Tilia @ Encorp Cahaya Alam, Seksyen U12, Shah Alam — 112 Schedule G landed houses that are already built, and that were filed under a second brand name

Ten things about Tilia that no brochure and no portal will tell you

This page exists for the awkward facts. Every card is sourced to a named published document, and every one changes what a buyer should ask before signing anything.

The two filed house types — and why there is no floor plan on this page

Jenis A and Jenis B are the only filed type codes. The brochures’ fixture schedules break each into variants — A1a, A1b, A2, A2a, A3 and B1, B1a, B2, B2a, B3 — but no built-up, bedroom count or price is filed against any variant. The variants exist only in the fixture table. Nothing is missing from the filed schedule in either direction: both phases’ types appear in both the filing and the marketing, with no filed-only type and no marketed-only type.

Rumah Teres 2 Tingkat Jenis A — Phase 1

56 units · register code 9351-11 · two storeys · variants A1a, A1b, A2, A2a, A3

Filed built-up 2,408 – 2,806 sq ft4 bed / 3 bath (filed)Lot 24′ × 80′ = 1,920 sq ft (filed)2 ruang kereta (filed, Tilia generation only)Filed RM1,141,000 – RM2,120,000

This is the type whose statutory block is filed three times over, which is why it is the best-documented house on the project. It appears in the Akasia-2 brochure for 9351-11, in the Tilia brochure for 9351-11, and — wrongly — in the Tilia brochure that TEDUH attaches to 9351-12. All three print the same band, the same built-up and the same 4 bed / 3 bath. The register corroborates the built-up independently: keluasan 224–261 m² converts to about 2,411–2,809 sq ft (our conversion), within about 3 sq ft of the filed Luas Binaan — which also proves that keluasan on this project is a BUILT-UP, not a land area. The microsite adds that corner lots sit at the top of the range, at 2,806 sq ft — marketing-only, plausible, and not filed. Car parking is filed only for this type, as 2 ruang kereta, and only in the Tilia generation; the Akasia-2 generation prints no car-park row at all.

Ask for the Jenis A price list and the remaining units

Rumah Teres 2 Tingkat Jenis B — Phase 2

56 units · register code 9351-12 · two storeys · variants B1, B1a, B2, B2a, B3

Filed built-up 2,707 – 3,131 sq ft4 + 1 bed / 4 bath (brochure) · 5 bed / 4 bath (register)Lot 24′ × 80′ = 1,920 sq ft (filed)Car parking NOT filed for this typeFiled RM1,241,000 – RM2,280,000

And here is the filing-level defect that matters most on this project: there is NO current-generation filed advertisement for Phase 2 at all. The brochure TEDUH attaches to 9351-12 is Fasa 1, Jenis A throughout — wrong band, wrong built-up, wrong bedroom count, and no mention of Jenis B anywhere in it. The only filed statutory block that actually describes Jenis B is the older, AKASIA-2-branded one. That is where the 2,707–3,131 sq ft built-up, the 4 + 1 bilik and the 4 bilik mandi come from, and it is also the document that prints the maximum as RM2,280,00.00, a digit short — a typo the live microsite shares, which shows the two were set from one piece of artwork, and which the register corrects to RM2,280,000.00. The register’s own keluasan 252–291 m² converts to about 2,712–3,132 sq ft (ours), corroborating the Akasia-2 built-up to within about 1 sq ft. Corner lots sit at 3,131 sq ft per the microsite — marketing-only and not filed, and this is the type the private-pool claim attaches to.

Ask for the Jenis B price list and the remaining units

No floor plan is published at a usable resolution.
The developer’s host carries four key-plan graphics — Type A, Type A corner Lot, Type B and Type B corner — but they are only about 850 px and assert nothing visual about the houses. This page says so rather than shipping a thumbnail, and the three e-brochure PDFs on the same host are image-only with no machine-readable text layer, so they gave up nothing either. Ask Louis for the full-size plans.

Three traps in the numbers — read this before comparing anything

keluasan · Baki 45 vs 34 vs 56 · and EdgeProp’s 2,411 sq ft

keluasan is a BUILT-UP in m², not land45 / 34 / 56 — three unit numbers, no as-at date2,411 sq ft is a double-conversion artefact

First: the register’s keluasan values — 224–261 and 252–291 mps — are BUILT-UPS in square metres, not land areas. Confirmed against the filed built-up schedule. Reading 224 m² as a land area would understate a 1,920 sq ft lot by about eleven times.

