They went for a public tender on the strength of the 80% and received no bids.
They then churned out a second Supplemental agreement to lower the reserve price to RP2 and garnered only 35% support. Not happy with this they went for a third Supplemental agreement with a higher RP3 (but lower than the initial RPº). This final RP3 only garnered 55% signatures.
They went for a Public Tender again ... on the strength of the first 80% (RP1) ... and received no bids.
I think they went for a second Public Tender .... and again received no bids.
One more fact: the valuation at close of tender was substantially lower than even the lowest RP2. When the marketing agent is the one calling the shots with regard to recommending/selecting an 'independent' Valuer - then this will always be the case.
After the failed public tender, a Developer came in with a private bid which equaled the RP3. This offer came with do-or-die conditions attached. The SC held an EOGM to discuss this offer and used the RP3 55% as a stepping stone and managed to persuade a further 25% to sign.
So the SPA was signed and an application made to the STB just days within the 1 year time period. (Though I would argue that the RP2 is a new contract and starts a new 1 yr from date of ... see post here).
Anyway the extra time was not needed as the application was in time from date of first signature of RPº.
This is very worrying.
1) A higher RP is used to bait SPs into signing and this is used to make multiple attempts at a public tender, even after lower supplemental agreements have been entered into.
2) The Developer is obviously privy to the RP as he made an offer equal to the second lowest RP3.
3) No public tender was held to determine if this was the best price for the estate - the tender was for the higher RP1, and so who knows, there could have been other bids if the tender price was set lower.
In other words, the market was tested at that level, and the SC failed to ascertain if this was the BEST price achievable.
Ultimately it boils down to owners agreeing on a selling price. It does not matter what the RP was initially as any downward change will need a fresh 80% again. Willing seller, willing buyer. Nothing wrong as long as this happens within one year from first signature.
ReplyDeleteAlso, 2 public tenders were called, no official bids were received but obviously interested developers would have indicated the price they are prepared to offer. How is that not testing the market?
Just curious to know what is valuation done before tender ? They always say this is a safe guard to SPs.
ReplyDeleteOffers and negotiations are highly confidential, behind closed doors by select few in SC, MA and Legal rep.
ReplyDeleteThey may choose not to reveal everything.
In past contested EnBloc, during Discovery (compulsory disclosure of documents) 'sweetheart deals' and instances of more favorable deals rejected due 'terms and conditions' or other silly excuses were exposed.
My point: SPs may be making decisions without knowledge of all pertinent facts.
Skullduggery, Chicanery and Conspiracy seems to be the order of the day for EnBloc Singapore.
It is imperative that MA/SC are people with integrity, savvy, forthright and dedicated to the cause and fellow neighbours. It's not just EnBloc at ANY price.
I have my reservations.
This SC kept from SPs the Professional relationship of former Secretary and MA.They were duly alerted, knew the Law and choose to ignore it.
This MA opted for and stubbornly defended his low RP, and since then had to contradict himself with so many flip flops and U Turns. It reflects poorly on his competence, dedication and commitment to T Courters.
By not signing I hope to deny them 80%.
Those tempted by the new RP to sign, I suggest you protect yourself with an ironclad agreement that keeps this team in the straight and narrow, and preserve your enhanced RP.
Food for Thought: in this example, the final selling price was even lower than the original RP.
Think about That!
Private treaties sales is good if the MA has very good connection with overseas developers & investors with deep pocket & the MA has the technical & marketing expertise to sell our land at high price. I am doubtful our MA has such quality & connection, that's why they are trying very hard to convince the SPs to sell cheap, hoping someone will bid for it. That's the reason they set the RP so low.They don't deserve the high commission we are paying them because that's the best they can do.
ReplyDelete