S&P Expiry: 25 July 2008STB Hearing day 4: 07 August 2008
.
.
.
.
1) The Board has not complied with the SC's request to bring the adjouned Hearing date forward to a date before the 25 July - and if the Buyer is still not minded to extend*, then the deal falls through. The deposit goes back to the buyer and the interest to the en bloc lawyer.
.
2) The Board has not complied with the SC's request to bring the adjouned Hearing date forward to a date before the 25 July - and if the Buyer changes its mind and agrees to extend then the Sale Committee has to hold an EOGM to seek the mandate from the majority owners to extend, too#.
.
Since the buyers are not minded to extend, and there has been no request from the buyer pushing the majority to 'extend or else' as in HT then the majority can let the Agreement lapse, too.
.
*Not minded to extend"= do not agree to extend = pull out.
2) The Board has not complied with the SC's request to bring the adjouned Hearing date forward to a date before the 25 July - and if the Buyer changes its mind and agrees to extend then the Sale Committee has to hold an EOGM to seek the mandate from the majority owners to extend, too#.
.
Since the buyers are not minded to extend, and there has been no request from the buyer pushing the majority to 'extend or else' as in HT then the majority can let the Agreement lapse, too.
.
.
These are just my thoughts on the matter - if anyone disagrees please leave a comment
.
Tampines Court is Case No. 2 for the year 2008.
.
Hi
ReplyDeleteit has been a long time , i dont see any news about tampines court enbloc, i am getting worried as time is coming soon, I am just keeping my fingers cross to have a
good outcome of the case, i dont want to leave tampines court if can.
I saw some residents gathered around the guardhouse today. They were in a discussion, probably about the hearing yesterday. Any intermediate news so far?
ReplyDeleteThe residents were taking a hired bus to the STB hearing.
ReplyDeleteCross-examination of the following witnesses:
Day 1: (not in order)
An Auditor
Lawyer from En Bloc lawyer's firm
Sale committee member
Managing Agent
Property Agent
Day 2:
Property agent (cont)
Majority Valuer
Day 3:
Majority Valuer (cont)
Minority Valuer
Day 4: (tentative order)
Majority Sale Committee member
Recalled Majority witnesses (unconfirmed)
Minority Witness
Minority witness (independent)
There has been a surprising development.
Hi
ReplyDeleteI understand that 25 July - Qualifying Certificate will be expiring. What will happen afterthat
They will extend it.
ReplyDeleteWhat is the maximum number of day could the STB hearing last?
ReplyDeleteAfter its hearing,how long it will take before the STB passes its order?
can u share about the surprising development?
Average Hearing usually lasts 3 to 5 days, though not necessarily consecutively. As you see, our day 4 is far off in August.
ReplyDeleteHow long before they make a decision? No idea.
The minority lawyers are putting up a fierce fight, much fiercer than anyone expected, and the majority have had to backtrack and do damage control or risk losing the case. I cannot say what it is as it is still ubder review and hasn't been fully argued yet.
If they thought the minority were push-overs, they were gravely mistaken.
There is no approval needed by the residents to extend the 25 July - Qualifying Certificate? They can just extend it indefinitely?
ReplyDeleteAs property market is slowing down, some developers even turned landlords after purchased en-bloc sales. Any sign of our developer Far East back off from the sales? Any comments?
ReplyDeleteGo back to the CSA clause 4.3.1, majority owners signed a blank cheque to the SC to do whatever they want.
ReplyDeleteGo back to the S&P agreenment pg 7 clause 6. "In the event an order is not obtained within the twelve (12) months from the in principle RPA Approval Date, then unless the parties hereto mutually agree in writing to extend the time for obtaining the STB order, the sale and purchase herein shall be terminated and all monies paid by the Purchasers to the vendors or the Vendor's solicitors shall be returned to the Purchaser without interest or compensation whatsoever."
Will the SC agree to extend the QC?
Definitely
Will the SC extend the time to obtain the STB order?
Definitely
Will our SC canvas the views of the Tampines Court majority before doing so?
I don't know.
For information on the QC go to the Residential Property Act Section 31(2)
Are there any more hearing after the one on 7 Aug 2008? I thought there were originally only 3 hearings.
ReplyDeleteWhat is your assessment that the STB could rule in favour of the minority? I really wish this will be the outcome.
I will like to give my moral support to the Minority Lawyers! Three Cheers!! For doing a wonderful job so far.
Should I wish to join in the next hearing on 7/08/2008 and wish to join the hired bus to STB,how to go about it?
ReplyDeleteWhat is the standing now?Does any of the minority has given out to fight on and how far can they persue?
The hired bus is for the objectors at the STB only, sorry.