Second: three different unit numbers sit on the current-generation documents. P45-20250807 prints 45 unit Baki Belum dijual; P45-20250802 prints 34 Unit; and both site plans print 56 Unit, which is the phase total and matches the register. Baki means units remaining. Neither carries an as-at date, the two folder dates are five days apart, and neither is resolved here. The register carries no bakiUnit field at all, which is why the only honest way to find out what is left is to ask.

Third: EdgeProp prints a built-up of 2,411 sq ft. That is the register’s 224 mps converted to square feet, not a filed figure — the filed floor is 2,408. A 3 sq ft artefact of a double conversion. Do not reproduce it. And two portals assign “blocks” to a terrace scheme — PropertyGuru “No. of blocks: 1” and iProperty “112 homes in 1 block” — which is a portal artefact and is ignored here.

The Type A exterior, and one thing this page will NOT read into it

the corner-lot question · and what “A3C” does and does not prove

Image CONFIRMED as Exterior Type A_FACorner-lot built-ups are marketing-onlyNo variant has a filed built-up or price

The image is confirmed: the developer’s content management system publishes it with the title and alt text Exterior Type A_FA. What is not confirmed is any variant attribution. The interior render on this page carries the source code Living A3C_FA, which reads as “Type A3, corner” — but that is a reading of a filename code, not a developer statement, so this page captions it “living area, Type A” and no more precisely. Likewise the master-bedroom render states no type and this page does not assign one. The microsite does publish corner-lot built-ups — 2,806 sq ft for Type A and 3,131 sq ft for Type B, i.e. the top of each filed range — and that is marketing detail, plausible and unfiled. No built-up, bedroom count or price is filed against any of the ten variant codes.

Ask which variant codes are still available

Filed prices are the statutory advertisement minimum and maximum per phase, which the filed KPKT HIMS brochures, the developer’s own statutory panel and the KPKT TEDUH registry band print identically to the sen on both phases. They are not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer. The real price for a particular house comes from the developer’s price list and the signed sale and purchase agreement — ask Louis for both. Square-foot conversions of the register’s square-metre figures are ours and are labelled as such.

Gallery — eleven images, ten of them CONFIRMED, and that word is used precisely here

This is the strongest image result on this site, and the word “confirmed” is used here to mean something exact. tilia-encorp.com runs WordPress with an open REST interface, and ten of the eleven files on this page carry real alt_text identical to the content-management title, each naming a specific subject. That is better than caption-published and far better than inferred-from-filename. Only the location map is inferred — its alt text is empty, so nothing beyond “location map” is asserted about it, and no figure printed on that image has been allowed into the text of this page. The library is also clean: it holds nothing belonging to Iris, Akasia, Lily or any other Encorp Cahaya Alam phase, and nothing from another Encorp project — which is unusual and is why the confidence here is higher than on the sibling Shah Alam pages. Eight further files were REFUSED because their titles name a marketing concept rather than a scene — yard, Type A, solar panel, Open Air Elegance, Low density, garden, family, Cosy Living — and several read as generic lifestyle imagery. A title that names a marketing concept is not a statement that the photograph is of this development, so none of them is on this page and none is captioned as a photograph of Tilia. Nothing has been borrowed from a sibling phase and no stock photograph has been substituted. All renders are artist’s impressions; the developer’s own disclaimer says all plans and information are subject to change and cannot form part of an offer or contract.

Location — Seksyen U12, Encorp Cahaya Alam, Shah Alam

The filed plan reference settles the location on its own: MBSA/BGN/BB/600-1(PB)/SEK.U12/0098-2022, printed identically on all four statutory surfaces, and the register’s own coordinates put both phases on the same point. And the single most important sentence in this block is that the developer publishes not one distance and not one travel time.

