Post-EOGM

The EOGM was a rowdy, explosive 4 hour long affair. It’s hard to know what came out of it. Tempers flared with both sides shouting at each other. Lawyers, Property Agent and Sale Committee on one side, the angry owners on the other. It was interesting to note that the Sale Committee was flanked by the 2 lawyers, with the Chairman in the back row, mostly out of sight.

The Sale Committee refused to answer questions directly, deferring always to the enbloc lawyer and property agent.

Two Sale Committee members were ineligible to vote (had there been one).

The Property Agent admitted that at no time did he advise the Sale Committee to raise the reserve price.

His reason for not getting a formal reserve price was that it would cost $20,000 and therefore too expensive!
A quick calculation will tell you that $35/-unit is peanuts and owners would have been very willing to pay that amount if it meant getting an up-to-date and accurate assessment of the true value of their homes + common property. Indeed, they might have agreed to a new Valuation being done every 2 months for that price!!

The Lawyers/ Property Agent/ Sale Committee Chairman refused to reveal what the majority percentage was at the time of sale. Why?

The lawyer seemed to claim that the beta sum mentioned in the Sale Committee minutes many moons ago was altogether different from the beta sum that materialized with the purchase price, even though they both served the same function.

One majority owner expressed her disappointment at having put her trust and faith in the SC. It turned out her trust was misplaced and her faith blind.

.

The Chairman of the MCST wanted to close the meeting even though there were many tabled questions left unanswered. A quick thinking subsidiary proprietor (SP) pre-empted his action by seeking and obtaining permission from the school official to extend the meeting by 1 hour. This was announced by the SP and so the meeting continued for another hour, by which time most of the important questions had been covered though not necessarily answered satisfactorily.

Even after the EOGM, it seems that what all of them have done collectively is to have contracted for the sale of this sstate with the barest of majorities and in the shortest possible time at the lowest possible price to a buyer who met the informal and never revisited or reviewed 15 month old prospective reserve price after marketing and tendering only one time.