Your Space: Maha-Rera has made builders answerable in Pune

Restoring trust of homebuyers

We agree with the comments of honourable Union minister Hardeep Singh Puriji. All the conciliation benches constituted under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act or RERA in Mumbai, Pune and Nagpur have a success rate of 90 per cent. Customers are feeling satisfied and the mechanism has gained confidence with homebuyers and developers for amicable solutions, happening within the schedule time frame. The Confederation of Real Estate Developers’ Associations of India (Credai)-Maharashtra, Credai-Maharashtra Chamber of Housing Industry (MCHI) and National Real Estate Development Council (Naredco) along with Mumbai grahak panchayat (MGP) are playing a crucial role in the conciliation process.

-Shantilal Kataria

A welcome change for flat buyers

Yes, Maha-Rera has given a respite to homebuyers who were earlier at the mercy of builders and developers. Now builders need to give exact date of hand over of flat and, if he is not able to maintain it, homebuyers can sue them and get compensated. Earlier, investing in upcoming housing projects was like taking a lottery ticket which may not bear any fruit. Many builders duped homebuyers, and some sold the one flat to many buyers. Hence, many were reluctant to invest in new housing projects and opted for resale flats. Now, because of RERA, buyers have a way to ask builder and developer about the project getting late and even demand compensation, which is great change. Now consumer has become king in real sense. Thanks to Maha-Rera.

-Maya Hemant Bhatkar

Conciliation process needs improvement

I have taken the liberty to write to you and give a constructive suggestion. I understand that the conciliation process is an additional layer that had been recently instituted to reduce the number of complaints, and on the positive side, to have an enhanced level of satisfaction among the realty consumers. I believe the conciliation process can be improved to reduce such rejections and, thereby save time. The improved process efficiency would also contribute to the objectives of Maha-Rera. It can happen that the customer may inadvertently input an incorrect Rera registration number. However, when the conciliation request travels online to the builder, he can reject the request there itself pointing incorrect number.

And if he has responded positively to the reconciliation request (overlooking the incorrect Rera registration number), thereby resulting in the consumer paying the conciliation fees, then the builder should not have a right to raise this as an objection during the conciliation meeting. It should be his (builder) responsibility to rectify with the correct registration number.

Secondly, this can also be corrected at the time of the reconciliation meeting also, instead of telling the customer to go back, find the correct registration number and come again. That does not solve the problem, but just pushes it to another day, again putting stress on the process. Instead, the conciliators should focus on addressing the real grievance that made the customer approach Rera.

It would also be appropriate with the spirit of conciliation that is aimed at resolving conflicts in a friendly conciliatory manner without technical and legal hurdles. I am stating this suggestion on the basis of my personal experience. And this may not be taken as a complaint or as such, but a suggestion in the broader interest of the conciliation process. I had a rather unpleasant experience with the Maha-Rera conciliation process. I had filed a request, which was accepted by the builder. The project is Blue Ridge and the apartment predates the implementation of Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act or Rera. So, even though the request was accepted and the Rera panel heard my complaint, it concluded by dismissing my request for incorrect Rera registration number. I think it was unfair to first accept the request and then reject it on such technicality.


Rera has made builders answerable

Few years back, realty estates was considered a very profitable business. With assured returns of almost double their investment in just three years, many put their money in this sector. As it is observed that where there is a lot of demand there is always manipulation and exploitation. Thus, builders started dictating terms and conditions. The work quality started deteriorating, delivery schedule was not adhered to, instead of carpet area super build-up area came into measurements, dry balcony, flower beds, development charges, car parking, amenities, maintenance and lot of ‘here and there’ charges were being charged. Buyers faced many problems and in many cases their hard earned money was stuck up or lost. Due to all these problems, the government came out with a new law — Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act or RERA. The Act put some restrictions on the builders making them answerable and provision of even punishment is also made. This has given tremendous relief to buyers and has made buying property a bit safe. Thanks to government for bringing this law.

– Haresh Shah

Maha-Rera is better compared to other states

I’m not sure if I totally agree with the statement that 75 per cent of the total complaints have been resolved by Maharashtra real estate regulatory authority (Maha-Rera). It’s a number too good to be true given the efficiency of the process. However, having said that, it’s also important to acknowledge the work of Maha-Rera, when compared with other states. Their procedure for dispute resolution is much more user friendly than its counterparts. The government needs to strengthen its efficiency by ensuring that all levels of officials work with equal dedication and cooperation to implement the laws in place to protect the citizens or consumers

– Ravi Shukla

First Published: Sep 24, 2018 16:45 IST

Source: Read Full Article