Aurum @ Sri Petaling — Kuala Lumpur
Registered with KPKT as PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM (30955-1) — a commercial registration, not a Residensi. The filed component is 456 SOHO suites: Type A 527 sq ft × 274 and Type B 679 sq ft × 182, sold on Schedule H. Licensed developer HARTACOM PROPERTY SDN. BHD. (201401032954), licence 30955/01-2030/0011, approving authority Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur. Every number below is attributed to the document that prints it, and where the developer’s own pages contradict each other, this page shows all of them.
I reply with the filed KPKT statutory advertisement brochure and the TEDUH register record, not a brochure summary.
Aurum @ Sri Petaling at a glance
Sixteen facts, each with the document that prints it. Where nothing was printed — the lot number, the land area, the storey count, the number of shop units — the row says NOT PRINTED instead of filling the gap with a portal’s guess.
- Registered scheme name
- PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUMThe KPKT TEDUH register files
30955-1under nama: PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM — literally Aurum Commercial Centre. The filed brochure itself prints no Nama Pemajuan field at all, so the registered name is recoverable only from the register. That is a filing defect worth stating. EdgeProp’s description calls this project “Residensi Aurum” — no source supports that string. - Marketing names in use
- Aurum Business Centre · Aurum Suites · Aurum Shop OfficesThe developer’s own site uses Aurum Business Centre as the parent name with Aurum Suites and Aurum Shop Offices as sub-brands. The dedicated microsite’s single page is slugged
aurum-suiteswhile its footer reads “Aurum Residence Sri Petaling”. A separate, earlier, sold-out phase is marketed as Aurum Residence. - Licensed developer
- HARTACOM PROPERTY SDN. BHD.(201401032954) in the filed brochure and as pemaju.nama in the register; developer code 30955, licence status Aktif. This is not the company any consumer source names. PropertyGuru and iProperty print Amber Homes Sdn Bhd (968732-H); EdgeProp and the main contractor print Amber Homes Sri Petaling Sdn Bhd (1389237-W), which is the licensee of the sibling RUMAWIP block Residensi Serina, not of this filing.
- Developer’s licence
- 30955/01-2030/0011Valid 23 Jan 2025 – 22 Jan 2030 — current as at 8 October 2026. The brochure and
saratan.myprint the serial with the (N) suffix; the live register carries (A). Quote the (A) form. - APDL permit
- 30955-1/09-2028/0786(A)-(S)The filed brochure leaves the permit-number field blank. It does print the validity, 25 Sept 2025 – 24 Sept 2028, so lapse can be assessed — about 23½ months still to run. The number itself exists only in the register, which also holds a superseded
…0786(N)-(S)record marked Tidak Aktif. - Filed residence type
- SOHOJenis Kediaman: SOHO in the brochure; jenis: Soho on the register’s component row. No field labelled Jenis Bangunan exists in this brochure.
- Sale contract
- Schedule Hpjb.jenis: Jadual H in the register. So despite the SOHO label and the commercial registered name, the 456 suites are inside the HDA regime — statutory Schedule H SPA, liquidated damages for late delivery, a housing development account and KPKT permit supervision. Most Malaysian SOHO product gets none of that. This is a genuine protection, and it is the single best thing about this filing.
- Units, as filed
- 456Jenis A – 274 unit and Jenis B – 182 unit; the register’s unit summary confirms 456. No total is printed in the brochure — only the two per-type counts. Four consumer sources and the main contractor print 661, which is a whole-site figure, not Aurum’s.
- Built-up, as filed
- 527 sq ft and 679 sq ftKeluasan Binaan: 527 KPS (Jenis A, 1 bedroom / 1 bathroom / 1 car park) and 679 KPS (Jenis B, 2 / 2 / 2). No square-metre figures are published by anyone — 48.96 m² and 63.08 m² are our own conversions. The filed and the marketed schedules agree exactly, which is unusual and worth saying.
- Tenure
- Freehold — Hakmilik Kekal, no expiryJenis Hakmilik: HAKMILIK KEKAL, with no lease term and no expiry date, because none applies. Kategori Tanah: Bangunan. Two sources pull the other way and are disclosed below. An express condition still requires the Kuala Lumpur Federal Territory Land Works Committee’s approval before the land may be transferred, leased or charged — which makes the filed Sekatan Kepentingan: Tiada read oddly.
- Chargee
- CIMB Bank BerhadBebanan in the filed brochure. The land is charged to CIMB Bank Berhad.
- Approving authority
- Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL)Pihak Berkuasa Yang Meluluskan, with building-plan approval DBKL.JKB.BP S3 OSC 2024 2093 (22). DBKL has jurisdiction only inside the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, so this reference is the location proof — not a marketing claim. The register files negeri: WP Kuala Lumpur; the main contractor files the site as Mukim Petaling, Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur.
- Filed expected completion
- “48 BULAN (NOVEMBER 2029)”Tarikh Dijangka Siap, as printed. The brochure already carries the revised, extended period — which is the reverse of the usual pattern.
saratan.myalready says Q4 2029. - Governing delivery date
- 5 December 2029The register records pindaanTempohSerahKosong, an approved additional 12 months, and a revised construction period of 48 months. First SPA executed 5 Dec 2025; vacant possession under the original 36-month period was 5 Dec 2028 and is now 5 Dec 2029. liquidated damages do not begin to run until the revised date. EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and iProperty all still print 2027.
- Construction progress
- 14.74% completeRegister fields: progress 14.74%, status Lancar (on schedule), development Berfasa (phased), CCC / VP dates both –.
- Filed statutory price range
- Type A RM417,545 – RM440,045 · Type B RM551,255 – RM573,755Harga Jualan Minima – Maksima per unit type exactly as filed; the register’s band for the phase is RM417,545 – RM573,755, identical at both extremes. The filed maximum of RM573,755 is below Kuala Lumpur’s RM1,000,000 foreign-purchase floor, so on filed prices not one unit in this scheme is open to a non-citizen buyer. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Jump to what you came for
This page is organised the way a buyer actually asks — starting with the questions that the portals get wrong by two years, by 205 units and by one whole non-HDA component.
Fourteen things about Aurum that do not add up — and the source for each
None of this is rumour. Every item comes from the filed KPKT statutory brochure for 30955-1, the KPKT TEDUH public register, the developer’s own two websites and e-brochure, the main contractor’s own project page, or a named portal. Where the developer’s own documents disagree with each other, both are shown.
The registered name is a commercial name. There is no registered “Residensi Aurum”.
KPKT registers 30955-1 as PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM — Pusat Komersial means commercial centre. The land category is filed as Bangunan and the residence type as SOHO. EdgeProp’s project description calls this “Residensi Aurum”. No filing, no register field and no developer page supports that string. Nor does the brochure print any Nama Pemajuan field, so the only place the registered name exists is the government register. If you want to check your own paperwork against the filing, check it against Pusat Komersial Aurum, project code 30955-1, licensee Hartacom Property Sdn. Bhd. — not against a Residensi name.
