The Valuation

The valuation issue is perhaps the most contentious issue in the whole en bloc process of Tampines Court

The facts as subsidiary proprietors know them:

The reserve price was not based on a formal valuation.
This was revealed at an un-minuted dialogue session in April 2007. But a figure like $389,719,233.00 could not have been plucked from the air, so who did the initial, estimated valuation?

At the EOGM held in July 2007: their rationalisation was that the STB regulations only stipulate a valuation not more than 3 months old at the time of application to the Board. Owner's expectations and normal practice do not seem to figure at all in their decision making.

The reserve price was not revised upwards in the 15 months prior to the sale.
Where was the option to revise the price upwards in the escalating property market? Other en bloc estates were keeping pace with the bullish market, why not ours? The Property agent obviously treated the RP as a maximum price, rather than the minimum it should have been.

Let’s look at how the reserve price was adjusted in another ex-HUDC estate Farrer Court:

.
Farrer Court (ex-HUDC):
DECEMBER 2006 ----------$700 MILLION
JANUARY 2007 -------------$840 MILLION
MARCH 2007 ---------------$1.2 BILLION ---------SOLD!
.
TAMPINES COURT (ex-HUDC)
DECEMBER 2005-----------$389,719,233
JANUARY 2007 ------------$389,719,233
MARCH 2007 --------------$389,719,233 ------SOLD for $395 million!
.
Note: it is not the actual figure that is important, but the fact the the RP was ADJUSTED UPWARDS reflecting market conditions at the time
.
Media Corps Press, Today online.com
"Jones Lang La Salles national director of investments Lim Song Hai said " For the first quarter of 2007, we've seen a rise in reserve prices in the region of about 30% on average"."
Channel News Asia