Complaints of Defects in New HDB BTO Flats

Mr Speaker, flat owners of newly completed BTO flats are provided with a one-year Defects Liability Period or DLP, where the building contractor will repair defects reported by flat owners.

Based on BTO flats completed over the past five years, about 90% of the feedback on defects was received during the DLP, with the remaining 10% received in the second to fifth year following the blocks’ completion. On average, during the DLP, the number of reported defects per BTO flat was around 2.6 and this dropped significantly to 0.2 after the first year, 0.1 after the second year and 0.05 after the third year.

The vast majority of reported defects involve issues such as scratches or cracks on timber surfaces, walls, tiles and sanitary fittings. These are easily rectified by the contractors and do not affect the structural integrity or safety of the building.

As most defects are resolved within the first year, a one-year DLP is sufficient for the majority of new flat owners and is in line with the industry practice for private developments. In addition, HDB provides all new flat owners with a five-year warranty for external wall seepage or inter-floor seepages, and a 10-year warranty for spalling concrete.

I thank the Minister for her explanation which I think clearly shows this is not a widespread problem. But in certain BTOs I have had in my estate, Woodland Glen is one of them. There are about 888 units and we have had more than 200 complaints so far on defects; most of which HDB is trying to rectify but HDB has no recourse against the original developer legally.

So, I was just wondering whether HDB or MND has a way of keeping track of maybe individual developers that have significant issues like this, where more than a quarter of the units will have defects that have come up later. And these are not things to do with wear and tear; it is like windows panes melting, toilet seats breaking. So, it just sounds like quality is bad or workmanship is bad.

I thank the Member for his question. I had earlier omitted in my answer to also mention that if any maintenance issues are reported after the DLP, HDB will investigate the likely cause and advise flat owners on the follow-up action accordingly. So, if the issue is assessed to be due to an inherent defect or quality issue, HDB will engage the building contractor to rectify it.

The Member raised the question of what happens when you have certain developments that may have more than the usual number of defects. And I think he referred in particular to Woodlands Glen. The BTO project at Woodlands Glen consists of five residential blocks with a total of 888 units and the flats in the MSCP were completed between March 2017 and June 2017. And I think that a number of the residents had appealed to Mr Nair with regard to the defects.

HDB met up with the building contractor, Precise Development Pte Ltd, and the contractor agreed to replace, in this case, I think a number of the defects related to the cracked toilet seat cover. So, they agreed to replace that – the bumpers and the window weather seal, upon the residents' feedback. And with regard to the other reported defects, for example, there was feedback about rusty gate and timber toilet door issues, HDB followed up to resolve the issues with the residents. So, HDB is working closely with the contractor.

In short therefore, I think the position is this. On DLP specifically and the length of it, the numbers show that one year would be sufficient because the vast majority of the defects appear within that period and those are generally fairly minor defects. We have provisions obviously for major things like wall seepage and spalling concrete.

So, when you do have outliers like this, HDB will work closely with the contractor to rectify the defects and to see how they can be made good because obviously people moving into new BTOs would want their premises to be nice to live in. And it is obviously upsetting when there are defects, because they mar your enjoyment of the premises.

Sir, I have two supplementary questions. Firstly, defects are sometimes reported before the end of the Defects Liability Period or DLP, but are not fully acted on by HDB or the developers, or not satisfactorily resolved by the end of the DLP. So, will HDB continue to act on these defects until they are fully resolved?

My second question – several residents in DBSS development in my constituency have reported a large number of similar defects soon after the DLP. What options are available to lessees who encounter defects after the DLP and will HDB consider co-payment arrangements, so that lessees do not have to bear the full cost of rectifications on their own?

With respect to the first question, if the defects are reported within the DLP, then obviously, it is within the relevant time frame and they should be followed up upon. For the defects which come up after the DLP period, as mentioned earlier, HDB will investigate the cause and then decide on what the best course of action is.

The reason I say this – and I sort of cannot give a definitive answer that yes, automatically everything after the defects liability period will be attended to by HDB – is because it depends on the nature of the defect. It depends on what exactly the cause is and it also depends on the nature of the follow-up action that needs to be taken. So, I think the the assurance we can give is this. If there is a problem after the defects liability period, HDB will look into it and do its best to resolve it with the contractor. But obviously if it is something that crops up 10 years later, then that is a very different thing.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. In cases where the residents have encountered multiple repair attempts to water seepage and wall seepage problems due to shoddy waterproofing works done by the contractor, and despite multiple attempts by contractors to fix the same problem, the problem keeps coming back in intervals of two to three years for the past 10-15 years – what recourse do residents have from HDB in terms of the distress that they have had to live through for the many years in encountering these problems?

Again, it goes back to a question of identifying the source or the cause of the problem. The question as framed by the Member was where the residents have multiple attempts at repairs and this continues over many years with respect to seepage, I understand. So, if it is seepage, then there is a five-year warranty. So, if it falls within the five-year warranty, it will be dealt with on the basis of that warranty.

But if the seepage arose, let us say, maybe in the sixth year and it was because of the unit above having done certain renovation works and therefore broken the waterproofing or done something, then, it really would not be correct to look to HDB for that because the owner above will also have to bear some responsibility.

Hence, it goes back to the approach that I said earlier. We would look at the cause, we would look at where the fault is or what the reason is. Sometimes, it is a diagnostic problem. All of us have encountered this. The residents will point to leakage, they think it comes from a certain place but actually it may come from somewhere else. You have got to trace it, you have got to find the cause. And whoever is responsible for having generated that cause or made that leakage happen, should generally be the one to deal with it.

But bearing in mind that for flats – and this is the same for HDB as well as for private developments – there is a defects liability period or DLP for a reason and there is a warranty period for a reason. Because it cannot be that a developer remains responsible for the entire lifetime of the building which is subject to fair wear and tear. So, if it is a new flat and there are defects, that will be followed up on, general rule – DLP; seepage, then the warranty for the seepage, spalling concrete, that is a 10-year warranty, which is a really long time. And the assurance you have is that they will be investigated and dealt with accordingly.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. One supplementary question for the Minister. Does the HDB monitor the extent of BTO flat defects associated with particular contractors in particular developments? And is that information then, given consideration in the decision-making process to award future contracts to that particular contractor? Is that information set analysed and given some weight in the decision-making process to award tenders to contractors?

I do not have that particular information with me at the moment and hence, I do not want to hazard an answer, and inadvertently, not give correct information. So, if the Member could just file a question on that, then we will be able to get back to him.

Good afternoon, Sir. I just have a question. For the defect liability period for both BTO and HIP projects, given the length of time of the circuit breaker and shortage in workers, will the Ministry consider an automatic six-month extension or some suitable period for the defect liability periods that have expired within this time frame?

We will certainly look into that.