A 12-month extension of time is already approved — and here it is the portals that are stale, not the brochure
The register records pindaanTempohSerahKosong, tempoh tambahan diluluskan 12 months, and a construction period revised from 36 to 48 months. The first SPA was executed 5 December 2025, so vacant possession moves from 5 December 2028 to 5 December 2029. Unusually for this series, the developer’s own filed brochure already prints the revised figure — Tarikh Dijangka Siap: “48 BULAN (NOVEMBER 2029)” — and saratan.my already says Q4 2029. The wrong sources are the consumer portals and the agent CRM: EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and iProperty all print 2027, the agent CRM prints 2027 Q3, and the main contractor’s own page says “expected to complete early 2027”. A buyer reading a portal page headed “Aurum” while being sold a Suite is two years out. The brochure is right. The portals are wrong. One footnote: the brochure says November 2029 while the register computes 5 December 2029 — a one-month gap, and it is the statutory date that carries liquidated damages.
The shop and retail offices are in no filing at all — this is the non-HDA split
The filed component list for 30955-1 contains exactly one component: Soho, 456 units. The developer separately markets Aurum Shop Offices / Aurum Retail Offices on the ground floor, Level 1 and Level 2, with three published layouts: Type A4, ground floor, 1,853 sq ft, Type B4, Level 1, 2,188 sq ft and Type B4, Level 2, 2,188 sq ft. No KPKT registration, no APDL and no statutory price band covers any of them. For a buyer of one of those units that means: no Schedule H and no Schedule G statutory SPA; no HDA liquidated damages formula for late delivery; no housing development account holding your progress payments; and no KPKT advertising-permit supervision. The sale would run on the developer’s own commercial contract. The developer’s Shop Offices page prints a Title: Freehold field and says nothing at all about commercial title or HDA status. Each of the three layouts is captioned “* proposed layout” by the developer — i.e. not committed.
The number of shop units is the biggest unpublished number on this project
Three retail/office layout types are published. A unit count is published by nobody — not by the developer, not by the register, not by any portal, not by the contractor. Neither is a price, nor a title category, nor the floor-to-floor height for anything other than retail (5.9 m, from the developer’s Shop Offices page). So it is impossible to state from public sources how many non-HDA parcels this building will contain, what share units they carry, or whether they sit under the same management corporation as the 456 suites. If you are buying a shop or office unit here, that is the first question to put in writing.
On the filed prices, no unit reaches Kuala Lumpur’s RM1,000,000 foreign-buyer floor
The filed Harga Jualan maximum across both types is RM573,755 (Type B maximum). The Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur applies a RM1,000,000 minimum purchase price to foreign buyers, with EPU consent on top. On the filed statutory band, every single unit in Pusat Komersial Aurum sits below that floor, which means the scheme is closed to non-citizen buyers on filed prices. Neither Aurum website mentions the threshold anywhere. This matters to a great many readers of this site and almost nobody publishes it, so it is stated plainly here. The RM1,000,000 Federal Territory threshold is the well-established general rule rather than a figure re-verified against a primary government URL on the day this page was written — say so to any lawyer you ask. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
The licensee is not the company the market names — four entity names are in play
Hartacom Property Sdn. Bhd. (201401032954) is the licensed developer of this filing, per both the brochure and the register. But: PropertyGuru and iProperty print Amber Homes Sdn Bhd (968732-H) — the brand/holding company. EdgeProp prints Amber Homes Group in its developer field and Amber Homes Sri Petaling Sdn Bhd (1389237-W) in its description, and the main contractor names the same company as its employer — but 1389237-W is the licensee of Residensi Serina, the RUMAWIP block by the sibling company on the same ground, not of this filing. Every consumer source names the wrong company. The group link is stated only on the developer’s own About Us page, which lists Hartacom Property Sdn Bhd inside the Amber Homes stable. And note that Hartacom’s number is printed two ways and never together: the filing gives the new-format 201401032954, the About Us page gives the old-format 1109038-X. They are consistent with being one company under its old and new numbers — but no document found prints both, so that equivalence is an inference, not a sourced fact. Check the company name and number on your own SPA.
Tenure: filed freehold, but two sources pull the other way — and Aurum’s own title is NOT PRINTED
The filing is unambiguous: Jenis Hakmilik: HAKMILIK KEKAL — permanent title, no lease term, no expiry date. The developer, EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and iProperty all say freehold. Against that: one agent CRM record prints Tenure: Leasehold, and the Government’s own Residensi Wilayah record for Residensi Serina — the block by the sibling company on the same ground — gives the title as Lot 103862 (pm8711), and a PM prefix is Pajakan Mukim, a mukim lease. That is Serina’s parcel reference, not Aurum’s, and no document found anywhere prints Aurum’s own lot, PT or title number — not the brochure, not the register, not a single portal. So the two cannot be reconciled from public sources. The honest statement: filed tenure for Pusat Komersial Aurum is freehold with no expiry; the adjoining block’s government record cites a mukim lease title; Aurum’s own title is unpublished. Ask for the land search.
“661 units” is a whole-site figure. The filed count is 456.
EdgeProp, PropertyGuru, iProperty and an agent CRM all print “661 residential units across two towers” for Aurum Residence. The main contractor says Aurum is two blocks, 661 units, 50 levels in Block A and 49 in Block B — and separately prints 661 for Residensi Serina too, which cannot also be true, so one of those two 661s is an error on the contractor’s own page. The filed figure for this licensed phase is 456, and the register confirms it. A reading that 661 is Aurum Residence plus Aurum Suites (661 − 456 = 205, which at 4 units per floor is roughly the contractor’s 50 levels) is offered here only as a hypothesis: nobody publishes that reconciliation, and 205 should not be quoted as the Residence phase’s unit count.
“Low density” fails the arithmetic — and the project’s own land area is not filed
The filed brochure prints no Keluasan Tanah at all, so density cannot be computed from a filed figure and no density figure should be published as fact. What is published, by non-statutory sources, is a parcel size — and even the unit disagrees: the developer’s own Residence page, PropertyGuru, iProperty and an agent CRM all say 3.426 acres, while EdgeProp says 3.426 hectares — the same three digits with the wrong unit, out by a factor of 2.47. Taking the four-source acres figure: 456 ÷ 3.426 ≈ 133 units per acre, and that is the most generous possible reading because it counts only the filed phase against the whole three-block site (Serina, Aurum Residence and Aurum Suites all sit on it). That is our own arithmetic on an unfiled number, not a published figure — but it already disposes of the “low density” claim the agent CRM, EdgeProp and the Residence site all make. Even on EdgeProp’s hectares reading the claim still fails.
The developer publishes its own MRT distance four different ways
To MRT Taman Naga Emas on the Putrajaya Line, from the developer group’s own pages: 0.6 km (the filed phase’s Suites site, in its location list), 600 m covered walkway (the developer’s own e-brochure, ground-floor legend), “350m to MRT” (the Residence site’s page title, the weakest placement there is), and “Only 500m away from MRT Station” (the body text of that same page). Its meta description says “5 Minutes Walk to MRT”. EdgeProp and the agent CRM both say “about 500 metres”. This page uses 0.6 km, because that is the figure the filed-phase site and the developer’s own brochure both carry, and the only one attached to the words covered walkway. Whether that walkway is built, who owns it and what route it takes are published by nobody.
