When I purchased my 4-room flat 2 years back, the ex-owner combined master room with one common room, removed the wall in-between, but now I want to restore it.

I am not sure if id would do this? Since there are still some remaining work, like open a new door and remove the wardrobes, etc.

If anybody did similar things before, normally how much does it cost?

Thanks,

I thought you have the right to get previous owner to restore the wall or anything back to the original state.

Can check with HDB.

You don't have such a right.

Your ID will do whatever you want if you pay, as long as it's legal.

Building up a plain wall is cheap, just a few hundred dollars. Fitting in a door is a separate matter, you can have a cheap $200 door or an expensive $2000 door.

I thought you have the right to get previous owner to restore the wall or anything back to the original state.

Can check with HDB.

All hacking work can be done provided a permit is submitted to HDB and approval is granted. I believe the ex-owner's contractor will apply the same. So it is perfectly ok and legal. There's no right to request previous owner to restore it. Furthermore, all properties are sell "as-it-is" condition unless stipulated otherwise in the sales agreement. You have no further right to demand after the sales completed.

ya i once did went to a flat at amk, the owner hack the wall and combined 2 rooms, can't get them to placed back the walls :<

its at your own cost

thank you all for the kind and prompt replies.

just to add on, you dun need to get HDB approval as you're "restoring back" the original look.

OIC, however would it be okay to get the previous owner to restore the unit back to its original state before the sales transaction is completed?

i doubt so unless the owner dun have permit to show they have gotten approval from HDB to hack the wall.

OIC, however would it be okay to get the previous owner to restore the unit back to its original state before the sales transaction is completed?

if it is part of the contract you can get the owner to do whatever is stated inside i.e. it forms part of the condition of the sales

some get the owner to apply for renovation permit on their behalf before the second appt etc

as long as you discuss with the previous owner and they are agreeable to it, why not?

Oh okay..thx for the advice.

OIC, however would it be okay to get the previous owner to restore the unit back to its original state before the sales transaction is completed?

There is no ruling to who to restore the unit back to its original. Question should be who to pay for the restoration

if it is part of the contract you can get the owner to do whatever is stated inside i.e. it forms part of the condition of the sales

some get the owner to apply for renovation permit on their behalf before the second appt etc

as long as you discuss with the previous owner and they are agreeable to it, why not?

Yes, unless it is part of the sales contract and must be clearly written down. Whereas getting the renovation permit on their behalf, there is a indeminity required.

There is no ruling to who to restore the unit back to its original. Question should be who to pay for the restoration

Yes, unless it is part of the sales contract and must be clearly written down. Whereas getting the renovation permit on their behalf, there is a indeminity required.

Aiyo, then so troublesome, might as well just put in black and white that the wall must be erected before the 2nd appt. Don't get involved in such indemnity issues or having to apply anything on behalf. Will invite more trouble only...

Aiyo, then so troublesome, might as well just put in black and white that the wall must be erected before the 2nd appt. Don't get involved in such indemnity issues or having to apply anything on behalf. Will invite more trouble only...

That's the ruling. All property is sell with"as it is" condition. I don't think any seller will want to restore the work for you. Question is who will want to pay for it when it is sell on condition that what you see is what you get. You have the option of not to buy it. If you really like it you have to pay for it. Besides, since the seller will be staying in till the sales is completed, do you think they will want to accept the inconvenience to restore it? They might as well sell to others when there bounce to have buyer who like it in similar way. Afterall, you still need to renovate the place after the transfer of ownership. Unless, you are willing to compensate the buyer handsomely for the inconvenience that cause.

That's the ruling. All property is sell with"as it is" condition. I don't think any seller will want to restore the work for you. Question is who will want to pay for it when it is sell on condition that what you see is what you get. You have the option of not to buy it. If you really like it you have to pay for it. Besides, since the seller will be staying in till the sales is completed, do you think they will want to accept the inconvenience to restore it? They might as well sell to others when there bounce to have buyer who like it in similar way. Afterall, you still need to renovate the place after the transfer of ownership. Unless, you are willing to compensate the buyer handsomely for the inconvenience that cause.

It depends on how you look at it. Yes, "as is" condition, but if I am the highest price, the 2nd price is like few thousands lesser and this is my condition of sale, would you do it? Also, handing over of keys is usually at 2nd appt, so the owners would have already moved out by then. They can easily adjust the date of the 2nd appt for the original owner to move out and do up the wall. Matter of timing only, as long as there is an agreement in black & white.

But then I won't do it this way: I rather spend money to do it myself because the owner can just any-old-how make a lousy wall. The disadvantage is that I have to pay for it in cold, hard cash lah...