The filed statutory particulars — KPKT projects 9351-11 and 9351-12, both registered as “Encorp Cahaya Alam”

Read from the KPKT TEDUH public register, from both generations of filed KPKT HIMS advertisement brochure, and from the developer’s own statutory panel, on 9 October 2026. The two brochure generations carry two different brand names for the same houses, and both file the advertising permit as a literal XXXXX placeholder, so the real permit numbers come from the register alone.

Read 9 October 2026. The dates that governed were the register’s serahKosongIkutPjb as extended — 14 February 2026 for Phase 1 and 3 March 2026 for Phase 2 — because those are the dates written into each phase’s own Schedule G agreements. The handover that actually occurred is 26 May 2026 on both. Each purchaser’s own 24 months ran from their own SPA, not from the first one. Dates in circulation that this page does NOT treat as the completion date: September 2026 (the Akasia-2 generation’s filed expected completion — which the actual CCC beat by about four months), Disember 2025 / December 2025 (the Tilia generation’s filed date, the developer’s live panel and The Edge of August 2023), Q4 2025 (iProperty), 2025 (PropertyGuru), 2026 and 31 March 2026 (EdgeProp’s two pages for the same project). Ten dates across eight sources, and the only two that matter are the two the register prints.

Sources for this table: KPKT TEDUH api/projek-swasta/9351-11 and /9351-12, with the full serial walk 9351-1 to 9351-12 and 9351-13 checked and returning a client error; the licensee record via api/developer-swasta?q=MUST EHSAN (positive control q=EXSIM returned 16, so the endpoint works); the filed KPKT HIMS advertisement brochures at files/9351/9351-11/IKLAN_BROSUR_01.pdf and files/9351/9351-12/ (the AKASIA 2 generation) and files/9351/P45/P45-20250807-00016853/ and files/9351/P45/P45-20250802-00016804/ (the TILIA generation); and the developer’s own statutory panel on tilia-encorp.com. Verify at teduh.kpkt.gov.my under 9351-11 and 9351-12 before you rely on anything here. There is no filed newspaper advertisement and no second brochure for either phase — IKLAN_AKHBAR_01.pdf and IKLAN_BROSUR_02.pdf were tried under both path forms for both phases and all four combinations return 404. akasia2-encorp.com, the domain printed in the first-generation filings, disallows robots and could not be read here, so the Akasia-2-era microsite — which may carry its own statutory panel and its own permit numbers — remains unchecked.

Foreign buyers — the band straddles the floor, the title bars it anyway, and there is a fourth restriction on top

Petaling is a Selangor Zone 1 district, and the minimum purchase price for a foreign buyer in Zone 1 is RM2,000,000. Tested against the filed bands, not against any marketing figure:

Phase 1, Jenis A, 56 units: minimum RM1,141,000 — 57.1% of the floor, FAILS by a wide margin; maximum RM2,120,000 — clears, at 1.06×.
Phase 2, Jenis B, 56 units: minimum RM1,241,000 — 62.1% of the floor, FAILS; maximum RM2,280,000 — clears, at 1.14×.

So this is not a clean yes and not a clean no — it straddles the floor on both phases. The percentages and multiples are our arithmetic on the filed figures. Because no source publishes a per-unit price list, how many of the 112 units clear RM2,000,000 is UNKNOWN and cannot be computed, and this page does not estimate it. Given that the bands run from 57% to 106% and from 62% to 114% of the floor, it is likely that only a minority of units — plausibly only corner and premium lots — reach it. “Tilia clears the Selangor floor” is never a project-level fact.

AND THE BINDING CONSTRAINT IS TITLE, NOT PRICE. Three independent lines of filed evidence make this individual-title landed: (1) Jadual G on both phases — the HDA 1966 schedule for a house sold together with its land; (2) the APDL tail -(L) on all four permits; (3) no strata reference anywhere — not in either brochure generation, not on the microsite, not in either register record — and a filed tenure of Pegangan Pajakan 99 tahun, berakhir 22.03.2104, a leasehold individual title.

On the published Selangor rules, individual-title landed is not available to a foreign buyer in Zone 1 at any price. propcashflow.my’s minimum-price page states that foreigners are limited to strata and landed strata (gated or guarded) and that “standard individual-title landed is not permitted”, citing Pekeliling PTG Selangor Bil. 1/2014; iProperty states the same restriction. And IQI’s own land guide at iqiglobal.com/blog/buying-land-in-malaysia-for-foreigners/ carries it too — Selangor landed “generally only strata-titled landed homes, from RM2,000,000 in main zones” — and adds that State Authority approval is required on every purchase and that a property priced below the state minimum will not be approved. Louis’s own company gets this right, and it is cited here for that reason.