Storeys: four or five different numbers, and the brochure prints none
The filed brochure has no Bilangan Tingkat field at all. The register’s component row says Tingkat 46. The developer’s own typical-floor plan is labelled Level 3A–16, 19–49, i.e. up to level 49. saratan.my says 49 levels. The main contractor says 50 levels in Block A and 49 in Block B. The Residence site’s own floor plans run Tower A L1–41 plus L42, Tower B L1–41. No storey count on this page is presented as filed, because none is.
Two near-identical domains, one hyphen apart — and the sold-out one hosts this phase’s brochure
aurumsripetaling.com.my (no hyphen) is the Aurum Suites microsite — the filed phase, this page’s subject, with a live licence and a live permit. aurum-sripetaling.com.my (with hyphen) is the Aurum Residence site — the earlier phase, whose own image filenames read “Fully Sold Out”, for which no KPKT registration is publicly reachable at all. The trap: the Residence domain republishes Suites material — its media library holds page scans of Aurum Business Centre Brochure V12 Suites, and the PDF it serves under a 2023-dated filename is an Aurum Business Centre brochure. So a reader on the “Residence” site can be reading Suites specifications — different unit sizes (1,071/1,260 sq ft vs 527/679), different lifts (3 vs 5) and different units per floor (4 vs 10) — without ever being told which phase they are in. There is also a third name on the same ground: Residensi Serina, a 44-storey, 661-unit RUMAWIP block by the sibling company. Confirm which phase and which company your paperwork names.
The register’s own coordinate is about 3.8 km from where the site actually is
The register prints 3.102213, 101.681910 for 30955-1. Two independent sources put the site at 3.073775, 101.701166 (EdgeProp’s map link) and 3.073388, 101.701347 (the Government’s Residensi Wilayah record for the block on the same ground). Those two agree with each other to roughly 45 m; the register’s coordinate sits about 3.8 km north-west of them — our own great-circle arithmetic from the two pairs, not a published figure. This page does not publish the register’s coordinate. Nor does the filing print a street address: Jalan Radin, Bandar Baru Sri Petaling and the postcode 57000 are portal- and government-record-published, not filed. The register’s daerah field reads “-”; Mukim Petaling comes from the contractor.
No award. No green certification. Nothing to report, so nothing is claimed.
The developer has no awards page — its site has Home, About Us, Completed Projects, Current Development, Contact Us and Register, and the About Us page lists no award of any kind. No award is claimed for Aurum on any page, by anyone, and no award was found for any other project in the group either, so there is nothing to borrow and nothing to guard against. No green certification is claimed — no GBI, no GreenRE, no LEED, no EDGE, no logo, no rating and no “targeting” language. The only sustainability-adjacent claims anywhere are the developer’s own natural ventilation to all rooms and bathrooms and 2.6 m-high windows, plus “energy-efficient design” which is EdgeProp’s wording, not the developer’s. The correct thing for this page to say about green certification is nothing at all, and that is what it says.
Project DNA — the filed component, the unfiled one, and the dated record
The register files one component for 30955-1: Soho, 456 units. Everything else the developer markets on this site — the shop offices, the retail piazza, the earlier Residence phase — sits outside that filing. The statband below is filed data only.
Facilities, by the level the developer itself assigns
Only the Aurum Suites site publishes a printed text legend beside each graphic — the strongest form of evidence available on this project. The parent brand page lists facilities in prose with no levels at all; the Residence site’s facilities table is an empty shortcode with graphics only. Everything below is from the two printed legends on the filed phase’s own site, and nothing has been imported from a portal.
Level 3 — podium facilities deck
- Podium lobby
- Pantry
- Games lounge
- Changing room
- Lifestyle pavilion
- 50 m lap pool
- Wading pool
- Water sculpture archway
- Cabanas
- Pickleball court
- Co-working space
- Feature spiral stairs
- Gymnasium
- Washroom
Ground floor
- Drop-off
- Suites lobby
- Retail office access
- Piazza
- Bus stop
- Covered walkway to MRT Taman Naga Emas
- Ingress and egress
- Basement parking entrance
- Resident parking entrance
- Shop office lift lobby
- Covered walkway to the shop offices
- Escalator to basement parking
The developer publishes this same Level 3 legend twice, differently
- The e-brochure version adds a second water sculpture archway and a podium lounge
- The e-brochure version omits the changing room and the washrooms
- The website version has one archway, a changing room and a washroom
- Neither version is labelled as superseding the other, and neither is dated
- Nothing here is marked “space only” in any source — that is a positive finding
Facilities that appear ONLY on portals or agent pages — NOT published by the developer for this phase
- EdgeProp and an agent CRM add, for the Residence phase: 50 m infinity pool, shallow water lounge, pool deck, hammock lounge, splash park, kiddie pool, courtyard atrium, seating wakaf, seating island, yoga studio, multi-purpose hall, function room, fern garden, jogging track, kickabout lawn, basketball half court, badminton court, adventure playground, BBQ arbour, music studio, laundrette, parcel drop-off, mail room, kindergarten, surau, management office and co-working hub
- EdgeProp’s generic amenity block further asserts housekeeping/launderette, mosque/surau, basketball court, badminton court, air conditioning and water heater as project facilities
- Not one of those appears in either of the two printed legends on the filed phase’s own site. They belong to the Residence phase’s graphics-only facilities plan, or to EdgeProp’s template
- The Residence phase’s facilities exist only as graphics with no text schedule — functionally uncommitted. Its facilities table is a literal empty
[ninja_tables]shortcode - The three retail/office layouts are each captioned “* proposed layout” by the developer — also uncommitted
Unit and building specification the developer does publish
- 5 lifts serving 10 suites per floor (the Residence site says 3 lifts and 4 units per floor — a different phase)
- 2.6 m-high windows in every room; all rooms and bathrooms naturally ventilated. EdgeProp turns this into a “ceiling height of 2.7 metres” — a window height is not a ceiling height, and the number changed too
- Floor-to-floor height 5.9 m for the retail spaces (Shop Offices page)
- Typical floor plate: Type A at unit numbers 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 (six per floor); Type B at 2, 3A, 8, 10 (four per floor)
- Fittings per the e-brochure, Type A / Type B: 1/2 wash basin, basin tap, WC, shower, paper holder and hand bidet; 1/1 kitchen sink, kitchen tap and laundry tap; 13/20 light points; 13/15 fan points; 2/3 hob and hood points; 1/1 air-conditioning point; 1/1 water heater point; 1/2 13A socket; 1/1 SMATV; 1/1 fibre point; 1/1 distribution board
- Structure: reinforced concrete frame, brick or RC walls, RC roof, skim-coat or plaster ceiling; plaster and paint with tiles to kitchen and bathrooms; floor tiles to foyer and wet areas, laminated timber to living and dining; fire-rated or flush timber doors, aluminium-framed windows
- Car parks: the filed field reads “1 / 2” — one bay for Type A, two for Type B. The total number of bays and any visitor parking provision are published by nobody. The contractor mentions 7 podium parking levels
The dated record — every date from the document that prints it
The filed schedule, and the layouts that are not in it
The first two cards are the filed unit types for 30955-1 — built-up, bedrooms, bathrooms, car bays, unit counts and the statutory price range, exactly as the brochure prints them. The next three are the shop and retail office layouts, which the developer publishes as “proposed” and which appear in no filing. The last card is the earlier Residence phase, for which no statutory figure of any kind exists.
