A Minority Owner's chronicled journey through 3 Collective Sale attempts; the last one being successful. TC was a 560 ex-HUDC estate with a thriving community spirit (up until the enblocs that is). I have moved on to a new, 37 unit Freehold estate. Life is quiet now with zero community feeling.
Objectors just want to drag the process as long as possible lah for whatever reason only they know. I dont think they will withdraw by 28th dec but want to drag on for another 21 days.They know they got no case & it's silly to waste money. Majority got more financial muscle to take them on anytime !.
Objectors keep on harping they are forced to sell their home. The fact is they drag on unnecessarily and forced the majority to incur more opportunity, time and money lost by paying more for replacement homes !
CSC should have take one of the majority SP's advice to bypass mediation & apply straight to high court. At least let the objectors spent their money if they want to challenge us in high court instead of letting them waste so much of our time !
Mediation suppose to be win-win for both parties. Now objectors win by delaying the process at zero cost and majority lose by time & opportunity lost. That's why must give the option to bypass mediation and both parties have to pay cost. It's more fair.
You will have to wait for another round of LTSA Amendments for that to be possible. It will never happen though because there needs to be a faster clearing house for collective sales and STB is it. The HC alone would be much slower than 60 days - maybe 9 months until you gat a date.
So, which do you want - 60 days or less or 6 months or more? How much do you want to pay? - $35k/560 or $xxx k/560?
Your suggestion is both illegal and illogical
(STB application fee = $5k + $1k for every day of arbitration) (For Lawyer fees - see Terms of Appointment)
100% majority is only possible for small estates, going to the STB is normal for all others. Time taken so far is within average for all.
Dear Choo, it is nice to see your blog active. I'm a majority owner. I find your blog interesting altho sometimes you did make some mistakes in your postings. Anyway, let's just hope that this en bloc will go thru. I know one of the reasons for objecting was that the amount is 1.7m plus, and not more than that, like Eunosville etc etc. But we cant compare TC with Eunosville, which has a far more superior location. Also its is not because TC is bigger hence the amount we get should be more. It does'nt work that way. For those who do not want to let go (i.e. the 3 objectors), my advise is take God's bounty and seek forth new pastures. For that amount of money, you can still get a decent FREEHOLD property at a decent enough price and size. Please do not derail the en bloc. Because for those who want to sell, it will be less than 800k and difficult to find buyer because of age of TC. For those who want to continue to stay in TC, be prepared to live in a crumbling and depreciating estate (look around you and you can see the signs of ageing). Get the money and move on. That is my advice.
In my opinion you are still very defensive on the objectors. Though they are the same camp as you (minority) what they do may not necessary be right. No one say they cannot object but please be reasonable and don't drag on unnecessary when there is no case causing the rest of the SPs including other minority to suffer.
Names of objectors who do not withdraw and yet do not oppose at HC need to remember their names are taken down.
Who knows one day something happens and this is used as evidence in the courts of the trouble making attitude they have of wasting public resources intentionally.
The three objectors are from two families, right? I remember two of them are joint owners. So there are only two families as objectors. I believe in Choo's predict. Let's wait and see.
It’s like a Motley Crue reunion of sorts here, the “LOL dude” , the “ in my opinion guy”... everyone is back... hahah Merry Christmas and Happy New Year everyone, let’s look to the New Year to get this enbloc pushed through. Yum Seng!
Rio Casa will pay in full; no need to absorb DP increase. What about us? SC should know and they should tell. LUP will not scuttle this deal but high court might. It's not 557v3, only majority pays for SC legal fight. Some willing, most won't ( unfair minority dont pay; they also benefit, challenge on what grounds? won't pay to flog a dead donkey....) That's the fact of collective sale- Cannot please all the majority all of the time.
re 30/12 blogger reply. LUP is a escape back door for SL,if URA assess it above 115 m.AND if ,touch wood lah,some big.bad news SL knows before D date,ie the very last date that SL can say bye bye. 2 can blogger share what is the last date or event SL cannot cancel the deal.All who want TC must pray hard after the D date. 3 Why i say SL? Cos sometimes some pple gey newd faster ,more,n more precise than other people. 4.LUP should be put under the sun.what is the status of assessment of LUP?
2) The Upgrading of Lease Tenure (the LUP) Now this is done by the Government's Chief Valuer - so the Buyer has to wait and see what it is. If it is anything more than $115m then the Buyer can abort the sale (Clause 3E in S&P)
hi blogger,tks. .very happy to read your blog again. 1 if objectors do not lodge any objection in the future,what is the last date SL can back out?
2.if go to court ,touch wood ah, within how many days of last judgement issued that SL can back out?say go to High Court and judgement issued. then there will be a period that lose side can lodge an appeal. Let say this appeal period lapse and no appeal lodged. Will SL bind by straight right or SL still,has a period to back out?
my question also apply if case go to Court of Appeal.
I would need to do a detailed analysis of the timelines in the S&P, which I have not done, there are so many extensions to extensions etc.
I am confident TC will not go to High Court and the Sale Order given on Tuesday 2 Jan.
From then on I do not see why Sim Lian would want to back out as it is a sweet deal. I shall not worry over the timeline details unless there is a need - and there isn't.