The gated-and-guarded condition is not demonstrable either. propcashflow.my conditions the landed-strata permission on the scheme being gated or guarded, and nothing Tilia has published commits to that: the developer’s microsite lists no security feature at all, neither brochure mentions one, and the only security element anyone publishes is iProperty’s “perimeter fencing” — a single unverified portal line. So the one route by which landed might be permitted cannot be shown to exist here.

AND THERE IS A FOURTH RESTRICTION, ON THE FACE OF THE FILING. The filed Sekatan Kepentingan reads “Tanah yang diberi milik ini tidak boleh dipindah milik, dipajak atau digadai melainkan dengan kebenaran Pihak Berkuasa Negeri” — every transfer, lease or charge requires State Authority consent, regardless of the buyer’s nationality. That is the strongest single foreign-buyer signal this site has recorded.

Two cautions that cut against relying on any of this, and one instruction. First, propcashflow.my contradicts itself across two of its own pages — its landed-property page states the RM2m floor for both strata and landed with no title-type restriction for Selangor at all, and gives a different zone-to-district mapping. Second, PTG Selangor publishes no reachable circular — lphs.selangor.gov.my has a broken TLS certificate and kuotalphs.selangor.gov.my returns a server error — so the threshold and the restriction are the published consensus of independent sources and never a filed fact. The instruction: a foreign buyer must treat the title type as the first question, confirm it with the developer and with PTG Selangor, and assume State Authority consent is required in every case. This page promises a foreign buyer nothing.

For comparison: Selangor Zone 1 (Petaling, Gombak, Hulu Langat, Sepang, Klang) and Zone 2 (Kuala Selangor, Kuala Langat) are RM2,000,000, strata and gated landed strata only; Zone 3 (Hulu Selangor, Sabak Bernam) is RM1,000,000; Kuala Lumpur and the Federal Territory are RM1,000,000 with EPU consent. A Selangor project that would clear in KL may not clear here.

Schedule G against Schedule H, in plain language — because no marketing source mentions either

The register files both phases as Jadual G with tempohAsal: 24 Bulan, and the APDL tail -(L) corroborates it. No marketing or portal source for this project mentions the schedule at all, so here is what it decides.

What is sold. Schedule G sells a house together with its own land, on an individual title. Schedule H sells a parcel in a subdivided building, on a strata title, with a share of common property. Tilia is Schedule G.

The delivery clock. Schedule G is 24 months from the purchaser’s own SPA; Schedule H is 36. This project filed 24 months on both phases and had an extension approved to 27 and 28 months, and the statutory liquidated-damages mechanic runs from the end of that approved period — which, as the table above shows, both phases then overran.

The payment ladder. Schedule G ties progress payments to stages of the house and its own infrastructure; Schedule H to stages of the whole building. A buyer who assumed strata would have had the wrong deposit ladder throughout.

defect liability period. 24 months from vacant possession under both schedules — so on this project, from 26 May 2026, which puts it live until about 26 May 2028 for the first purchasers (our arithmetic). That is the single most useful consequence of the schedule on a completed scheme, and it is why the handover date matters even to a subsale buyer.

Common property and management — the one that costs money here. Under Schedule H a management corporation, a maintenance charge and a sinking fund arise by statute. Under Schedule G, none of them does. On Tilia that leaves the 1-acre park and the thematic gardens with no published owner, no published maintenance arrangement and no funding mechanism — and no statutory way to levy a charge to pay for them.

Foreign ownership. Selangor’s published zone rules permit strata and landed strata; Schedule G with an individual title is the category the sources say is not permitted. See the FAQ below.

A buyer told only “2-storey superlink home, leasehold” would not know that the 24-month clock, the absence of any management corporation, the 24-month defect window from 26 May 2026 and the foreign-ownership restriction all follow from the schedule. That is why it is on this page.