Jenis A — 527 sq ft SOHO suite
Filed as Jenis A with Keluasan Binaan 527 KPS, 1 bedroom, 1 bathroom and Tempat Letak Kereta 1. The marketed schedule agrees exactly — the developer’s own CMS titles the layout image “Type A | 527 sq ft” and places Type A at unit numbers 1, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 9 on the typical floor, six per floor. The statutory Harga Jualan Minima – Maksima for this type is RM417,545.00 – RM440,045.00. No square-metre figure is published by the developer; 48.96 m² is our own conversion. Do not call this a studio — it is filed as a 1-bedroom SOHO unit, and the “studio” listings on one portal’s filter pages match nothing in either phase’s published schedule. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Ask about Type AJenis B — 679 sq ft SOHO suite
Filed as Jenis B with Keluasan Binaan 679 KPS, 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and Tempat Letak Kereta 2. The developer’s CMS titles its layout image “Type B | 679 sq ft” and places Type B at unit numbers 2, 3A, 8 and 10, four per floor. The statutory range is RM551,255.00 – RM573,755.00, and RM573,755 is the filed maximum for the whole scheme — which is what puts every unit below Kuala Lumpur’s RM1,000,000 foreign-purchase floor. No dual-key claim is made for either filed type, and the filed room list would not support one. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Ask about Type BType A4 — ground floor retail, 1,853 sq ft
Published by the developer’s own CMS as “Aurum Retail Offices | Ground Floor | Retail Units | Type A4”, at 1,853 sq ft, and captioned “* proposed layout”. It appears in no KPKT registration, under no APDL, and in no statutory price band. A buyer here would get no Schedule H and no Schedule G statutory SPA, no HDA liquidated damages formula, no housing development account and no KPKT permit supervision — the sale would run on the developer’s own commercial contract. Floor-to-floor height is published as 5.9 m. No price is published and none is printed here. Ask for the price list and the draft SPA at the gallery.
Ask what contract governs the shop unitsType B4 — Level 1 retail office, 2,188 sq ft
CMS title “Aurum Retail Offices | Level 1 | Retail Units”, Type B4, 2,188 sq ft, captioned “* proposed layout”. Same position as Type A4: outside the filing, outside the HDA, with the developer’s Shop Offices page printing only a Title: Freehold field and saying nothing about commercial title or HDA status. Whether these parcels share one management corporation with the 456 suites is published by nobody.
Ask about the Level 1 unitsType B4 — Level 2 retail office, 2,188 sq ft
CMS title “Aurum Retail Offices | Level 2 | Retail Units”, Type B4, 2,188 sq ft, also captioned “* proposed layout”. Three published layouts in total across three levels, and not a single published unit count for any of them — the largest unpublished number on this project.
Ask how many shop units there areAurum Residence — the earlier, sold-out phase
The developer markets Type A at 1,071 sq ft (3 bed / 2 bath) and Type B at 1,260 sq ft (4 bed / 3 bath), the latter with a “can be converted to a dual-key layout” claim that its own published room list does not support — no second entrance, second kitchen or separate wet area appears in any text. The built-up is contested five ways: 1,071 (developer and EdgeProp’s description), 1,065 (EdgeProp’s own floor-plan tab), 1,066 (EdgeProp’s listing field), 1,260 (developer) and 1,270 (iProperty’s range top) — EdgeProp contradicts itself three times inside one page, and iProperty’s range starts at 527 sq ft, i.e. it is pooling the Suites into the Residence record. Because no filing for this phase is reachable, lapse cannot be assessed, no statutory price band exists, and no price and no built-up for it is published on this page. Two portal and agent “from RM” figures circulate for it; neither can be tested against a statutory minimum, so neither is printed.
Ask which phase my paperwork namesNothing in these cards is estimated. Where a figure is our own arithmetic — the square-metre conversions — the card says so. Where nothing is published — the retail unit counts, the retail prices, the Residence phase’s statutory data — the card prints that as a blank rather than importing a portal’s number. The filed statutory price ranges are the legally filed advertisement particulars for 30955-1. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer. For a current price list and the draft SPA, ask at the sales gallery, and ask me what to look for in it.
Five images, all from the filed phase’s own site
Every image on both Aurum websites carries the developer’s own disclaimer: “All information contained herein are for illustration purposes only”, “is not intended to form and cannot form part of an offer or contract” and “All images are artist’s impressions.” Captions here state whether each subject is confirmed from the developer’s own CMS title or merely inferred from a filename. All five are confirmed. No image on this page comes from the hyphenated Residence domain. That site’s media library is named img136.jpg, img207.jpg and so on, with CMS titles identical to the filenames and no captions or alt text anywhere — so every subject there would be a guess, and this page guesses no subjects. A Type B layout graphic and the typical-floor plan exist on the filed phase’s own site but were not among the five verified for this page, so they are absent rather than substituted.
Location — Bandar Baru Sri Petaling, Kuala Lumpur
The filing prints no project address and no lot number. What proves the location is the approving authority: the brochure files the plan approval as DBKL.JKB.BP S3 OSC 2024 2093 (22) and the authority as Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur, and DBKL has jurisdiction only inside the Federal Territory. The street and postcode below are portal- and government-record-published, not filed.
The register’s own coordinate for this project is not used on this page. It prints 3.102213, 101.681910, which sits about 3.8 km north-west (our arithmetic) of the two coordinates that agree with each other: 3.073775, 101.701166 (EdgeProp’s map link) and 3.073388, 101.701347 (the Government’s Residensi Wilayah record for the block on the same ground). The map above is centred on the street address the portals publish, which is consistent with those two.
Rail and bus — and the four MRT distances
- MRT Taman Naga Emas (Putrajaya Line / MRT2; EdgeProp gives the station code SSP190) — 0.6 km with a covered walkway, per the filed phase’s own location list; the developer’s e-brochure says “600m covered walkway”. This page uses 0.6 km.
- The same developer group also publishes “350m to MRT” (a page title on the Residence site), “Only 500m away from MRT Station” (that page’s body) and “5 Minutes Walk to MRT” (its meta description). EdgeProp and an agent CRM say “about 500 metres”. Four figures, one walk, one developer group.
- Whether the covered walkway is built, who owns it and what route it takes: published by nobody.
