Jun 28, 2008

I hear through the grapevine that a group of majority owners (the ones that are close to the SC) are signing a petition to move the hearing date forward. Their reason being that the buyer 'is not minded to extend' after the 25th July deadline. The SC have requested the STB for the adjourned date to be fixed at a time before the 25th and expected not only an earlier date BUT a speedy decision as well. Rushing decisions through is NOT in the best interests of the majority or the minority; it is an abuse of due process.
Justice hurried is Justice buried.
.
It is not the minority who set the dates, but rather the STB panel. They are professionals in their own right with busy schedules and fit these hearings in at their convenience, not ours. Bear in mind, it was the very late application to the STB by the SC that delayed the process to begin with by a whole 9 months!
.
Isn't it poetic justice that they are running out of time?! The majority owners signed the CSA stating "Completion of the Valid Contract of Sale shall be scheduled not earlier that 3 months and not later than 6 months from the date of the Valid Date of Contract" (4.1.5). But in the S&P, it was changed to one year from the in principle RPA date - effectively tripling the length of time to 16 months.
.
On another issue:
In case you haven't heard about the outcome of the Sale Committee's application on the 23rd June to amend the Sale and Purchase agreement over the distribution of Beta sum:-
The application to amend was withdrawn.

Jun 26, 2008

Just Articles

Goodbye en bloc sales
Sunday Times-27 April 2007
.
What if my condo's enbloc sale fails?
Sunday Times -27 April 2008
.
Mandarin Gardens management steps down over en bloc disputes
ChannelnewsAsia - 2 May 2008
.
Enbloc upraor at Bayshore Park. Mandarin Gardens
Straits Times - 5 May 2008
.
Enbloc system needs relook, as Bayshore shows
Straits Times - 5 May 2008
.
Mandarin Gardens En Bloc Sale
Straits Times - 09 May 2008
.
Regent Gardens owners file appeal despite sale completion
Straits Times - 17 May 2008
.
En Bloc woes at Toh Tuck Road
Residents complain of noise, dust, as developer builds showflatIt’s like living in a shipyard’ It’s not chirping birds that wake them now, but pounding hammers. And it has been driving some Goodluck View residents up the wall. The 20-year-old Toh Tuck Road estate has been sold en-bloc, but residents have been given a six-month grace period and need to move out only by August. Long before that, in March, developer Hiap Hoe Limited started building the show flat. A resident said he has to endure the ‘noise outside his window’, every day from 8am. ‘It’s like I’m living in a shipyard. It’s all right if they build the showflat in the middle of the road or somewhere further away, but it’s hard to live here when there’s all that noise so close to your home.’ The fence surrounding the showflat sits barely 2m from his window. From his three-bedroom apartment, he can see and hear the workers. Work on the showflat is expected to be completed by the end of July, according to a circular distributed by the estate’s management agent. Yet, the residents patience is wearing thin. Said the Singapore permanent resident: ‘My son has to prepare for an exam and he has complained that he is finding it hard to focus. He shuts his windows to block off the noise. ‘I find it difficult too because I work from home.’ His neighbor upstairs, Madam Tracy Dean, said that sometimes the noise can be a little too much for her. At such times, she leaves the apartment. Said the IT consultant: ‘I really look forward to rain because I know the workers will have to stop work. All that grinding and banging can drive you up the wall. ‘Even with the windows closed, the noise filters into my flat.’ The Resident and his family plan to move out within three weeks. Madam Dean will leave for Bangkok in August. ‘We didn’t sign up to live like this. They work without considering that there are still people living here. I’ve had enough.’ And it’s not just the noise. Residents claim dust and mosquitos have also been invading their homes  He said he complained to the estate management when construction workers used the swimming pool toilet, leaving trails of mud. He claimed that by starting work on the showflat, the developer was breaking the en-bloc agreement. His landlord, Mr John Tilley, also said the developers should not be working there before August. ‘We (tenants and owners) are expected to leave by 21 Aug. But it’s extremely unreasonable for my tenant to live in such conditions,’ Mr Tilley said. ‘The six months grace period is meant for those still living here to find alternative accommodation.’
INCONVENIENCE EXPECTED But a spokesman for Hiap Hoe said the company had not broken any rules. There are no ‘hard and fast rules’ on building a showflat during the six-month free stay period, she said. She added: ‘Some inconvenience is expected. But so long as we abide by the construction rules and try to minimise the inconveniences, the issue is unavoidable. ‘Building showflats during the free stay period is a very common practice in en-bloc developments. There is no clause that says we start work (on the showflat) only after all the occupants have left.’ The spokesman said they had received some feedback expressing unhappiness over the construction work. She said no piling work was done, except for the erection of metal beams for the showflat. The sale of the new development is scheduled for the third quarter of 2008.
New Paper - 17 May 2008
.
Proxy votes in Mandarin Gardens
Straits Times - 19 May 2008
.
En Bloc sales bring out the worst in Singaporeans
Straits Times - 01 June 2008
.
Developers turn landlords as property market stays quiet
Straits Times - 04 June 2008
.
Prices of some new properties coming down
Straits Times - 12 June 2008
.
HDB upgraders hold key to property market turnaround
Business Times - 12 June 2008
.
En Bloc blues? There's hope , says support group
Straits Times - 12 June 2008

