Missing PA letter

The property agent sent an email to majority owners on 14 April. Since not all owners are computer savvy, especially the older crowd, I wonder just how many owners it actually reached.

.

Since it is 'Confidential and subject to legal privilege' I shall not be reproducing it here. There's not much in it, to tell you the truth, anyway. All stuff we know already.

.

They have a blogspot blog! - using my choice of template, too. I guessed as much with that letter I published for them :) They are not accepting comments, though, - I tried, but they promptly deleted it. Aw, no reciprocation, guys?

.

So, we are to expect the selective sending of information to continue. I'm sure, all owners, regardless of their affiliation, would like to know what's going on. It may not be mandatory for them to inform anyone who is not for the sale, but it is good manners.

Botanic Garden View has the same problem - see their latest blog post.

*********************************************************

April 30

One of the comments below said: - "Enbloc sale affects all owners. Hence, they have the right to be kept updated regardless of their affiliation."

Another asks:- "any obligation on the sales agent part?"

Believe me, if it were mandatory to inform every owner about every little thing that happens, then you can be sure every owner in Tampines Court would have received double copies!

Let's look back at Lincolnsvale Condominium, a couple there claimed they were not informed of the sale.

Condo sold en bloc, but family won't move out - Straits Times 20 April 2007

Gans may be hauled to court for staying put Today - 24 April 2007

Well, the Gans were taken to court by the developer and I have dug out the Lincolnsvale High Court decision, 25 May 2007 to see what Justice Paul Tan had to say. The respondents' case raised inter alia 9 points to claim that the process of the sale was defective. Point (v) read:

"(v) They (ie. the respondents) were not fully informed, if at all, about the sale of Lincolnsvale until everything had been signed. Notices should have been sent to their Post Office Box address rather than any other address since they were constantly moving between apartments."

Justice Paul Tan wrote:

"69 ....First, when an en bloc sale is initially proposed, the LTSA does not make it compulsory for each subsidiary proprietor to be personally informed. While personal notice is eventually required, there is nothing mandating a sale committee (so long as it is able to garner the requisite shareholding) to publicise the sale to each and every subsidiary proprietor personally, save that a notice of who has assented to the collective sale agreement must be affixed in a conspicuous part of each of each building in the development every eight weeks (para 1(b) of the Schedule to the LTSA).............

70 The short point is this: as long as the sale committee (who may be composed of anyone) has been able to amass the requisite majority, it is under no obligation to bring the sale to the individual attention of all the subsidiary proprietors. Of course, in practice, it would be difficult to get a majority without some active publicity. But that may still leave a significant minority of owners whom, for instance, may not actually reside in their units on a daily basis, completely out of the loop."

So, there you have it. Your personal code of ethics might not be in alignment with the current law, but it's the Law that must be applied - and it's not unlawful to keep even a significant number of people out of the loop.