- LRT Bukit Jalil — 3.2 km (developer)
- LRT Sri Petaling — 3.4 km (developer)
- Terminal Bersepadu Selatan (TBS) — 5.0 km (developer)
- A bus stop is item 5 on the printed ground-floor legend, with no distance — it is on the site
- “3 stops to TRX, 4 to Bukit Bintang, 5 to KLCC” — the developer’s own claim on three of its pages. That is a station count, not a distance or a time, and it has not been verified here against the Putrajaya Line’s published station order
- “Transit-Oriented Development” is the developer’s word. A covered walkway to a station is published; no DBKL or MRT Corp document designating this site a TOD was found
Shopping, commercial and the city — developer’s own list
- Sri Petaling Commercial Hub — 1.2 km
- Kuchai Entrepreneurs Park — 2.6 km
- Pavilion Bukit Jalil — 7.0 km
- Mid Valley Megamall — 7.4 km
- Sunway Velocity — 9.0 km
- IKEA Cheras — 9.2 km
- MyTOWN — 9.5 km
- KLCC — 12.0 km
- These are straight-line kilometres as the developer prints them, not drive times. The only drive-time claim anywhere is “5 minutes drive away” to Bandar Baru Sri Petaling, on the Residence site. KESAS, NPE, the KL–Seremban Highway, MRR2 and MEX are named by the developer with no distance at all
Education, healthcare, recreation
- Education: the developer’s list runs from 0.8 km (SK Bandar Baru Sri Petaling) to 6.0 km (Asia Pacific University). Only those two endpoints are recoverable with their figures — the intermediate rows’ individual distances are not, and are not guessed here. EdgeProp separately names Beaconhouse Eduland Sri Petaling, SK Bandar Baru Seri Petaling, SK Salak South and Institut Mentari with no distances
- Healthcare: the list runs from 3.1 km (IMU Healthcare) to 14.7 km (Subang Jaya Medical Centre); intermediate rows not recoverable
- Commonwealth Hill — 3.7 km
- Bukit Jalil Recreational Park — 4.9 km
- Bukit Jalil Golf & Country Resort — 5.5 km
No source publishes a distance for any of these
- Endah Parade · Sri Petaling town centre proper · Bukit Jalil Stadium and the National Sports Complex
- Pavilion Bukit Jalil’s own station · KL Sentral · KLIA or Subang airport
- The nearest hospital emergency department · the nearest wet market · the nearest police or fire station
- The drive time to Mid Valley or KLCC — only straight-line kilometres are given
- The nearest primary school’s catchment status
- Every distance on this page is published by the source named against it. None is estimated, and none is carried over from a neighbouring project.
Sri Petaling sits on the Putrajaya Line in southern Kuala Lumpur, between Bukit Jalil and Sungai Besi, inside DBKL’s boundary. Do not take a station distance from a neighbouring Sri Petaling project across to this one — this site already carries a separate page for Aster Hill, Sri Petaling, which is a different parcel by a different developer with its own filed particulars.
PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM — the statutory register, as filed
Project 30955-1 in the KPKT public register, cross-read against the filed statutory advertisement brochure (Butir-Butir Iklan) for the same phase. This is the only part of this project with legal force. Where the brochure leaves a field blank or omits it, the row says so.
| Registered scheme name | KPKT project code | Licensed developer | Developer’s licence | Licence validity | APDL permit | Permit validity | Approving authority | Building plan | Filed residence type | Sale contract | Units filed | Bed / bath | Car bays | Filed built-up | Filed statutory price range | Tenure | Land category | Interest restriction | Chargee | Construction progress | Expected completion | Governing vacant possession | Land area | Storeys | Diskaun Bumiputera field |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM The brochure prints no Nama Pemajuan field; register nama only | 30955-130955-2 returns 404 — one registered phase only | HARTACOM PROPERTY SDN. BHD. (201401032954); developer code 30955; status Aktif. About Us page prints 1109038-X | 30955/01-2030/0011 Brochure prints (N); live register carries (A) | 23.01.2025 – 22.01.2030 Current as at 8 Oct 2026 | 30955-1/09-2028/0786(A)-(S) BLANK in the filed brochure — recovered from the register, which also holds a superseded (N) record marked Tidak Aktif | 25.09.2025 – 24.09.2028 Printed in the brochure, so lapse can be assessed: NOT LAPSED, about 23½ months to run | DEWAN BANDARAYA KUALA LUMPUR The location proof — DBKL has jurisdiction only inside the Federal Territory | DBKL.JKB.BP S3 OSC 2024 2093 (22) | SOHO Jenis Kediaman; register component jenis: Soho. No Jenis Bangunan field exists in this brochure | Jadual H So the 456 suites are inside the HDA: statutory Schedule H SPA, liquidated damages, housing development account, permit supervision | 456 Jenis A – 274 unit, Jenis B – 182 unit. No total printed in the brochure. Four portals and the contractor print 661 — a whole-site figure | 1–2 / 1–2 Type A 1/1, Type B 2/2 | 1 / 2 One bay Type A, two Type B. Total bays and visitor parking: NOT PUBLISHED | 527 KPS / 679 KPS Square feet only. No m² figure is published by anyone — 48.96 and 63.08 m² are our conversions | Type A RM417,545.00 – RM440,045.00 Type B RM551,255.00 – RM573,755.00 Registry band for the phase: RM417,545 – RM573,755, identical at both extremes. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer. | HAKMILIK KEKAL (freehold) No lease term and no expiry, because none applies. One agent CRM says leasehold; the neighbouring block’s government record cites a pm (mukim lease) title. Aurum’s own lot and title: NOT PRINTED | BANGUNAN | TIADA (none) But an express condition requires Kuala Lumpur Federal Territory Land Works Committee approval to transfer, lease or charge — which sits oddly with “Tiada” | CIMB BANK BERHAD Bebanan as filed | 14.74% Status Lancar (on schedule); development Berfasa (phased); CCC / VP dates both – | “48 BULAN (NOVEMBER 2029)” The brochure already prints the revised period. saratan.my says Q4 2029. EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and iProperty all still print 2027 | 5 DECEMBER 2029 36 → 48 months, 12-month extension of time approved. First SPA 5 Dec 2025; original vacant possession was 5 Dec 2028 | NOT PRINTED Keluasan Tanah is absent from the filing. Non-statutory sources say 3.426 acres (developer + three portals) or 3.426 hectares (EdgeProp) — and that is the whole three-block site | NOT PRINTED No Bilangan Tingkat field. Register component row: 46. Developer’s typical-floor plan: Level 3A–16, 19–49. saratan.my: 49. Contractor: 50 + 49. Residence site: 42 + 41 | FIELD DOES NOT EXIST in this filing A positive finding, not an omission — there is no Diskaun Bumiputera field in this brochure, and no percentage of any kind is published or printed here |
Sources for this table: the KPKT HIMS filed statutory advertisement brochure for registered phase 30955-1, and the KPKT TEDUH public register record for the same phase, read against each other. The licence number was first recovered from a third-party page (saratan.my) that quotes it in prose; the leading serial of a licence number is the register’s developer code, and that is how 30955-1 was found at all — the register’s developer-list endpoint timed out on every attempt.
