers in other sectors, the issue isn’t as simple as Foo suggests. According to the Malaysian Bar, there are 23,645 lawyers and 7,323 legal firms in Malaysia—one lawyer for every 1,353 Malaysians and one legal firm for every 4,370 Malaysians. Similarly, the Ministry of Health reports 9,726 specialists in 29 specialties serving the Ministry's facilities, translating to one specialist for every 3,290 Malaysians.

Based on Foo’s logic, we would need a separate board for conveyancers to allow individuals to practise conveyancing without a law degree, and doctors to practise medicine without a medical degree as there is a dire need of conveyancers and doctors. It is certainly misguided to portray the profession in such a way. Does it mean we should lower the bar for specialists, lawyers, and in this case, property managers, by establishing a new board that lacks the education, skill, knowledge, experience, institutional support by universities, professional bodies, accreditations, professional assessments and regulations that have been in place since 1981?

Separate board could lead to illegal practices

I’ve already provided clear examples of why knowledge of valuation and agency is essential in property management, particularly when managing commercial buildings and complex properties. Creating a separate board for building managers is a waste of public funds and time, and it will not improve the status quo. In fact, it will only contribute to the proliferation of illegal property managers, leading to issues such as illegal homestays, corruption, potential monopolistic practices by interested parties and poor management.

What is needed is stricter regulation of property management in all areas. At the same time, the Malaysian government should encourage education in property management in Malaysia through existing BOVAEP-accredited degree programmes. There are dozens of universities offering formal education in real estate management. This will increase the number of qualified and experienced property managers who can manage not only residential properties but also commercial and complex properties like airports, hotels and office buildings.

BOVAEP provides for property management since inception 

Lastly, another factual error by Foo is his claim that BOVAEP under Act 242 was never intended to cover property management until 2018. This is incorrect, as the Act has included provisions for property management since its inception in 1981, far earlier than 2018. In fact, the Malaysian Property Management Standards, in its first edition, was published by BOVAEP in 2010. This shows that Foo lacks the understanding of the relevant by-laws in property management, which all registered valuers will certainly be aware of.

I strongly encourage Malaysians, including Foo, who are not yet licensed with BOVAEP, to pursue accredited real estate degrees at institutions such as TARUMT, UM, UiTM, UTM, UTHM, Reading University, or any other universities accredited by BOVAEP. These programmes provide essential training in property management laws and regulations, including critical areas such as valuation and agency laws. This will assist Foo in clarifying his many factual errors and understanding the Malaysian Property Management Standards, which he is not aware of. This initiative will certainly help to address the shortage of experienced and professional property managers in the country.

At the same time, the Malaysian government should strongly reject the redundant proposal for a separate board of building managers, which wastes public funds to accommodate unqualified individuals. Instead, our hard-earned taxes would have been better redirected towards scholarships, enabling more young Malaysians to pursue studies and become professional property managers.

Asst Prof Dr Sr Tham Kuen-Wei
Tunku Abdul Rahman University of Management and Technology
Registered valuer, property manager and estate agent
Licensed Auctioneer (Perak) (Penang) (Melaka) (Selangor)

Note: The views expressed in the article reflect the personal opinions of Assistant Prof Dr Sr Tham Kuen-Wei and may not necessarily represent the positions or perspectives of the University. The opinions offered are based on Dr Tham's professional experience as a registered valuer, property manager and estate agent.

The article has been edited for clarity. The views expressed are the writer’s and do not necessarily reflect EdgeProp’s.