Investor Explains NOXH Lottery Mechanism: Why Larger Families Get Smaller Units, Singles Win Larger Ones, and Unit Swapping Remains a Mystery

On December 3rd, the Hanoi City Administrative Service Center hosted a dialogue session titled “From Streamlined Procedures to Stable Living: Addressing Challenges for Social Housing Buyers in Hanoi.” During the event, numerous residents raised concerns regarding the lottery process and apartment swapping within social housing projects, notably Rice City Long Châu.

One resident expressed frustration: “We submitted our preferred apartment size in advance, but during the lottery, the developer conducted a random draw. This resulted in single individuals receiving larger units, while families of four or five were allocated smaller ones. Why weren’t those with similar size requirements grouped together for the draw?”

Addressing these issues, Mr. Lê Quang Huy, Deputy General Director of BIC Vietnam Joint Stock Company, explained that the Rice City Long Châu social housing project (Thượng Thanh social housing) is developed by a consortium of Him Lam Thủ đô and BIC Vietnam.

On November 24th, the developer conducted a lottery for eligible applicants. The project offers various apartment sizes, ranging from 30m² to 77m². Prior to the lottery, the developer surveyed residents’ actual needs.

The survey revealed that only over 2% of buyers sought the smallest units (1 bedroom, 1 bathroom), despite their abundance. “Given the significant disparity between supply and demand, grouping by size would compromise fairness. Therefore, we opted for a random draw for all eligible applicants, without size-based grouping,” Mr. Huy clarified.

Another resident inquired about apartment swapping within Rice City Long Châu: “I wish to exchange my unit for a larger one within the same project or another project by the same developer. Is this permitted? What is the process, and which authority handles it to ensure compliance and prevent unit revocation?”

Mr. Huy responded that while forfeited units post-lottery are possible, swapping is not always feasible, especially for larger, limited-availability units. “Currently, there is no legal framework allowing swaps based on individual preferences. Once new guidelines are issued, the developer will formally notify residents to ensure compliance,” he emphasized.

Regarding priority for individuals with disabilities, Mr. Huy noted that current regulations do not list “persons with disabilities” as a distinct category among the 12 eligible groups for social housing. However, female gender and disability status are considered when multiple applicants within the same priority group have equal conditions.

He illustrated with an example: if two applicants are “relatives of martyrs,” but one is female and the other male, the female applicant is prioritized. Similarly, among applicants with revolutionary merits or those displaced without resettlement, those with disabilities are given precedence.