What this page does not publish, and why. Louis Koh does not publish any discount, rebate, nett price, promotion, package, freebie, incentive, commission, Bumiputera percentage, leaseback or guaranteed-rental rate, or yield/ROI projection for any project, from any source. The only prices on this page are the filed statutory Harga Jualan Minima – Maksima per unit type from the legally filed advertisement particulars for 30955-1, and the register’s own price band for the phase. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer. For anything beyond the filed range — the current price list, what is available, the draft SPA — speak to me directly. One further deliberate omission: the Residence site hosts a page titled “Pricing & Packages”; it was identified from that site’s own page index and was not opened, and nothing on this page comes from it.
Can a foreign buyer purchase at Aurum @ Sri Petaling?
On the filed prices, no. Aurum sits in the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, where the minimum purchase price for a foreign buyer is RM1,000,000, with Economic Planning Unit consent on top. The filed statutory maximum for every unit in this scheme is RM573,755 — the top of the Type B range. So not one unit in Pusat Komersial Aurum reaches the Federal Territory floor on filed prices, and the scheme is closed to non-citizen buyers on that basis. For comparison, the Selangor thresholds are RM2,000,000 in Zones 1 and 2 (strata and gated landed strata only) and RM1,000,000 in Zone 3, i.e. Hulu Selangor and Sabak Bernam — but Aurum is not in Selangor. Neither Aurum website mentions the threshold anywhere. The RM1,000,000 Federal Territory figure is the well-established general rule; a primary government page for it could not be opened on the day this page was written, so take it to your own solicitor rather than treating it as re-verified here. If you are a non-citizen and you want a Kuala Lumpur unit that does clear the floor, ask me and I will send you ones that do.
What does “14.74% complete, Lancar” actually tell you?
It is the register’s own construction-progress field for 30955-1, with status Lancar — on schedule — and the development classed Berfasa, phased. Read it against the governing vacant possession date of 5 December 2029 rather than against the portals’ 2027: at 14.74% in October 2026, a 2027 handover was never the live plan, and the approved 48-month period is what the schedule is now measured against. The register’s CCC and VP date fields are both blank, so no expected CCC date is published by anyone. The main contractor is EJ Group, identified from its own project page, which also mentions seven podium parking levels; the filing names no architect, engineer, quantity surveyor or solicitor, and no contract sum is published — the contractor is unlisted, so there is no Bursa announcement to recover one from.
Not published, therefore not on this page
These are the questions buyers ask that no source answers, and they are the list I will take to the developer for you: how many shop and retail office units there are (three layouts published, no count — the biggest missing number here); whether those units are on commercial title and what SPA governs them; the land area of the Aurum parcel itself, as against the whole three-block site; the lot, PT and title number for Aurum (only the neighbouring block’s Lot 103862 (pm8711) is public); the storey count and the number of blocks as filed; total car park bays and visitor parking; share units and strata allocation; the Bumiputera unit quota (absent from the register record); whether your own SPA copy is Schedule H, which the register says it is and the developer never mentions; the expected CCC date; the architect, engineer, QS and solicitors; the contract sum; whether the suites and the retail parcels share one management corporation; the maintenance charge and sinking fund from the developer — the developer publishes nothing, and a third-party page (saratan.my) gives RM0.50 per sq ft per month including sinking fund, which is that site’s figure and not the developer’s; whether DBKL has designated the site a TOD; whether the MRT covered walkway is built, and on whose land; any orientation, view or facing information; the finishes and appliance brands (the e-brochure gives a fittings count, not a specification); lift waiting times and the lift count for the retail podium; and whether Aurum Residence has a licence and an APDL at all, which no source reveals.
The licensed developer — and the four company names in circulation
The licensed housing developer of PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM is HARTACOM PROPERTY SDN. BHD., registration 201401032954, as printed in the filed statutory advertisement brochure for 30955-1 and as recorded in the KPKT public register under pemaju.nama. Its developer code is 30955 and its licence status is Aktif. Licence 30955/01-2030/0011 runs from 23 January 2025 to 22 January 2030. The register gives the registered office as Unit 310, 3rd Floor, Lobby 2, Block A, Damansara Intan, No. 1, Jalan SS20/27, 47400, and the business address as 02-07, Kompleks Permaisuri Q, No. 6 Jalan Sri Permaisuri, Bandar Sri Permaisuri, Cheras, 56000 WP Kuala Lumpur — which is also the address on the government record for the neighbouring RUMAWIP block. The register’s contact details are 03-9171 5133 / 017-618 6233 and salesadmin@amberhomes.com.my.
That email address is the clue to the confusion. Hartacom trades under the Amber Homes brand, and every consumer source names an Amber Homes company rather than the licensee. PropertyGuru and iProperty both print Amber Homes Sdn Bhd (968732-H), which is the brand and holding company, incorporated 18 November 2011 — not the licensee. EdgeProp prints Amber Homes Group in its developer field, which is a brand and not a legal person, and Amber Homes Sri Petaling Sdn Bhd (1389237-W) in its description — the same company the main contractor names as its employer. But 1389237-W is the licensed developer of Residensi Serina, the 44-storey RUMAWIP block by the sibling company on the same ground, per the Government’s own Residensi Wilayah record — not of this filing. The entity a buyer of an Aurum suite contracts with is Hartacom Property Sdn. Bhd., and no portal says so.
The group relationship is stated only by the group itself, on its own About Us page, which lists the whole stable: Amber Homes Sdn Bhd (968732-H), Amber Homes Development Sdn Bhd (1108624-V), Amber Homes Cheras Sdn Bhd (1207887-T), Amber Homes Land Sdn Bhd (1334296-H), Amber Homes Sri Petaling Sdn Bhd (1389237-W) and Hartacom Property Sdn Bhd (1109038-X), with founding entity Amber Resources Sdn Bhd (177771-U). A third-party page describes Hartacom as “an AmberHomes company”. Note the two registration numbers for Hartacom and the care they need: the filing prints the new-format 201401032954, a 2014 incorporation; the About Us page prints the old-format 1109038-X, which falls in the band issued in 2014. They are consistent with being one company under its old and new numbers, and are treated as such here — but no document found prints both numbers together, so that equivalence is our inference and not a sourced fact. Check the name and the number on your own SPA.
Where the statutory particulars were NOT found is itself worth recording. amberhomes.com.my/apdl/ returns 404; that host’s REST API is disabled; and no Amber Homes page and no Aurum page publishes a statutory particulars block at all. The Aurum Suites microsite has exactly one page and no statutory, APDL, disclaimer or terms page; the Residence site has nine pages and not one of them is either. The licensee’s name came from the government register and the filed brochure, and nowhere else.
No joint venture is published for this scheme. The developer’s only JV claim is historic and belongs to a different company, a different decade and a different site: founding entity Amber Resources Sdn Bhd as “one of the pioneering joint venture partners” of DBKL for land in Cheras from 1989, alongside an “over 22 years of experience” line. That belongs to the group, not to Aurum, and it is not borrowed onto this page. No JV partner and no share split is published for Pusat Komersial Aurum. The developer’s named completed projects — Casa Green@Bukit Jalil, Casa Green, Seruni Residence and Aster Residence — carry no award claim on its own site, and nor does Aurum.
