Back in the saddle

Well, here's a turn-up for the books - the marketing agent has decided to continue it's involvement with the collective sale of Tampines Court after all.

The Chairman of the SC sent a begging letter to Huttons and after 'discussion with the various stakeholders on their continued involvement' they replied in the positive. Who might those stakeholders be, I wonder? Are they merely referring to themselves or someone else?

Perhaps, after thinking about it long and hard, they realised it might not be good for their enbloc credentials to be known as quitters in the field, liable to give up half way through. Who would want to hire such a firm? No, better to slug it out half-heartedly to the end.

Anyway, the pain continues. The news will bring cheer to some and a groan of despair to others.

Curtains call

Since we have had no news since 30th Nov concerning the plight of the collective sale attempt, I am assuming it is curtains for enbloc round 3.

How does it end legally, you may ask. Well, according to the LTSA Third Schedule :

Resignation of Marketing Agent

So, it has finally happened. The MA has handed in it's notice. I had an inkling this would happen at the last SC meeting - they were not happy campers at the prospect of a higher RP and were palpably despondent.

So, what is going to happen next? The sale committee should just disband and let the clock reset for another try in 2 years. To continue is madness but they seem to think they can attract another MA to take over at the higher RP. A sheer waste of time an energy - and MCST money. 

What about the lawyers? Didn't they come bundled with Huttons? Will they also resign?

My advice to the SC:

Guys, just bow out with a respectful letter to the 46% of owners, thanking them for their support.

Anonymous said:

I was surprised to discover in MA's resignation letter that Mr Vasan had offered to pay for a valuation report, and Hutton's endorsement of this proposal. This pertinent info was omitted in the minutes.
Hutton's proposal for SC to convene a General Meeting was also not reported.
Has Secretary faithfully reported all that's transpired in CSC Meetings? Has this SC been totally transparent with us?
If this SC wants to continue with this Enbloc please address this issue, Mr Secretary.
Without trust, you will not get the necessary mandate from remaining SPs.


From FB