Jun 25, 2008

Gillman Heoghts High Court Decision

..
Honorable Choo Han Teck J
.
on TOP/CSC:.
"15. The relevant parliamentary debates show that parliament had intended to peg the requisite majority consent needed for the collective sale (80% or 90%) with the age of the estate/development"


.
"17. The words "TOP" or "CSC" were not mentioned at all during the second and third reading of the 1998 Bill by the Minister or any Member of Parliament. I am of the opinion that the references to TOP or CSC in s 84A(!) by the draftsman were merely used as a method of calculating the age of the development."
.
"18. ...I am of the opinion that the parliamentary intention in respect of s 84A(1) of the LTSA was to allow en bloc sales with 80% majority consent for strata development that are more than 10 years old. It cannot be said that parliament had intended to exclude privatised HUDC estates from collective sale by making references to TOP and CSC in s 84A(1)."
.
"20. If a literal construction was adopted in the present case, the intention of Parliament to allow en-bloc sale of strata developments that are more than 10 years old if they have the requisite majority of 80% would thus be frustrated. The undesirable consequence of the literal interpretation in the present case may have the result that a privatised HUDC estate more than 20 years old cannot participate in a collective sale. I do not think parliament intended this effect because one of the reasons for privatising an HUDC estate is to let it enjoy the benefits of a private estate, including a collective sale."
.
"24. Furthermore, it appears that the CSC and TOP would not avail the appellants even if a strict literal reading of the relevant 84A(1) was adopted.
.....The appellants did not tender a recent strata title plan that reflected the clubhouse.... as a "building comprised n the strata plan". .....the building and the swimming pool, being common property of the Development, would not, in any event be reflected in the strata title plan. "
.
On purposive approach:
.
19: It is important to point out here that s 9A of the Interpretation Act requires that a construction promoting legislative purpose be preferred over one that does not promote purpose or object.....
......I agree, generally, with what was said in [case law here], warning, however, that the phrase "purposive interpretation" should not be used without the court keeping an eye on what purposes are involved and whose purposes are being served. "Purposive interpretation" is not a phrase to be used as a password like "open sesame". For the statute in question, for example, making sure that the safeguards in favour of minority subsidiary proprietors are properly observed is just as purposive as giving the majority owners a right to sell en-bloc."
The specific question in issue, however, was not one concerning specific protection for the minority. It concerned whether a privatised HUDC estate can participate in the benefits of an en-bloc sale if the requisite conditions are met. In this regard, I think that the court should incline towards the affirmative answer than a negative one."
.
The remaining points do not form part of TC's objections.
Time period for en-bloc: 12 months (for 80%) + 12 months (STB application) = 24 months. Time periods may overlap. (my reading).
.
Straits Times-26 July 2008

Financial Benefits of en-bloc for TC

What did $19,666.00 in privatization costs bring to the residents of TC? How do some owners 'enjoy the benefits of a collective sale'?

