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
Anonymous said:
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
I agree. The enboc has failed right from the start when you have a weak SC and a demanding MA who insist to call the short and dictate the RP. In the end it has just proven that TC SPs are not that naive to be easily convinced that our land is pathetic and we should sell off cheap. We still stand tall and hold on to our land inspite of all the negative sales talk.
ReplyDeleteIf the MA is adamant about the old RP or not going ahead with marketing, shouldn't they make it clear during shortlisting as their condition of appointment. That being the case, they won't be appointed in the 1st place. They are wasting SPs valuable time and opportunity.
ReplyDeleteI 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.
ReplyDeleteHutton'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.
It is indeed a very sad state of affair when a single SP offers to bear the full cost of a valuation. If SPs continue to bicker over the RP instead of engaging a valuer collectively (probably $50-$100 each) the estate is clearly not ready for en bloc. They can only blame themselves. Good luck.
DeleteLet this be a lesson to learn. Do not appoint a half past six MA just to save upfront cost. Appoint a truly professional MA from the larger estat agencies who has good track record and who will act fully in the interest of the SPs. I believe RP is not the only issue. The credibility of the MA also play a part in SPs' decision whether to sign or not.
DeleteIn recent interview. Enbloc Supremo Mr Karamjit Singh, who brokered record breaking Farrer Court and also Shunfu n Raintree mentioned Rio Casa as potential sale in 2017. TC despite it's headstart, is not mentioned.
ReplyDeleteSC/MA, your botched TC Enbloc has spread throughout Spore property circles.
Still trying to resurrect this Enbloc? Get real ! Unbelievable !
Spare us the agony. Mercy. We beg you. No More. Please
I think we can still give the SC another chance so long as they can control the new MA and do not let them dictate the enbloc process, in particular, the RP. For an enbloc to be successful, we need a no-nosense SC who have the courage and determination to control the MA. Everything has to be done legally right from the beginning and every issues that may give rise to possible objections has to be carefully considered. before approving it in the CSA. I believe many will raise objections on the apportionment of the sales proceed. In my opinion, it is ridiculous that the apportionment of sales proceed is based on size of units when every SPs are paying same maintenance fee based on equal share value. SC may think that this is not a big issue because the difference is insignificant but it is issue like this that can block the whole enbloc sales even though you can get 80% signature. I think the SC should work closely more with the lawyer instead of just listening to MA advice who obviously is more interested in having a quick sales and collect their commission.
ReplyDeleteThe 50% strata floor area and 50% share value method is most commonly used for similar developments and tried and tested in court.
DeleteYes but that doesn't mean SPs won't raise an objection. Did the larger unit pay higher maintenance fee than smaller units? It is unfair and this will be a good ground for objection and put the enbloc in jeorpody. My point is SC should look at every grievances seriously instead of just imposing on others who are unhappy about certain issues. The MA's stubborn attitude on RP is a good example. They impose on SPs on their RP and couldn't get the 80% signature. Now who has the last laugh.
DeleteYou can object to anything but that does not mean the judge will be on your side. There are many precedent cases to refer to and none of these objections were successful. I suggest you do some homework on that matter before splurging money on a lawyer.
DeleteGo ahead & impose anything you want. Unhappy SPs just won't sign and end of story. Till now almost 6 mths has past & we can't even achieve 50℅. Lol.
DeletePrevious precedent cases does not guarantee the bigger units SPs will win the case. The smaller units SPs can always can always pool their resources to fight the case. There are other mistakes the SC/MA has make that can be included to overturn the enbloc. Don't be so arrogant to think that just because you can achieve 80℅ means that you can call the shots and smaller unit SPs have to submit to you. Remember, pride comes before the fall! Either we all work together in harmony and in all fairness or let the enboc failed.
DeleteIt's not about pooling resources or big or small units. En-bloc is nothing new. There are many precedent cases to refer to and as long as the laws don't change or circumstances are vastly different this is what judges will look at. By now, there is anything left that has not been tested in court. There are lots of judgments linked in this blog. Just read up...
DeleteLike I wrote previously, this round of enbloc was dead, "they just haven't made it official"..