ReplyDeleteThe hearing is open to the public but as the seating is limited, those party to the hearing (the objectors)take priority and believe me, they take up all the available seats.In fact not all of them can attend at the same time as there are simply not enough seats for them all. You will not get in.
just a friendly comment - i am from minton. while i am for the sale, i am certainly not anti - minority - in fact we remain friends and neighbours. But i have seen the minority paying quite a fair bit to fight based on very weak objections. one minority owner told me that his roof is now leaking and he does not know what to do about it. This is one of the reasons i supported the sale which if it had gone through earlier would be financially fairly attractive. when there are maintenance issues in a private development, the cost can be substantial. In any case I am fully appreciative that this being our homes, every owner has a right to defend his stand. Just be mindful and rational every step of the way.
ReplyDeleteThe STB gave the go ahead for the en bloc sale of Minton Rise on Monday (23rd June). Minton Risers can't buy diddly-squat with the sale proceeds now - certainly not one of the estimated 1300 units to be built next year where 342 units used to be. The price was never good - no doubt the PA used individual unit prices instead of getting the proper estimate for selling the land (which is what the developer is interested in)with the potential GFA factored in.
ReplyDeleteJust crumbs from the bountiful table of en bloc.
Hi I am a majority, I have signed the documents in good faith, the minority is doing a very good job for the benefit of everyone.
ReplyDelete(This message was moderated by blog administrator)
Hi
ReplyDeleteI read that the
The en bloc solicitor will be holding a dialogue session this coming Saturday at the CC to ‘try and understand each parties’ concerns and views in the hope of arriving at an amicable resolution to the matter”.
Does this means they will try to persuade the minority.
Is this only for minority or for majority as well.
I think you are reading about the June 28 meeting 2007 - 1 year ago!
ReplyDeleteWe are at the STB now - the time for such things are past.
:)
Hi
ReplyDeleteI saw it in your blog archives (minortiy meeting), i am not sure when is the meeting and the date not given.
Actually, the date is written on the top of the post. 28 June 2007. The archives are also dated according to day/month/year.
ReplyDeleteNewest posts I put below the top posting and/or add updates to older posts.
It is really confusing now.
ReplyDeleteSome resident say that the buyer of TC has agreed to extent its deadline on 25/07/08,since over the weekend.
There is one tampines court's owner
express his view at enblocoutlook.blogspot.com that you mislead us over certain issue.
I am very eagered to know the latest update and the true at this
stage....
After doing the disappearing act since the last general meeting I am very much surprise to see the SC members appearing again at lift lobbies requesting SP from majority to sign a petition to bring forward the hearing date before 25th July 2008. Is it not the obligation of the SC to convene a General Meeting and inform all the SP concern for their consent.
ReplyDeleteThis minority owner would never intentionally mislead anyone about anything! The truth wins out every time and that is my firm belief.
ReplyDeleteI have answered that misguided owner's letter point by point.
"Some resident say that the buyer of TC has agreed to extent its deadline on 25/07/08,since over the weekend."
ReplyDeleteSorry, but that resident is wrong.
If the deadline(25/7/08) is not extended(S&P agreement),I don,t see any point to proceed with the next hearing(7/8/08).In such scenerio can the resident who is still keen to sell his unit go ahead with selling in the open market? or does he has to wait until STB declare officialy that the deal is off?
ReplyDeleteIf the deadline is not extended and the STB do not forward the hearing date to before the 25 July; then there will be no hearing as the S&P would have expired.
ReplyDeleteIf a hearing set before the 25 July, will the STB make it's decision so speedily? If the decision is not out by the 25th then the S&P expires and the deal is off.
Everything is still up in the air on this issue. The STB has not come back with it's decision whether or not it agrees to a forwarded date of hearing.
Believe me, when I know, you will know.
The extension of time has to be mutual, that is, both parties have to agree and seeing as one party is not agreeable at this point then there can be no extension. Hence the SC's application to get the hearing date forwarded.
As for selling your unit on the open market, please make sure that you have the all clear!! I am not the right person to ask on this issue!
Just curious to ask If the TC en bloc falls through and the interest goes to the lawyer, will it be less that or equal to the commission they will get if the en bloc is successful.
ReplyDeleteDo the Property agents get some shares of the interest?
Thanks.
The en bloc lawyer keeps the interest whether the sale goes through or not. Stakeholders keeping the interest is quite the norm (see my Aug 2007 post 'Stakeholders and interest).
ReplyDeleteI am not privy to any agreement between the lawyer and property agent on splitting the interest. Apart from the interest on the deposit, the lawyer has a set fee which each unit would have to pay.
The property agent works entirely from commission.
I will go back to the CSA and check my facts and talk about this issue after the 25th, not before.