Is it HDA-protected? Yes for all 112 houses, and there is no non-HDA parcel to worry about

All 112 filed houses are protected. Both registered phases carry pjb.jenis: Jadual G, both sit under a live developer’s licence (9351/02-2028/0292, valid to 13 February 2028), both held their own APDL, and both filed advertisements carry the endorsement “Iklan ini diluluskan oleh Jabatan Perumahan Negara” and direct the reader to TEDUH.KPKT.GOV.MY.

No HDA / non-HDA split question arises on this project at all. All 112 units are residential, all under one licence, all Jadual G. There are no office suites, no SOFO or SOHO, no serviced-apartment component and no non-HDA parcel in either registered phase. The licence’s commercial phase at Cahaya Alam — Magnolia, shop lots — is a different, long-completed record, and nothing of it belongs on this page.

The housing development account is not published. No filing, panel or register field names an HDA bank or account number. On a completed scheme that matters less than on one under construction — but if you are buying an unsold unit, ask for it, and ask that every payment goes into it.

And the thing to ask about instead, now that this scheme is complete: the defect liability period runs 24 months from vacant possession, i.e. from 26 May 2026 for the first purchasers. Ask when YOUR vacant possession was or will be, what defects have been reported, and what is still outstanding. Nothing published anywhere addresses the defect position on this project.

Density — 12.27 units per acre, on a PRESS acreage, with the cross-check that makes it credible

This is computable on exactly one denominator, and that denominator is a press figure, not a filing.

The Edge Malaysia (City & Country, 21–27 August 2023) reports Tilia as “9.13 acres with 112 two-storey superlink homes on 24ft x 80ft lots”. On that: 112 ÷ 9.13 = 12.27 units per acre (our arithmetic). Published with that label, and never as a filed figure.

The cross-check that makes the 9.13 acres credible, and it is worth showing. The filed lot is 24′ × 80′ = 1,920 sq ft, so 112 lots = 215,040 sq ft = 4.94 acres of saleable land, which is 54.1% of 9.13 acres — leaving 45.9% for roads, drainage, the 1-acre park and open space. That is a normal net-to-gross ratio for a Malaysian terrace scheme, so the press acreage is internally consistent with the filed lot dimension and the filed unit count. All of that arithmetic is ours. It is still a press figure and it is labelled as one throughout — but it is not a loose number.

FOUR DENOMINATORS ARE REFUSED, AND THE WORST ONE IS ON THE DEVELOPER’S OWN TILIA PAGE.
1. The TOWNSHIP’s 209 acres — which tilia-encorp.com prints on the Tilia page itself. encorp.com.my and The Edge give 210 acres; NST and the affordable-housing reports give 209. That is the whole Encorp Cahaya Alam township, carrying 2,414 units across twelve phases plus a business centre, apartments, flats and an 1,800-unit affordable component. 112 ÷ 209 = 0.54 units per acre, a figure 23 times too favourable. Refused — and the trap originates on the developer’s own page.
2. A township-wide unit-per-acre figure. 2,414 ÷ 210 = 11.5 per acre for the township, close enough to Tilia’s 12.27 to look like a confirmation. It is not — it is a different population on different land. Refused.
3. The 1-ACRE PARK. A landscaped-greenery figure printed where a land area belongs. 112 ÷ 1 = 112 units per acre, nine times too unfavourable. Refused.
4. EdgeProp’s “4.89 acres”, printed as the township land area in its article on a sibling phase — impossible for a 209-acre township. By arithmetic it is far more consistent with that sibling’s own parcel. Refused for Tilia, and unsafe for the sibling too, because EdgeProp labels it as something else entirely.

And a fifth, specific to the register: the TEDUH keluasan values 224–261 and 252–291 mps are BUILT-UPS in square metres, confirmed against the filed built-up schedule. keluasan is not a land area on this project, and reading 224 m² as one would understate a 1,920 sq ft lot by about eleven times.

No filed document gives any land area for Tilia. The brochures print only the lot; the register’s keluasan is a built-up; the microsite prints the township’s 209 acres. So the 12.27 per acre rests entirely on one press sentence, and this page says so. The developer’s own LOW DENSITY tile states a unit count and publishes no parcel area — a unit count is not a density, and iProperty’s “low-density enclave of just 112 homes” repeats the same unsupported claim.

