Venue: Blk 130 void deck, slide presentationPresent: Layer, MA & CSC
Crowd: Large I estimated over 300
Atmosphere: Nasty
Heckling: Maximum, directed at blogger only
This post is going to be really long so, I'll add & edit bits as I go along.
The talk started with a quick greeting from the Chairman who then handed the microphone over to the vice-Chairman. GW talked about how the SC was formed and the difficulties they faced. He mentioned the resignation of the MA due to their 'disappointment' and how the SC managed to get them back. The audience gave them a round of applause. He also thanked the SC for their hard work. The SC congratulating themselves. Round of applause.
Microphone handed over to the MA who proceeded to not explain why they resigned - mentioning only that they never ever wanted to resign. Glossing over that he went on to talk about the choice of venue - showing my blog picture - and thanked me for pointing out the obvious. After that it was an update on the consent level - still 81.79% as of 30 June 2017. That is 458 units out of 560 (620 owners)
I have no idea why he went on to give the reasons why the majority signed as he's preaching to the already-signed & converted
- They can get a premium sales price over individual sales price
- Leasehold property's capital value declines over the years
- They do not want to leave their children a depreciating asset.
- Financial independence
- Maximisation of land usage
He pointed out the recent case in Geylang where HDB houses whose leasehold properties were returned to the State as the 60 yr lease had ran out. There was no compensation.
If this was meant as a scare tactic, then it is disingenuous. All leasehold properties return to the State - that is the nature of all leasehold. TC need not worry until 2086, by which time I am guessing we will all be safely in our graves. Even graves are leasehold in Singapore and you get shifted out of your comfy earthen home after 15 years. So, really, there's no permanent leasehold home for the living or the dead.
He talked about how it is good time to sell as the Government will release 6 GLS sites in 2nd half of the year. He compared GLS to Enbloc and the usual clean site vs complex enbloc situation.. blah blah. He then tried to convince minority owners to sign - again pointing to the lease running out as if it were next month.
Percentage of signatories is important to the Buyer - completing negating an earlier point that TC had an impressive number of signatures compared to recent ex-HUDC estates. Mr. MA - you can't have it both ways - you can't say we have more signatures than other estates yet too few for the developers.
I was perfectly happy going down this well-trodden path of pro-enbloc viewpoints, after all, there is nothing new to say, really. But then he made a fatal mistake.
It made my blood boil and my resolution to sit tight and keep my mouth shut flew out the window.
MA: "Tampines Court 2007. You think that the Minority won the case, I say they did not, ok. In 2007, what happened - The 'Buyers' did not want to extend the deadline for completion, right? The STB did not want to bring forward the hearing date, that's why they were forced to. They have not gone through the litigation process. So, I don't think the Minority won the case"
I had to jump up an say "That is a (not for publication)!"
MA: "It's in the paper"
ME: "The sale was dismissed on two counts of bad faith
MA: "Not bad faith, they had not gone through the STB process"
ME: "We went through the whole STB process, we didn't go on to High Court because the developer quit. Please, keep to the truth
(a lot of heckling here)
MA: I shouldn't have gone on to this case. Anyway, it's in the paper, right?
ME: The paper is wrong
MA: Never mind. we'll just move on.
Near the end of the meeting I asked the lawyer to publicly refute the MA's version of events. He politely asked the MA to retract his statement and he did so, kind of.
If the MA and/or Lawyer is reading this they can read the tape transcripts here (names redacted). No litigation process? Really? 2 Senior Counsels (and another one sitting in the audience) and our own soon-to be-Senior Counsel slugging it out in a court before 5 STB panel members, calling witnesses and grilling them for hours and the STB giving a definitive decision before the expiry of the S&P and Qualifying Certificate? Fact: the Application was made 7 Jan 2008 and sale dismissed 25 July. Months of litigation . The Buyer did not agree to extend because his lawyer was in the room the whole time and saw it was a lost cause. End of.
Before you comment on why I am bringing up old issues - it was the MA who unwisely brought it up and had to be slapped down with the truth.
Next up, some owners want $2million, is that possible. MA says yes - giving Rio Casa as an example. Who knows basically. Our RP of $1.X is guaranteed. below that is no go,
TENDER LAUNCH DATE: 04 Aug 2017
TENDER CLOSING DATE: 15 Aug 2017, at 3pm
TENDER PERIOD: 6 weeks
CSC will inform bidder of decision no later than 15 Oct 2017
Bidders pay 10% deposit
There was a media release today in the Straits Times.