ReplyDeleteNow it is official.
Absolutely Agree.
DeleteThis SC was left in the lurch by MA. Unprecedented in Enbloc history. They are now hopelessly lost.
It's Chairman's call to officially end it, not yours or mine.
Sir, please disband your committee.
Followed with a nice letter to all residents thanking them for their tolerance and indulgence. Apologise on behalf of SC/MA members for any broken dreams, false hopes and missed opportunities will do nicely.
All will be forgiven.
Thank You
This SC has sullied TC, our homes good name just to convince SPs to accept distress price for an assured sale to Developers. It's not beyond them to spread false rumours, if it serves their purpose. They boast of transparency and openess and yet witheld vital information from us. Even the veracity and completeness of CSC mtg minutes is in doubt.
ReplyDeleteNo effort is put in to familiarise with LTSA Laws, crucial to Enbloc success. Indeed they run roughshod over it jeopardising the sale.
SC lacks discipline, expertise and enthusiasm to be given a second chance. Irony is, if you display knowledge and dedication they will dismiss you, even though it may be unlawful.
They do not have residents interest at heart. SC thinks we're gullible, stupid and desperate.
Giving them a second shot will confirm that we are!
Actually whether the SC should be given 2nd chance or not, it's all up to the remaining 35℅. All depends on the revised RP and the reputation of the new MA. We'll have to wait and see.
ReplyDeleteI respectfully disagree.
DeleteEverything hinges on this SC. They set the tone and direction. By right, that's the way it should be.
Past performance was despicable.
Presently, they're lethargic.
Future prospects, dreary.
Past RP, Pathetic.
Current RP just so-so. Still grossly lower than Rio Casa, an inferior HUDC location in Hougang.
TC surpasses Rio in convenience (round market, neighbourhood centre). Taps into all the benefits of a Regional Centre: transport links, connectivity, Malls, Education and Business Hub, Hospitals, International Airport and spanking new Tampines Hub first of it's kind in Singapore. A great place to live or invest.
With SC track record, future sell price will be lower. They're 'NO POWER NEGOTIATORS'.
Top notch Agencies will not waste their time and risk their reputation by association with seriously flawed endeavor.
Only risque agencies willingly apply. They take their cue from SC in discharging their duties.
It's our SC that matters. They're in control. Do you trust them? Well Tampines Courters you chose them. Can we sack them?
Is Eldan Law still onboard?
ReplyDeleteHave they complete drafting the "addendum to CSA revised RP"?
Will they still send a Rep to witness signing sessions?
Eldan is mindful that they will not be paid if it all falls through.
Lawyers continued commitment, or lack thereof, would be telling.
SC Enbloc FB is in hibernation. Not encouraging.
Do something! Fill us in, Mr Chairman, Mr Secretary. Pronto.
It's been more than a month since CSA revision submitted for update. Mr Secretary, what's the status of Enbloc? We SPs of TC are entitled to a completely honest, factually correct and unblemished situation report. Even if there's no progress, we need to be kept posted. Thank you
DeleteGood riddance I say. From the outset this en-bloc was doomed. A Huttons agent on the sales committee? A sales committee, the majority of whom didn't have a clue on the law pertaining to en-bloc? No transparency from the SC? The deleting of comments from the facebook account? Riding roughshod over those who dared to question or disagree with them? Omissions from the minutes? Being led by the nose by the MA instead of strong leadership from withing the SC (Of which there was none)? A SC that seemed to want to sell off our homes at any price because it suited them?
ReplyDeleteTrust me, the SC should put this whole thing to bed now because even if it gets to the point of a sale they will have a lot of questions to answer in court over certain things that happened...
We have been witness to a shoddy, amateurish attempt by desperate people to sell their holdings. Unfortunately for them it didn't work out.
Kudos to Mr Vasan, the only one who truly had the interests of his neighbours at heart, how he put up with his fellow SC members for so long is beyond me an is testament to his character. A SC made up of Mr Vasan's would be a beautiful thing to behold!
This Collective Sale is finished.
ReplyDeleteSC, you may quit now, drag it on till it naturally expires or if you achieve sale status, then the Courts will decide.