What this page does not publish, and why

Louis does not publish any discount, rebate, nett price, promotional package, freebie, incentive, commission, Bumiputera discount percentage, leaseback rate or yield projection on any page of this site. That is an absolute rule and it applies whether or not such a figure exists. What it means here:

1. The filed statutory price bands ARE published above, because they are the legally filed advertisement particulars — the statutory minimum and maximum per phase — and on this project the filed brochure, the developer’s own panel and the KPKT TEDUH registry band agree to the sen on BOTH phases, with no splice. They are not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer, and the real number for a particular house is in the price list and the signed sale and purchase agreement.

2. Below-floor “from” figures exist across TWO independent publishers, and those figures are WITHHELD. The Edge Malaysia carries a “from” price for each type in its August 2023 article, both sitting below the filed statutory minimum of the phase they describe, and PropertyGuru’s project page carries a lower bound below both filed minima. How many INDEPENDENT publishers is that? Two. theedgemalaysia.com and edgeprop.my are one publisher, The Edge Communications, so The Edge’s two below-floor type prices count once; PropertyGuru Group is the second. iProperty publishes no price at all. Recorded here is only that the discrepancy exists and that it runs across two independent publishers.

3. And the sharper point: the same publisher contradicts itself. EdgeProp’s own new-launch page prints a starting figure of RM1,241,000 — exactly the filed Phase-2 statutory minimum — while its sister title’s article carries a lower one. That is the strongest single argument for publishing only the filed band, and it is why this page does. PropertyGuru’s two square-foot figures also disagree with each other — its listing-derived range against its “Market Pulse” four-bedroom average — and both are secondary-market aggregates from third-party agent listings, not developer advertisements and not statutory figures. Their existence and their disagreement are recorded; their values are used nowhere on this page.

4. The announced GDV does not reconcile with the filed bands, and here is the arithmetic. The Edge Malaysia (August 2023) announced a Tilia GDV of RM100,000,000. The sum of the filed minima is 56 × RM1,141,000 + 56 × RM1,241,000 = RM133,392,000; the sum of the filed maxima is RM246,400,000 (our arithmetic). So the announced GDV sits RM33.39 million — 25% — BELOW the sum of the filed minima. Both figures are publishable and both are here. The explanation is almost certainly timing: the RM100m was published in August 2023, at the launch of the Akasia-2-named generation, while the bands in circulation today belong to filings re-lodged in August 2025. It is carried with its date and its source as a launch-era figure, and it is never presented as the project’s value against the current filed bands.

5. A Bumiputera field: its existence may be stated, its value never will be.

6. The township’s own money is not Tilia’s money. The township GDV figures in circulation — RM960 million (NST, April 2023), about RM1 billion (The Edge, August 2023), RM0.99 billion (encorp.com.my, 2026) — cover 2,414 units across twelve phases and are not attached to Tilia anywhere on this page, and neither is the separate 1,800-unit, RM450 million affordable component.

Ask Louis for anything in this section. That is what he is for.

Not published by anyone, therefore not on this page

The gaps are the useful part of this page. These are the questions a buyer will ask that no published source answers — and they are the list Louis will take to the developer for you.

Corporate. The Encorp : PKNS equity split in Must Ehsan Development Sdn Bhd — four sources name the joint venture and none gives a percentage; encorp.com.my/corporate-structure/ is a flat image, /reports/ and /ir-home/ hold no PDF at all and only link out to a robots-blocked host, and the media-library route recovers only two 2011/2012 sustainability files. So it is not obtainable, and this page says so rather than leaving a blank or guessing. Which Encorp subsidiary is the JV party — Encorp Must Sdn Bhd is an inference from a subsidiary list, not a filed fact. Whether PKNS is the landowner, and on what terms the land came into the joint venture.

The parcel and the title. Lot or PT number, mukim, and any street address for the parcel — NOT PRINTED on any of the four statutory surfaces. Any land area for Tilia in any filed document — the 9.13 acres is a single press sentence. Whether that 9.13 acres is gross or net. The lease commencement date — expiry is filed as 22.03.2104 on a 99-year term, which implies a start around 23 March 2005, and that is our arithmetic. Whether any part of the land is or was Malay Reserve. Whether individual titles have been issued or the land is still under a master title — and on a Schedule G scheme that has already handed over, that is a live question.