One live oddity on the developer’s own page, mentioned because it is on a page a buyer may land on: the hyphenated Residence site’s social link points to a Facebook page named for an unrelated listed developer. Almost certainly a template leftover rather than anything meaningful — but it is on the developer’s live site, and it is one more reason to confirm which domain and which phase you are reading before you believe a specification.
Everything in this section is sourced to the filed brochure for 30955-1, the KPKT public register, the Government’s Residensi Wilayah record for the neighbouring block, the developer’s own About Us page, the main contractor’s own project page, or a named portal. No company relationship is asserted here that one of those sources does not state, and where a relationship is our inference — the two Hartacom numbers — the text says so.
Aurum @ Sri Petaling — FAQ
Where exactly is Aurum @ Sri Petaling, and is it in Kuala Lumpur or Selangor?
30955-1 prints the approving authority as Dewan Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur (DBKL) and the building-plan approval reference as DBKL.JKB.BP S3 OSC 2024 2093 (22), and DBKL has jurisdiction only inside the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur. The KPKT register files negeri as WP Kuala Lumpur, and the main contractor files the site as Mukim Petaling, Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur. The filing prints no project address and no lot number at all — the only addresses in it are sales-gallery addresses. Jalan Radin, Bandar Baru Sri Petaling and the postcode 57000 are portal- and government-record-published, not filed. The register’s daerah field reads “–”. Because this is a Federal Territory project there is no state land-office record to cross-check the coordinate against, and the register’s own coordinate sits about 3.8 km from the two coordinates that agree with each other, so this page does not publish it.Is this a condominium, a SOHO or a commercial building?
Are the Aurum suites protected by the Housing Development Act?
30955-1 as Jadual H. That means the 456 suites carry a statutory Schedule H SPA, HDA liquidated damages if delivery is late, a housing development account holding your progress payments, and KPKT APDL supervision of the advertising and sale. Buyers of Malaysian SOHO product very often get none of that, because many SOHO schemes are sold on commercial contracts outside the Act. The developer never mentions Schedule H anywhere — the register is the only place it is stated. Ask to see that your own SPA is the Schedule H form.And are the shop and retail office units protected the same way?
30955-1 contains exactly one component: Soho, 456 units. The Aurum shop and retail offices — published as Type A4, ground floor, 1,853 sq ft, Type B4, Level 1, 2,188 sq ft and Type B4, Level 2, 2,188 sq ft — appear in no KPKT filing at all. No registered phase, no APDL, no statutory price band. For a buyer of one of those units that means no Schedule H and no Schedule G statutory contract, no HDA liquidated damages formula for late delivery, no housing development account, and no KPKT advertising-permit protection; the sale would run on the developer’s own commercial agreement. The developer’s Shop Offices page prints a Title: Freehold field and says nothing at all about commercial title or HDA status, and every one of the three layouts is captioned “* proposed layout”. No unit count, no price and no title category is published for any of them by anybody. Get the draft SPA and a lawyer before you pay a booking fee on a shop unit here.When will Aurum actually be completed? Why do the portals say 2027?
30955-1: the construction period goes from 36 to 48 months, and because the first SPA was executed on 5 December 2025, vacant possession moves from 5 December 2028 to 5 December 2029. liquidated damages do not begin to run until that revised date. The developer’s own filed brochure already prints the revised period — Tarikh Dijangka Siap: “48 BULAN (NOVEMBER 2029)” — and a third-party page already says Q4 2029. EdgeProp, PropertyGuru and iProperty all print 2027, an agent CRM prints 2027 Q3, and the main contractor’s own page says “expected to complete early 2027”. Those refer to the earlier Residence phase, but a buyer reading a portal page headed “Aurum” while being sold a Suite would be two years out. On the filing, the brochure is right and the portals are wrong. One footnote: the brochure says November 2029 while the register computes 5 December 2029, a one-month gap, and it is the statutory date that carries liquidated damages.Who is the licensed developer? Is it Amber Homes?
amberhomes.com.my address — but no consumer source names the right company. PropertyGuru and iProperty print Amber Homes Sdn Bhd (968732-H), the holding company. EdgeProp prints Amber Homes Group, which is not a legal person, and Amber Homes Sri Petaling Sdn Bhd (1389237-W), as does the main contractor — but 1389237-W is the licensee of Residensi Serina, the neighbouring RUMAWIP block, not of this filing. One more wrinkle: Hartacom’s number appears as the new-format 201401032954 in the filing and as the old-format 1109038-X on the developer’s own About Us page, and no document found prints both together, so treating them as one company is an inference. Check the company name and number on your own SPA.Is Aurum freehold or leasehold?
Can a foreigner buy a unit at Aurum @ Sri Petaling?
How many units are there — 456 or 661?
How far is the MRT, really?
How many storeys is the building?
Is Aurum a low-density development?
Which Aurum am I looking at? There seem to be two websites.
aurumsripetaling.com.my (no hyphen) is the Aurum Suites site — the filed phase, this page’s subject: 456 SOHO units, 527 and 679 sq ft, 10 suites per floor, 5 lifts, live licence, live APDL. aurum-sripetaling.com.my (with hyphen) is the Aurum Residence site — the earlier phase, marketed as 1,071 and 1,260 sq ft condominiums, 4 units per floor, 3 lifts, whose own image filenames read “Fully Sold Out” and for which no KPKT registration is publicly reachable at all. And the trap: the Residence domain republishes Suites material, including page scans of an Aurum Business Centre Brochure V12 Suites and a PDF served under a 2023-dated filename that is actually a Business Centre brochure. So you can be on the “Residence” site reading “Suites” specifications and never be told. A third name sits on the same ground: Residensi Serina, a 44-storey, 661-unit RUMAWIP block by the sibling company, with its own government record. Confirm the registered name, the project code and the licensee on your own paperwork: Pusat Komersial Aurum, 30955-1, Hartacom Property Sdn. Bhd.What is the APDL number, and is the permit still valid?
…0786(N)-(S) record marked Tidak Aktif. The same suffix trap applies to the developer’s licence: the brochure and a third-party page print 30955/01-2030/0011(N), while the live register carries (A). Quote the (A) forms. And never let a licence validity be passed off as permit validity — they are different documents with different expiry dates.Has Aurum won any award, or does it have a green rating?
What is the maintenance charge?
saratan.my) gives RM0.50 per sq ft per month including the sinking fund, which would be roughly RM264 a month for a 527 sq ft Type A and RM340 for a 679 sq ft Type B — that is that site’s figure and our arithmetic from it, not the developer’s published charge. The share units and strata allocation are not published either, nor is it published whether the 456 suites and the retail parcels fall under one management corporation or two. Those are on the list I will take to the developer for you.What prices does this page publish, and what does it not?