There will be another media release on Tues in the Business Times & some other paper.
to be cont
TENDER LAUNCH DATE: 04 Aug 2017
TENDER CLOSING DATE: 15 Aug 2017, at 3pm
TENDER PERIOD: 6 weeks
CSC will inform bidder of decision no later than 15 Oct 2017
Bidders pay 10% deposit
There was a media release today in the Straits Times.
There will be another media release on Tues in the Business Times & some other paper.
to be cont
Your tender launch date should be 4th July 2017 - tuesday. Not 4th August 2017.
ReplyDeleteThe meeting was on void deck Blk 131 not Blk 130 too.
ReplyDeleteIs the 10 weeks' private treaty period compulsory to have even if there are bids during tender period?
ReplyDeleteSO THE DATES AS FAR AS I CAN DETERMINE:
ReplyDelete01 Jun 2017 - 80% The CSC has 12 months to Apply for Sale to the STB from this date
04 Jul 2017 - TENDER
( Hi for this part I think it should be '04 August 2017 - Tender' )
Thanks for the typo corrections. Comment 4: the tender open this Tuesday 4th Jul and runs for 6 weeks. Comment 3: you should pose this question to the MA in an email.
ReplyDeleteMy opinion: The 10 weeks gives the CSC a timeframe to work within. It does not have to take 10 weeks, and they can always buy themselves more time by holding a second tender and a second 10 week window. They have 12 months from 01 Jun to get a square peg into a round hole, as it were.
It just goes to show how unprepared the MA and Edan are
ReplyDeleteNot really. The blog owner is asking too many obvious questions, many of them are already in the CSA. She is just trying to monopolise the meeting & wasting everybody's time & interrupting the meeting. As usual, seeking attention & trying to act smart. It's obvious she is not a likeable person. Even the minority has deserted her. She even make mistakes in her posting which need to be pointed out by readers. Lol.
DeleteLol man with his usual pitiful comments. The blog owner is just showing how daft you are by publiahing your comments.
DeleteAll the booing and boycott of blog and setup a new blog blah blah and people still come back, sneak a peek like voyeurs, and even comment on what they see! What do you call these people? There has to be a name for them!
DeleteThis place is only good for entertainment. Smart SPs will do their own due deligence. Wonder why all of sudden the anti-enblocers supporters start to crawl out of their holes to kpkb now. At the meeting don't know where they are hiding leh. Poor blog owner has no one to support her. These are the worst 'friends' who will dump you when they find you are in trouble.
Delete^What trouble? The only troubling thing to me is when people are discouraged from speaking up by hecklers. Just like what yo are doing here with your personal and sarcastic comments. It is absolutely unnecessary and adds nothing of value to this enbloc exercise. Smart is something else.
DeleteWhere were you if you felt she was been heckled? Did you stand up & support her ? If she dare to speak up, why should you be discouraged to do so ? If you are a man, shame on you! At least the blog owner has contributed something. What value have you contributed to the enbloc? Talk is cheap !
Deleteya lah, you smarter than others cos reply to comments that you think is unnecessary and add no value. lol
DeleteThe most despicable anti-enblocers are those who want to protest but dare not do it to upfront & has to rely on the more outspoken SP like the blog owner to fight their battle. They may be the objectors but would not do it for fear of losing the case & paying legal fees & so will provoke someone else to fight the battle for them. You can find many of these people in office politics. Beware of such people & don't fall into their trap and allow yourself to be make use by them.
DeleteAnd the heckling continues. It's ok, you may continue wasting everybodies time :).
DeleteToo many childish remarks are coming in for comment No 6. This particular thread is closed.
DeleteMay be good to put in a timeline on graphical format given each stage has flexible deadlines.
ReplyDeleteSo can look for new homes that are available from next Mar?
ReplyDelete3 months for completion is common. Due to the size of TC it is unlikely they will be able to complete faster than that. Don't forget, completion must be for all units on the same day. There is lots of legal paperwork to do before you can comeplete the sale, just like buying a HDB or private flat.
ReplyDeleteI suggest anyone has any questions email the MA/Lawyer direct. The blog owner doesn't act any for anyone (majority & minority). She is not always in the right. That's why she put her disclaimer clause to protect herself. If you make any decisions based on her advice or information & get into problem, good luck to you !
