After thinking about this long and hard and talking it over with a very learned friend I have come to the conclusion that Mr. Vasan is right and the Lawyer is wrong. The RP cannot possibly be lowered in the way outlined - namely everyone is pegged to their original RP and the RP can be raised or lowered like a yo-yo.

The 80% is crucial, it is pivotal, it is the tipping point at which all things change. The second 12 months is triggered by the 80%, the estate can be sold at 80%, the minority lose their homes to the 80% . It cannot be treated like any other percentage.
Once the 80% is reached then it is comprised of all majority owners at a single RP. If the RP is lowered then the 80% DISAPPEARS IN TOTAL because no one can be deemed to be below. A fresh round of signature collection must begin. You can have a supplemental agreement to lower the RP but it must be signed by a fresh 80% .
This would not be considered a 'frivolous objection', I believe, and if the Lawyer's mechanism for lowering the RP is attempted, it would have to be tested in a court of Law.
(The Lawyer was wrong when he advised the SC at the 19th SC Meeting held on 1 June 2017 to hold an EOGM and had to correct his mistake afterward - so is he really, really sure of his wobbly mechanism here?)
(The Lawyer was wrong when he advised the SC at the 19th SC Meeting held on 1 June 2017 to hold an EOGM and had to correct his mistake afterward - so is he really, really sure of his wobbly mechanism here?)
No comments:
Post a Comment