Your statutory right to Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD) at 10% per annum of the purchase price — the formula, the Ang Ming Lee ruling, how to calculate, and how to claim at TTPM.
This guide is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a licensed Malaysian solicitor for specific legal disputes.
Liquidated Ascertained Damages (LAD) is the pre-agreed compensation payable by a developer to a buyer when the developer fails to deliver vacant possession (VP) by the date stipulated in the SPA. The amount is not a penalty — it is a genuine pre-estimate of the buyer’s loss, fixed by statute so that no dispute arises over the quantum of damages.
LAD for residential property in Malaysia is governed by:
Every SPA for a new residential property sold by a licensed developer must include the standard Schedule G or Schedule H terms. Clause 24(2) of Schedule G and clause 25(2) of Schedule H both provide:
“If the Vendor [developer] fails to deliver vacant possession … the Vendor shall pay immediately to the Purchaser liquidated damages calculated from day to day at the rate of ten per centum (10%) per annum of the purchase price …”
This clause is mandatory — a developer cannot contract out of it, and KPKT’s Controller of Housing cannot grant an extension of time (EOT) that validly waives it, as confirmed by the Federal Court in Ang Ming Lee.
The formula is straightforward:
| Variable | What to use |
|---|---|
| Purchase price | The SPA purchase price (not loan amount) |
| LAD rate | 10% per annum |
| Daily rate | Purchase price × 10% ÷ 365 days |
| Number of delay days | From day after SPA VP deadline to actual VP date |
| Total LAD | Daily rate × Number of delay days |
Worked example: Purchase price RM450,000; SPA VP deadline 1 March 2023; actual VP received 1 September 2023 = 184 days late.
For strata developments under Schedule H, there is an additional LAD component for delay in completing common facilities (10% of the last 20% of the purchase price), but this is typically claimed collectively through the JMB.
| Feature | Schedule G (Landed) | Schedule H (Strata) |
|---|---|---|
| VP deadline | 24 months from SPA date | 36 months from SPA date |
| LAD rate (VP delay) | 10% p.a. of purchase price per day | 10% p.a. of purchase price per day |
| Common facilities delay LAD | N/A (landed) | 10% of last 20% of purchase price for delay in common facilities VP |
| DLP after VP | 24 months | 24 months |
| Claim forum (up to RM50k) | TTPM | TTPM |
Before November 2019, developers routinely obtained Controller of Housing EOTs under Regulation 11(3) of HDR 1989, which effectively extended the VP deadline and cut off the buyer’s LAD entitlement for the extended period. Thousands of buyers lost legitimate LAD claims this way.
The Federal Court’s landmark decision in Ang Ming Lee & Ors v Menteri Kesejahteraan Bandar, Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan & Anor [2019] 11 MLJ 555 changed this. The court held that Regulation 11(3) was ultra vires Act 118 — the Controller had no statutory power to grant EOTs that extinguished buyers’ LAD rights. EOTs granted under that regulation were invalid, and buyers were entitled to LAD for the full delay period.
This ruling significantly strengthened buyer rights and opened the door for many previously-denied LAD claims.
In July 2024, the Federal Court issued a clarification in Obata-Ambak Holdings Sdn Bhd v Prema Bonanza Sdn Bhd. The court held that the Ang Ming Lee decision applies prospectively — meaning it applies to cases arising after the November 2019 ruling date, not retrospectively to EOTs that had already been fully acted upon before that date.
In practice, if your VP delay involved an EOT granted and acted upon before November 2019 and the matter was already settled or res judicata, the Ang Ming Lee principle may not reopen it. For delays after 2019, or where proceedings were still ongoing, Ang Ming Lee remains fully applicable.
Send a formal written Letter of Demand to the developer’s registered office and customer service address:
If the developer ignores your demand or refuses to pay LAD without justification, file at TTPM:
| TTPM detail | Information |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Claims up to RM50,000 |
| Filing cost | Free |
| Legal representation | Generally not permitted — you appear yourself |
| Time limit | 12 months from cause of action (developer’s failure to pay LAD) |
| Where | ttpm.kpkt.gov.my or nearest KPKT office |
| What to bring | SPA, VP notice, LAD calculation, Letter of Demand and developer’s response (or non-response) |
If your calculated LAD exceeds RM50,000, TTPM cannot hear the claim. You must file in the civil courts:
Engage a property solicitor for civil court claims. Many property law firms in Malaysia act on a conditional fee or success-fee basis for LAD claims, meaning you may not need to pay upfront legal fees if you have a strong case.
Tell us what you need — we reply within the hour.