What I found out today.

This is the part I hate: I wandered down to the signing session to ask a few questions of the MA, SC and Lawyer. (They were in the void deck, just outside the conference room. They preferred that to the Activity room))



The Lawyer

A young chap who was very forthright in telling me he is not familiar with Enbloc Law and so could not answer any of my questions. His only purpose, he said, was to sit there and witness the CSA signing.  Indeed, the First Schedule only states that the CSA should be signed in the presence of an advocate and solicitor who has a valid practising certificate. You would have to go back to hansard records to understand the secondary purpose of a lawyer's presence: 'The property which is to be the subject of a CSA may often be a very significant asset for the owner. It is important that the owners understand the CSA and it is important to avoid any arguments as to what was or was not said to them. ' (LTSA Amendments Bill Second reading).

The owners should be able to ask questions and have them answered by a knowledgable lawyer.
It is a shame that our so-called legal firm isn't able to produce one.

The Marketing Agent
A gist of some of the questions and answers

Q: Is the new RP considered a Supplemental Agreement?
A: No. Clause 1.2 of the CSA states that the RP can be increased
Q: Does the new RP start a fresh 12 months signing?
A: No.
Q: When is the end date for reaching the 80%?
A:  25 June 2017
Q: When is a Supplemental needed?
A: If the RP is lowered 
Q: You sent in a resignation letter, yes?
A: It wasn't a resignation letter per say- we were thinking of withdrawing, 
Q: Why did you change you mind?

A: Over the months, we fostered a relationships with SC and SPs.. some called us to reconsider. we felt that the spirit is not healthy in Tampines Court, but after the 2 months when everything stalled people did call to say they would sign so we thought, why not? See how it goes. Let it go naturally.

Q: Is it a LTSA requirement that a proper record of meetings be kept and minutes posted on the board within 7 days.

A; Yes, and kept up for 14 days. 

Q: Can a MA who has sent in an official resignation be reinstated without holding EOGM?

A:  This part is very, very tricky. anyone can send in a resignation... but is it accepted. We will answer that if the time comes 

So, it is good news that the new RP does not constitute a Supplemental Agreement and so the end of this enbloc is unchanged. That is a relief.

However, I disagree with his insistence that the email sent was not a resignation letter per say. 

Firstly, the SC certainly thought it was so - they labelled it 'Withdrawal of the Collective Sale Exercise for TC'. and secondly, the final paragraph read 'we regret very much the necessity to withdraw all our involvement in this collective sale exercise because our Management is of the view that the additional time, effort and resources will be spent for naught. Thank you, Yours faithfully etc'

If that doesn't sound like a resignation, I don't know what does. 

The Chairman of SC and pal GW

Well, this is where the frustration started. I questioned them on the lack of Minutes for the Nov 24th meeting. They denied that there was any necessity for meetings as nothing was important enough to warrant them and they only held  'discussions' to plot their course of action. They felt it bothersome to write Minutes for everything. I asked incredulously if they thought the resignation of the MA unimportant, and the course of action the SC wished to take also unimportant and so did not warrant a SC meeting or a record of what they discussed?! 

Round and round in circles we went.

They kept insisting that informal discussions were enough and no Minutes were needed. They clearly did not get why total transparency is necessary in the sale of 560 homes. They were confused between the words 'discussion' and 'meeting', the former being more like chit-chat in their minds. So, the MA resigned, lets have a chit-chat!  Let me clear it up for them: Meetings are held to discuss matters. Meetings are recorded so that the owners of the 560 units can see 1) who attended, 2) what was discussed (or chit-chatted) 3) what decisions were made and 4) how they were made, whether unanimous or split. The way it looks now, it seems the Chairman & pal just winged it on their own - perhaps keeping the other SC members 'in the loop' with BCC emails. Is there no one on the SC who can reign in this rogue Chairman?

They talked about putting posters up in the estate - so I asked them what they had promised to the MA for them to come back. They said 'nothing', but we have not seen that begging letter nor are we likely to hear about any unimportant chit-chat surrounding it.

The Letter of Resignation throws up some possibilities: The MA was peeved that the SC did not hold an EOGM  to propose the following:

1. To present & explain the derivation of their RP
2. To endorse on Mr Vasan's request for a valuation report at his own cost as stated therein in his response dated 24th Oct 2016
3. To allow display of notices at prominent locations in TC
4. To allow the use of Conference Room for CSA signing and
5. To obtain an updated strata roll / mailing addresses

Item 1: They have not shown their RLV to date, save for flashing it on screen. A useless exercise
Item 2: What offer? We never heard about this because the SC are selective in what they record and what they tell owners.  Indeed, had owners known about Mr. Vasan's selfless offer, many would have stepped in to lighten the load financially. We could have had a Valuation done, but the SC blocked this... imagine that, a SC who do not want to know the true value of the land.
Item 3: Neither the SC nor any other committee/SP can hang signage/posters up in the estate, it is against Bye-Law 2.5. The have to stick to the Notice Boards. Old Notices should be taken down to make way for new.
Item 4: Well, well, well ... they tried.
Item 5: No problem. Any SP can get a copy of the Strata Roll if they pay the price. It is not free even to the SC.