I have just read the Minutes of the 13th Meeting of the Sale Committee.
I am dumbfounded by the MA's feeble excuse for lowering the RP by multi-millions to it's present farcical figure.
Here it is:
"the construction cost of a new development would increase due to the 'Silver Zone' which would hamper movement of heavy vehicles resulting in having to use alternative construction methods"
What utter rubbish! What 'alternative' methods are they dreaming of? Dropping in heavy machinery by helicopter? Having a human chain passing building materials mano-to-mano along Street 11??
Look at the present construction of the multi-storey carpark near the round market to see how they dealt with cranes, building materials etc. No problem as far as I could see - those drivers of impossibly long haulage trucks were expert at backing into that tiny road without even dismantling the carpark IU barrier at the centre. I watched them do it one day and was awestruck. A perfect execution that took less than 2 minutes.
Tampines Court isn't even on a tiny side-road like that car-park. When they knock down TC they will have a HUGE EMPTY SPACE where they can leave a HUGE entrance so trucks can just turn off slowly. There will be no impeding structures, no IU barriers, nothing but open land.
If that is not enough, then they can do what the new Storage Hub building did just off the PIE ... have a temporary back entrance to the site.
 |
| POSSIBLE ENTRANCES TO TC BUILDING SITE |
Its disingenuous to incur millions due to problematic vehicular access during construction. Which engineering firm was consulted? If not who proposed the figure, was he qualified to do so? What exactly are 'Alternative Construction Methods'? List the solutions proposed and the cost breakdown? Was the SC at all sceptical and probed further or trusted the MA completely.
ReplyDeleteIts a huge discount to the RP. I'll we need facts n figures for verification
Independent Valuation has been touted as a safeguard against underselling. I take issue with the word 'Independent'. A Valuer, engaged by the SC will play nice with his paymaster n harmonise his valuation with the sell price to sanction the sale.
ReplyDeleteIn Enbloc 1 the sellers valuation matched closely with the sale price ( $2m or 0.5% ) However, the Minority Valuers figure differed by, correct me if I'm wrong, almost $100M. Two qualified Professional assessing the same site,arrived at absurdly different figures!
The SC is still clueless about Enbloc. To suggest to all SP's that their homes are protected by this Government ruling is misleading, untrue and costly.
The Many in Enbloc 1, were saved by the sceptical few who applied their knowledge and common sense and asked probing questions when things don't seem right.
Enbloc 1 Failed due BAD FAITH
Honesty and Integrity definitely helps.
1 of 2 posts, apparently it's too long!
ReplyDeleteFrom a one time fence sitter (Until today that is)
So Hutton's have come out with an official response to the Vice Chairman's letter, all well and good and they seem to rebut his concerns with clear and concise points.
Except, there is a glaring omission, and a rather large one at that.
Nowhere in the rebuttal does Mr Lian mention the reason he gave to the Sales Committee for the reduction of the reserve price, as recorded in the 'Minutes Of Sales Committee 13th Meeting' dated 28th July 2016, some 12 days ago, and I quote..
"Mr Terence explained that the revised RP was done after a site recce which concluded that the construction cost of a new development at the current Tampines Court site would increase due to the “Silver Zone” roads which would hamper movement of heavy vehicles, resulting in having to use alternative construction methods. This increase in construction cost would be taken into consideration by prospective developers."
Before I go on I would like to point out that prior to the rebuttal of 10th August 2016 this seems to be the only reason given for the decrease in the reserve price, according to the 'Minutes Of Sales Committee 13th Meeting' dated 28th July 2016.
Now, many may think this is a valid and reasonable argument, and at face value it looks good on paper, except it's neither valid nor reasonable for the following reasons:
1. HDB have managed to build a new multi story HDB car park next door with a minimum of fuss or inconvenience with all the heavy machinery that this involves whilst the silver zone has been in operation.
2. Prior to this the HDB built a multi story block of flats beside said car park, yes, this was before the silver zone came into operation and I recall about as much fuss and inconvenience as when the car park was built, ie. very little.
So, unless Silver Zones have strict rules governing what kind of traffic can use roads in the Silver Zone then I don’t see how this could be an issue, in fact it is probably to the advantage of the construction crews as there is a strict speed limit in place in these Silver Zones, thus giving heavy machinery better and safer opportunities to enter and exit the work site in traffic that is not speeding by.
3. Last one, I promise…
Once a small portion of the site is cleared this will be used as a staging area for all heavy machinery that needs to have access to the site, heavy machinery will simply not be allowed to remain along Tampines Street 11 and so will cause a minimum of fuss and inconvenience. In fact there are other locations that could be used to access the site, not just from Tampines Street 11
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteSorry, I will reinstate this comment once the sensitive figures are edited out.
DeleteHere it is, though without the actual figures, it's hard to understand. Hope my X's and Y's don't confuse even more.
Delete2 of 2 posts (First one is above)
The rebuttal from Huttons now outlines myriad factors as to why the reserve price was lowered (projected gross sales proceeds minus development cost, lease upgrade premium, demolition, construction cost etc etc)
This is a far cry from the initial reason given, ie. the Silver Zone
So why didn’t Hutton’s outline these factors initially instead of using the Silver Zone as the excuse?
You would have to ask them.
What I can say is that it doesn’t instil confidence and smacks of being disingenuous, this kind of flip flopping doesn’t gain my trust, in fact it alienates me entirely from the whole process as I no longer have faith in them to get the best price for me and my neighbours.
It seems to me that real estate agents are all about one thing and one thing only and you would do well to keep it uppermost in your mind, how much can THEY make out of it, and they don’t particularly care who they trample on to obtain it.
Anyway, let’s have a look at the cold hard facts, the numbers don’t lie...
Reserve Price #1: XXX,000,000
Amount Per Unit: 1,xxx,000
1% Agent Fee:
Balance:
Reserve Price #2: YYY,200,000
Amount Per Unit: 1,yyy,000
1% Agent Fee:
Balance:
Difference in what SP's will receive at the lower reserve price: $79,200, quite a substantial amount I think you would agree.
Now, onto the the real crux of the numbers game, Hutton's Fees:
Reserve Price #1: XXX,000,000
1% Agent Fee:
Reserve Price #2: YYY,200,000
1% Agent Fee:
Difference in what Hutton's will take home at the lower reserve price: 448,000, again, a substantial amount until you consider the difference between X.XX million and Y.YY million isn’t really that big of a deal whereas x.xx million and y.yy million certainly is…
"X@X@ X@X !!"
ReplyDelete(expletive edited by itshometome)
It's incredulous that 'Alternative Construction Methods' would incur $ 45M. Each SP stand to loose Eighty Thousand Dollars. I will raise this during Huttons dialogue. Please make available all Engineering Reports, documentation to validate this.
ReplyDeleteThanks
Before I buy a house, I could engage a 'House Inspector' for a report on the condition of the property. In his report he will list all outstanding defects: eg spalling ceiling, termite infestation, Structural flaws, illegal alterations, plumbing issues and put a price for fixing the problem. I will highlight this to seller and hopefully get a lower price.
ReplyDeleteThe report is certified by a professional house inspector and has value, weather the seller likes it or not.
To reduce by 45M and attribute it to 'Alternative Construction Methods' without any professional certification, documentation is unacceptable. Show us the Engineering reports.