ReplyDeleteAll Correct. This is just a blog, I am not always in the right, corrections to my postings are welcome. I do not speak for anyone.
DeleteThe CSC, MA & Lawyer are also not always in the right. If they make mistakes, I point them out. We are all only human (likeable or not is immaterial) but the Team has a legal responsibility to get it right the first time. They are paid professionals after all and the CSC have a moral duty of care and due diligence.
Agreed that legal counsel need to buck up. Have been sleeping if SPs ask a question and they dont have it at their fingertips.
DeleteThe lawyer seems approachable, courteous and handled the crowd and questions very well yesterday.
DeleteI suspect this is his first collective sale experience under the 2010 rules. At least he doesn't stonewall or try to bully - we had a lot of that in rd 1 & 2.
That shows that your understanding of lawyer's duty & scope of work is very narrow. Legal counsel is doing the right thing. Not every question is universally applied to all the enbloc SPs or CSA contract. If he answers to every irrelvant or personal questions the meeting will never end. That's why he advised the SP to write direct to him or seek advice from his own solicitor. I have full respect for our lawyer.
DeleteMy statement " That shows that your understanding of lawyer's duty..." is in reply to the statement " Agreed that legal counsel need to buck up...."
Delete"The lawyer seems approachable .... ". I think the MA is also ok lah. Maybe he oversell & bring in round 1. He did realised his mistake & later withdraw & apologise. Having said that in my opinion, I think you also make a statement which I believe you realised you should not. I believe you know what it is. Anyway I am glad there is not too much of a drama & the meeting was able to proceed on till the end.
DeleteDear Blogger...
ReplyDeleteThank you very much for summarising of what happening in the SP meeting on 1 July 2017.
I feel benefitted more from you rather than MA.
Actually, the MA/Lawyer did a pretty good job - bar the regrettable incident - they should have had a print out to take away, though.
DeleteThanks to the blogger for the summary. Couldn't trust the MA/Lawyer to prepare something half as good.
DeleteMe too. Blogger has done a good job !
DeleteTomorrow (4th July 2017) is the tender day. I would like to appeal to the bloggers to let her blogs go Haitus so no information concerning our enbloc (knowingly or unknowingly done ) will be leaked to the public. Any SPS require any information should email directly to the SC/MA/Legal team as already been invited to do so during the 1st July 2017 meeting.
ReplyDeleteAlso although the blogger is doing the SPs a favour. In my opinion, I think it is not to her advantage if anything goes wrong with the enbloc and unhappy SPS may put the blame on her. Why risk putting yourself in unnecessary liability and stress ?
Peace everyone! May the blessing be upon us when the tender result is announced and we have an extremely good offer from bidders !
Cheers !
Nothing much is going to happen from now on. The tender is a silent exercise and there's nothing to leak. The discussion yesterday at the meeting was very general and applicable to every collective sale. Even the proposed terms in Tender & S&P are commonplace and not secret.
DeleteComments will dwindle to zero soon enough.
Tomorrow I will put up the advertised media and I think that will be that until close of Tender.
Peace will reign in the kingdom once more
First and foremost, I do not approve of the shouts of “get lost!” and “shut up!” whenever the blogger tried to say something during the meeting. I think its unnecessary and makes the whole situation more tense without serving any real purpose at all. A lot is at stake here and the best way to handle such a situation is to remain calm and hear everyone out.
ReplyDeleteI like to believe after reading the blogger’s comments that she is not entirely against the enbloc; she just wants to make sure that the whole process is done in good faith and all the stakeholders (SPs, MA, lawyer) take their fair share of what they are entitled to. Although I agree with the MA in terms of the advantage of having a bigger majority, having a CONSTRUCTIVE minority is not without its merits…a final lifeline if you will…just in case TC SPs got played out by whoever for whatever reasons. Notwithstanding, recent refinements in the enbloc laws, STB processes and High Court cases have all seek to make the enbloc process more transparent and fair and to force Managing agents and Sales Committees to walk a more narrower prescribed path towards a successful enbloc; so missteps are minimised and the whole process can be less litigious. For example, it used to be minorities are unfairly punished by making them pay a bigger share of the fees etc..Also there used to be dodgy deals between MAs and some SPs to entice people to sign up…all these unfair practices have since been exposed and shot down over the years.
Personally I do not think any serious challenge will be mounted by the minority this time round as the offer is good and I think most of the people who did not sign recognised it too. They are also resigned to the fact that the music cannot last forever and all good things have to come to an end someday.