You show no compunction in underselling our homes, disrupting our lives in the interest of Developers, when you should be safeguarding our interests. We will reciprocate in kind and defend our homes and way of life in the courts.
How this endgame will pan out is in your hands, SC.
There may be still hope if the SC team steps down & appoint Mr Vasan as chairman & with the help of the knowledgeable SPs here. Else might as well call it a day. As for hutton, please do the enbloc market a favour by not going for another one. You are a liability rather than an asset to the market.
DeleteLike all HUDC's TC has excellent Enbloc potential. It buggers me that this SC/MA manages to put a negative spin on our land and it's residents.
DeleteA large plot opens up possibilities of subdivision, ease of planning and bigger profits for Developers. Oh no no.. it's too big to swallow.
Silver Zone is conclusive to safety of the very young and old, besides subdued traffic noise. No way Jose, it's a Developers nightmare so says Mr MA: Penalty-$45M.
Proximity to round market; sorry guys, it's moving soon. An outright Lie.
Challenge and expose their flawed reasoning and we are deemed "difficult", condemning TC to Enbloc Purgatory.
Their arguments is strangely aligned with Developers. Is this where their allegiance is?
Tampines Court is badly damaged by some of our own.
I disagree that Mr Vasan should take over. He has all the qualities to helm any Enbloc. He's Honest, Dedicated and Knowledgeable. I trust him completely, comfortable with him in charge, confident that he has our interest at heart.
Mr Vasan is the antithesis of this present lot. However this present Enbloc is beyond redemption.
There will be another attempt, Mr V has my vote.
Does Mr Vasan play poker? If not he should. MA thought they were holding all the aces but when Mr Vasan raised them a valuation they folded and ran for the hills. Their letter withdrawing from the proceedings is but a pathetic attempt to cover up the fact that they had been called out and to save face they could do nothing else but withdraw.
ReplyDeletePut simply, the MA knew their pathetic low balling game was up when he offered to do a valuation and that their ridiculously low reserve price would be revealed to everyone to be the money grabbing attempt that it was. A smart man is our Mr Vasan and I can only hope he leads the charge when / if we go for another round.
It would also be prudent for itshometome to step up as the knowledge they have displayed is second to none. With those two leading the way we can be guaranteed of a fair and transparent en bloc attempt and won't have to worry about greedy money grabbers trying to sell OUR homes at any price.
Furthermore, if any (With the exception of Mr Vasan) of the current members of the SC are involved in a subsequent round I would refuse to sign (Questions remain on certain members as to their reasons for being on the sales committee not least of which are why a Huttons agent was involved)
So Right. Our RP was about to be exposed for what it is: A Sham.
ReplyDeleteWith the recent sale of 2 HUDC and another in the pipeline for a payout ranging from 1.6X -1.89M just piles the pressure on him.
I share your concerns on SC member and MA too. They are veterans in their profession, they otta know the law, not defy it.
When our chosen Rep looked the other way, instead of doing what's right, it was a downward death spiral for this enbloc.
Question for the SC: How was the Revised RP derived?
ReplyDeleteHuttons was firm on it's original RP. Was the new RP then based on ex member Mr Vasan's recommendation? Or was it just an arbitrarily number that you all fancied.
Subsequent development made the minutes of the 15th and 16th CSC meeting a confusing read.
I am reminded of an earlier miscommunication in your notices requiring 'All registered owners to sign'
Is it tardiness, inattentiveness during meetings or just poor writing skills?
It's our homes, a big deal, a huge responsibility.
Will someone with authority, in the know please explain truthfully and clearly how the revised RP came about.
Thanks
When we have devious characters with selfish intentions purporting to serve a greater good, result is an 'Enbloc Nightmare'
ReplyDeleteSheer stupidity in trying to defend a deplorable RP with silly, irrational arguments that fail to convince even themselves. Enough of blunders, beaches of the Law and suspicious unprofessional conduct to warrant the Enbloc Police.
An embarrassing debacle you'd want to hide, not publicise. Beware when you involve more consultants. Events will take on a life of it's own, beyond your control.
It's a Humpty Dumpty of your own making.
Can't be saved.