2002 high-end public housing (HUDC)
2003 privatisation at $19,666 (strata title)
2004 a fence, 2 guardhouses and sleeping security guards
2005 en-bloc rumblings
2006 signature collection
2007 en bloc sale
2008 en bloc fight
2009 low to mid-tier public housing, substantial bank interest loss, substantial CPF loss, no cash for next home.

All this has a filter down, disruptive effect on:
retirement plans
investment plans
childrens’ education plans

$576,257 is owed to the MCST for privatization balance. But some of these owners who did not pay up on time like the rest of us, need not worry – they will have their debts paid by the diligent folk whose agreement was never sought. Not only that, if they have also chalked up huge interest penalties, that too will be paid on their behalf. So, on hindsight, it would have been better NOT to pay privatization costs promptly.
.
Private Apartment –--> en bloc –--> public housing
Don’t pay you bills –--> more money from en bloc

Welcome to the topsy-turvy world of en-bloc, Tampines Court style.

Jun 11, 2008

Another call for 1-for 1 exchange


Property index and saga of the three-hump camel
Straits Times - 12 Sep 2009


SINGAPORE’S Private Property Market Index looks like a mutant three-hump camel, registering a 45 per cent bust from the second quarter of 1996, a 40 per cent boom from the fourth quarter of 1998, a 20 per cent bust from the second quarter of 2000 and a 58 per cent rise from the first quarter of 2004, with the latest figures in the second quarter of this year dropping back to below the second hump.
Yet National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan said on Sept 2 that ‘as far as (private home) prices are concerned, we want to make sure… there is no excessive speculation’.
With a three-hump camel of boom-busts in 13 years, at what point is speculation deemed ‘excessive’? When a slew of sub-sale advertisements appear on soft launch and when kettles are owned for more than five years, yet property ownership of less than five years may not be ‘property trading’, it makes a mockery of tax laws.
Currently in land-scarce Singapore, we have 4.84 million residents (6,814 people per sq km), with a 6.5 million target population in 40 years. As Central Provident Fund savings are largely locked in home ownership, residential real estate goes beyond Mr Market’s wheeling and dealing. To draw a parallel, it is equivalent to rice harvests in Vietnam as an agro-economy – except we are in perpetual drought.
Mr Mah urges Three Thinks – ‘think carefully, think long term, think about the unexpected’ – before we buy property.
I did Three Thinks before buying a condominium unit. Now I cannot do even One Thing when my neighbours sell the roof over my head.
Property is all about location and timing. Retirement wealth is at stake. Can Mr Mah follow South Korean laws and do One Thing for Singaporeans: ‘Sell one, return one’ instead of ‘Double the price or half the size’ in collective property sales?
Tan Meng Lee (Ms)

Jun 4, 2008

Developers turn landlords

"PROPERTY developers such as Koh Brothers and GuocoLand, which bought collective sale sites during boom times, are now becoming landlords as they wait out the market slowdown.
They are leasing out apartments they bought to existing occupants as a way to generate some income instead of simply leaving them vacant.
.
If developers were to launch their projects now, it may be challenging for them to reach their target price for some of the projects.’
.
Frasers Centrepoint said it may offer short-term leases to the former owners of the 185-unit Flamingo Valley, a freehold site in Siglap Road that it bought for $194 million in February last year.
‘We had 50 owners who wrote to ask us to extend their lease…They haven’t found anything suitable,’ said the firm’s general manager of development and property, Mr Cheang Kok Kheong.
He said the firm was likely to extend a lease of six months to a year. This would ‘give us more time to think about our plans’."
.
If developers were to launch their projects now, it may be challenging for them to reach their target price for some of the projects.’ - MR MAK of Knight Frank, on companies holding out for better prices

Straits Times - 04 June 2008