Price, units and sales. Any per-unit price list, and therefore how many of the 112 units clear Selangor’s RM2,000,000 foreign-buyer floor. Baki Unit as at any dated moment — the register carries no bakiUnit field for either phase, and the two current-generation brochures give 45 and 34 with no as-at date and disagree. Take-up at completion — Encorp’s Bursa quarterly gives Tilia revenue, not units sold. A current-generation filed statutory block for Phase 2 — there is none.

Construction and delivery. The main contractor — no Bursa contract-award announcement for Tilia or Akasia 2 was found, so the usual “check the contract award date against the original VP” test could not be run. The architect for Tilia — CL+O Architects Sdn Bhd is credited by StarProperty for the township, not for this phase. Why each phase needed its extension, and why each then overran it. The QLASSIC certificate number and assessment date, and any CIDB verification of the 82%. The defect position: what has been reported, what is outstanding, and when each purchaser’s 24-month window closes.

The houses. Built-up, bedroom count and price per filed variant (A1a, A1b, A2, A2a, A3, B1, B1a, B2, B2a, B3) — the variants appear only in the fixture schedule. How many corner units have a private pool, and whether it is built or an option. Whether solar panels are fitted, to how many units, and at what capacity — live in one newspaper, absent from the developer’s current page and from the filed fixture schedule. Ceiling heights, floor-to-floor, car-porch dimensions, electric-vehicle provision. Tempat letak kereta for Jenis B — filed only for Jenis A, as 2 ruang kereta.

Living there. Who owns, maintains and funds the 1-acre park and the thematic gardens now that handover has happened, and whether a residents’ association, a joint management body or MBSA takes them on — and on an individual-title Schedule G scheme the HDA 1966 strata maintenance machinery does not apply. Any service charge, sinking fund or community fee, and its basis. Whether the scheme is or will be gated and guarded, who guards it, and what iProperty’s “perimeter fencing” actually is — decisive for the foreign-buyer answer. The timetable for the rest of the township, in particular how close the 1,800-unit affordable component is to Tilia and when it completes against the township’s 2027 build-out. The nearest LRT3 station, its name, and its distance — four sources name “LRT3” and none names a station. Any chargee or end-financier panel — all four surfaces print Tiada / Nil.

Registry and publication. Nothing usable from either Selangor state registry — ehartanah.lphs.gov.my carries the search term into its own pagination links and still returns the default unfiltered listing, which is proof it is INERT, and kuotalphs.selangor.gov.my/projectDetail/ returns a 500. An inert registry is never a negative. No filed newspaper advertisement and no second brochure — 404 on both path forms for both phases. All three developer e-brochure PDFs are image-only with no machine-readable text layer. akasia2-encorp.com disallows robots, so the first-generation microsite could not be read. A second domain, tilia-cahayaalam.com, also disallows robots and its ownership could not be established, so nothing from it is used.

Tilia @ Encorp Cahaya Alam, Seksyen U12, Shah Alam — frequently asked questions

Other Shah Alam pages Louis keeps, built the same way

Published 9 October 2026 · Last verified 9 October 2026 against KPKT TEDUH projects 9351-11 and 9351-12 (with the full serial walk 9351-1 to 9351-12 read and 9351-13 checked and returning a client error), the licensee record for Must Ehsan Development Sdn. Bhd. under developer code 9351, both generations of filed KPKT HIMS advertisement brochure at files/9351/9351-11/ and files/9351/9351-12/ (AKASIA 2) and files/9351/P45/P45-20250807-00016853/ and files/9351/P45/P45-20250802-00016804/ (TILIA), the developer’s own statutory panel, feature tiles and amenity lists on tilia-encorp.com, encorp.com.my’s township, awards and corporate-structure pages, Encorp Berhad’s quarterly results filed 20 August 2026 as reported, the four GreenRE tier registers, the GBI directory, both Selangor state property registries, and the published press and portal coverage of 2023 to 2026. This is marketing information, not an offer. Filed particulars change — verify at teduh.kpkt.gov.my under 9351-11 and 9351-12 before you rely on anything here.