Since it has to end….it might be better to end on a high note.
I also heard someone shouting 'enough !'. I don't blame him. Many of the majority must be very frustrated at the way she brag non-stop in her blog and equally non-stop condeming the SC/MA. If she is trying to contribute, there is always a gentler way to do it without been judgemental. Morever there is always the email or phone call she can use to give feedback & suggestions. No need to create so much hoo haa in her blog which serve no purpose except to stir up anger & create divisions among the SPs. In any case, her intention may be good but frankly I think she is talking too much. Since the majority has appointed the SC/MA respect their decision and leave them to do their job. I hope from tomorrow onwards she would stop posting any new stuff in her blog as this is a crucial period and it's best to lie low until the result of the tender.
Deletethere are at 100 units that currently have not signed and they are entitled to their voice too. Just because legally 80% has been reached doesn't mean 20% have to go on mute. In fact, the minority want a far higher price than the 80%.
DeleteIts back to the same issue - if you are not happy, then skip this blog or start your own. Everyone has his own opinion whether the blogger is talking too much.
btw even the tender ad isn't on the official facebook page now, shows how much timely info SPs are getting from the MA/SC.
The blogger has been doing the dogsbody but important work, so I want to say thanks to her.
Are you absolutely sure 100 units SPs are unhappy if this enbloc is successful especially if we can get good price ? Please show proof instead of using the minority to support yourself. Minority did not sign for many reasons, they are not necessary anti-blocers. If you are so unhappy why don't you speak up during the meeting instead of relying on the blog owner to speak up for you. Where were you hiding when she is been heckled ? If you think the FB is not updating in time with the tender Ad why don't you post your complaints on the FB? No point kpkb like a spoilt crybaby in this blog under anonymity using the minority & blog owner to support your petsonal agenda if you are so unhappy ?
DeleteI'm perfectly happy making comments here, thanks. Its so easy to get under your skin.
DeleteTC must be the only estate that communicates with SPs through a PUBLIC Facebook page. It is such a meaningless, inappropriate and unnecessary channel for a CSC to use. Just close it
DeleteYou have repeated your comments like 5 x in this section that minority SP have no guts cant speak up insecure Anonymous etc. Whats wrong With you?
DeleteVery well said. Btw, are we supposed to have some advertisement in newspaper today?
ReplyDelete"madding" or "mad"?
ReplyDeleteI personally felt ashamed at all the heckling and shouting down of the blogger. That type of be uncouth and unruly behavior is certainly uncalled for, and not becoming of a civil society.
ReplyDeleteWe should attempt to have civil discourse at these meetings. Yes, I do understand that the topic is an emotionally charged one. The (forced) sale of ones home is certainly a highly emotional topic. However, respect for opposing views is so critical for complete disclosure.
Bravo to the blogger for so working hard to get clarity on the process going forward.
"I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it." --Voltaire
"It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to practice either of them." --Mark Twain
some of the majority SP talking here, they are same one who were booing and shouting in the meeting.
Deletewhat TC can transform into is only limited by createivity and imagination of developer. big plplot can do more, rather than tiny plot. Dev will be bullish!
ReplyDeleteMinority are not necessary anti-enblocer. Minority's choice is clear : they will either sign or don't, simple as that and for that we respect their decision.
ReplyDeleteAnti-enblocers on the other hand has only one objective in mind - to sabotage this enbloc. For all you know they may not even be TC SPs. I don't think the recent anonymous letters are sent by any of the minority as the objective of the letters is so clear - to stop the enbloc which is what the anti-enblocers want.
Why anti-enblocers prefer to come to this blog is because it give them cover for their identity & protection against any legal consequences if any, so they think .
On FB if they create too much problems they will either be blocked or legal action be takened against them for any defamation they make as their identity can easily be traced. Noticed that they love to praise the blog owner in the pretext of acting for the interest of SPs to avoid suspicion and will not hesitate to attack pro enblocers here but dare not do so on FB.
I wont be surprise later if there is a bid, they will manipulate & provoke the enbloc SPs' feeling to encourage them to raise objections just as what they did in the letters to provoke SPs to withdraw their signing during cooling period. They got nothing to lose because they don't have to pay any legal fees if the objectors failed in their case. Either way the anti-enblocers win !
All the anti-enblocers want is to see this enbloc failed. Don't fall into their trap !