30955-1 — Type A RM417,545.00 – RM440,045.00 and Type B RM551,255.00 – RM573,755.00 — and the register’s own band for the phase, RM417,545 – RM573,755, which is identical at both extremes. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer. Not published, as a matter of standing policy on every page of this site: certain commercial terms, which are deliberately withheld. There is no Diskaun Bumiputera field in this filing at all — that is a positive finding about the filing, not an omission here. No price is published for the shop and retail office units, because no statutory band exists for them and no source publishes one; and no price is published for the earlier Aurum Residence phase, because no filing for it is publicly reachable, so the two “from RM” figures that circulate for it cannot be tested against any statutory minimum. For a current price list and the draft SPA, ask at the sales gallery — or ask me what to look for in it.Get the filed documents, not a brochure summary
I will send you the KPKT filed statutory advertisement brochure for 30955-1, the TEDUH register record showing the approved 12-month extension and the real APDL number, and a plain-language note on what the non-filed shop and retail component means for a buyer. Then we can talk about whether this suits you at all.
Certain commercial terms are deliberately withheld on this page and in my reply to you, from any source. This is marketing information. It is not a price list, not a quotation and not an offer.
Louis Koh
Director, LK Group Marketing · IQI Realty Sdn Bhd · Registered Estate Agency
Over a decade selling Malaysian property, across Kuala Lumpur, Selangor and Johor Bahru. I build these pages from the filed statutory particulars first and the marketing second, because the filing is the part with legal force. On Aurum that approach found a 12-month approved extension no portal mentions, an entire retail component that sits in no filing at all, a licensee no portal names correctly, and a filed price ceiling that quietly closes the scheme to foreign buyers. If a number is not published, I will tell you it is not published and then go and ask for it.
Published 8 October 2026 · Last verified 8 October 2026 against the KPKT HIMS filed advertisement brochure for 30955-1 and the KPKT TEDUH register record. This page is marketing information and is not an offer, a quotation or a price list. Figures that are our own arithmetic are labelled as such; figures that nobody publishes are printed as NOT PRINTED.
Worth putting beside this one
Kuala LumpurDamansara Fifty6 @ Damansara Heights — registered <code>RESIDENSI DAMANSARA 56</code>, register code <code>13859-1</code>, <b>56 units in two blocks of 4 and 11 storeys</b>, <b>wholly <code>Jadual H</code></b>, <b>an APPROVED 15-month extension and the building still arrived nine months beyond it — <code>ccc</code> and <code>vp</code> both 27/03/2023</b> — licensee <code>DAMANSARA FIFTY6 SDN. BHD.</code>, Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur
WhatsApp
Kuala LumpurTHE MAISON 23 @ Cheras, <b>Kuala Lumpur</b> (DBKL, WP Kuala Lumpur) — <b>23 THREE-STOREY TERRACED HOUSES</b>, filed <code>Rumah Teres 3 Tingkat, Taman Bukit Mandarina, Cheras (Maison 23)</code>, KPKT <code>30937-1</code>: <b>all 23 on <code>Jadual G</code> with individual title</b> — <b>register status <code>Lewat</code> at 69.13% with NO approved extension, so vacant possession stands at 11 March 2027</b>
WhatsAppTHE MAPLE RESIDENCES, Taman OUG (Taman Overseas Union), <b>Kuala Lumpur</b>, Daerah Kuala Lumpur, WP KUALA LUMPUR — <b>a COMPLETED freehold <code>Jadual H</code> CONDOMINIUM</b>: <b>940 units in Blok A, B and C, CCC and register vacant possession both 30 May 2025</b> — <b>registered as <code>Residensi Mapel OUG</code></b>, with <i>Maple</i> respelled <i>Mapel</i>, under register code <b><code>14379-2</code></b>, <b>and with an advertising permit that LAPSED on 8 September 2025</b>
WhatsApp
Kuala LumpurPark Green Pavilion @ Bukit Jalil, Kuala Lumpur — registered as <code>Pavilion Bukit Jalil</code>, project code <code>30667-1</code>, <code>Jadual H</code> on all 453 units, VP revised to 15 Apr 2029, licensee <code>REGAL PATH SDN. BHD.</code> (a Malton Berhad company)
WhatsApp
Kuala LumpurSKYLINE KUCHAI, Kuchai Lama, <b>Kuala Lumpur</b> (DBKL, WP Kuala Lumpur) — <b>registered as <code>RESIDENSI SKYLINE KUCHAI</code> on TWO registrations, <code>30331-1</code> and <code>30331-2</code></b>: <b>1,838 units over 59 and 56 storeys, and EVERY ONE of them is <code>Jadual H</code></b> — <b>80% built, ~99% sold, vacant possession October 2027 on a <code>+20-month</code> extension that the developer itself discloses</b>
WhatsAppSOUTH BANK / Southbank Residence, <b>Old Klang Road</b>, Kuala Lumpur, Daerah Kuala Lumpur, WP KUALA LUMPUR — <b>a COMPLETED <code>Pangsapuri Servis</code> under <code>Jadual H</code></b>: <b>674 units in Blocks A and B, CCC 29 August 2017</b> — <b>registered as <code>RESIDENSI TEBING SELATAN</code></b>, the marketing name translated into Malay by MEANING, under register code <b><code>13512-1</code></b> — and <b>“South Bank 2”, Block C, has NO reachable KPKT registration of any kind</b>
WhatsAppAsk a specific question
If you would rather not use WhatsApp, use this. I answer them myself. Only your name and one contact method are required.
Developer: Amber Homes (1 development on this site)
Where it is: Sri Petaling, Kuala Lumpur (KL)
The unit mix, the permitted price and how far up it is
None of this table is the developer’s account of itself. It is what the Ministry of Housing and Local Government records from the 7(f) returns: unit type, bedrooms and bathrooms, built-up area, unit count, the price range on the permit, and the certified percentage complete. A brochure price can be revised; the price on the permit was filed. A brochure need not mention progress; the percentage is certified. The status vocabulary is theirs too: Lancar (on schedule), Lewat (behind), Sakit (sick), Terbengkalai (abandoned).
30955-1 · PUSAT KOMERSIAL AURUM
Overall status: Lancar — on schedule
| Component | Bed / bath | Built-up | Units | Price on the permit | Complete |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Soho 46 storeys Lancar | 1, 2 / 1, 2 | — | 456 | RM417,545.00 – RM573,755.00 | 14.74% |
Swipe the table sideways for the rest of the columns.
This is the document the developer had to file, and the housing department had to approve, before it was allowed to advertise at all — served from the ministry’s own host. It normally carries the location plan, the developer licence and building-plan approval references, the expected completion date, the encumbrance position, and the unit count and price floor and ceiling for each type. The brochure a salesperson hands you can be reissued. This one cannot.
Read from teduh.kpkt.gov.my on 2026-10-23, project code 30955-1. Re-read weekly.
What to do with the number. Read it against the delivery date in your own agreement, not against what a salesperson says. A project with a year left on its statutory clock and a third of the building up is telling you something the brochure will not.
How does that compare? Every development on this site, grouped by register status — cancelled, abandoned and behind schedule first.