I hope the LUP has been settled and not kept hidden from us until the HC hurdle has been cleared.
Merry Christmas😎😎
ReplyDeleteMERRY Christmas and happy New year! It's good to see you are back. How do you weigh the chances of objectors go to high court pls?
ReplyDeleteZERO
Deleteitshometome 3.1- Hi, mrs blogger. Welcome back and happy new year. Why do you think that there is zero chance the objectors will go to high court ?
DeleteObjectors just want to drag the process as long as possible lah for whatever reason only they know. I dont think they will withdraw by 28th dec but want to drag on for another 21 days.They know they got no case & it's silly to waste money. Majority got more financial muscle to take them on anytime !.
ReplyDeleteObjectors keep on harping they are forced to sell their home. The fact is they drag on unnecessarily and forced the majority to incur more opportunity, time and money lost by paying more for replacement homes !
DeleteCSC should have take one of the majority SP's advice to bypass mediation & apply straight to high court. At least let the objectors spent their money if they want to challenge us in high court instead of letting them waste so much of our time !
DeleteSTB is a necessary legal step - CSC cannot choose to bypass
DeleteMediation suppose to be win-win for both parties. Now objectors win by delaying the process at zero cost and majority lose by time & opportunity lost. That's why must give the option to bypass mediation and both parties have to pay cost. It's more fair.
DeleteYou will have to wait for another round of LTSA Amendments for that to be possible.
DeleteIt will never happen though because there needs to be a faster clearing house for collective sales and STB is it. The HC alone would be much slower than 60 days - maybe 9 months until you gat a date.
So, which do you want - 60 days or less or 6 months or more?
How much do you want to pay? - $35k/560 or $xxx k/560?
Your suggestion is both illegal and illogical
(STB application fee = $5k + $1k for every day of arbitration)
(For Lawyer fees - see Terms of Appointment)
100% majority is only possible for small estates, going to the STB is normal for all others. Time taken so far is within average for all.
Merry Christmas and happy new year
ReplyDeleteMerry Christmas and Have a Great 2018
ReplyDeleteMerry Christmas and Have a Great 2018
ReplyDeleteDear Choo, it is nice to see your blog active. I'm a majority owner. I find your blog interesting altho sometimes you did make some mistakes in your postings. Anyway, let's just hope that this en bloc will go thru. I know one of the reasons for objecting was that the amount is 1.7m plus, and not more than that, like Eunosville etc etc. But we cant compare TC with Eunosville, which has a far more superior location. Also its is not because TC is bigger hence the amount we get should be more. It does'nt work that way. For those who do not want to let go (i.e. the 3 objectors), my advise is take God's bounty and seek forth new pastures. For that amount of money, you can still get a decent FREEHOLD property at a decent enough price and size. Please do not derail the en bloc. Because for those who want to sell, it will be less than 800k and difficult to find buyer because of age of TC. For those who want to continue to stay in TC, be prepared to live in a crumbling and depreciating estate (look around you and you can see the signs of ageing). Get the money and move on. That is my advice.
ReplyDeleteBlogger as a minority has stated ZERO (how do you weigh the chances going to high court) why keep asking the same question.
ReplyDeleteI’m stating facts. For all to know, if they still do not know. Especially the 3 people
DeleteHi Choo
ReplyDeleteAre you able to post the timeliness since the CSC was formed and the signing of the CSA.Thks
Sure
DeleteThks.👍
ReplyDeleteThank you for your blog.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion you are still very defensive on the objectors. Though they are the same camp as you (minority) what they do may not necessary be right. No one say they cannot object but please be reasonable and don't drag on unnecessary when there is no case causing the rest of the SPs including other minority to suffer.
ReplyDeleteanonymous 12- In my opinion, you are merely repeating yourself.
DeleteBlogger, u also keep on repeating open and close yr blog. If you don't want people to post In yr blog, then shut down yr blog permanently lor. Lol.
DeleteAnonymous 12.2- I am not the blogger. Try guessing again. Lol.
DeleteWhat if objectors dont withdraw, then they will have to pay high court fee on 2 Jan?
ReplyDeleteAre u one of the objectors? Getting worried ? Lol
DeleteNo. It is not as simple as the STB fee - $5k + $1k for each day of arbitration
DeleteEach side engages a lawyer at their own expense and from there the fees mount for this and that. You can find a list of High Court fees here;
https://www.supremecourt.gov.sg/rules/court-processes/civil-proceedings/commencement-of-an-action/court-fees-and-hearing-fees
I am still confident this matter will not go to High Court - but I have been wrong in the past as my detractors love to point out.
But I am sticking to my guns - my money is still on withdrawal
Names of objectors who do not withdraw and yet do not oppose at HC need to remember their names are taken down.
DeleteWho knows one day something happens and this is used as evidence in the courts of the trouble making attitude they have of wasting public resources intentionally.
13.3 What is that? Is that a veiled threat? This kind of comment is more suitable for the FB page.
Deleteanonymous 2- Care to explain what "Last lost" means ? Seems that your logic is not very sound either.
ReplyDeleteThe three objectors are from two families, right? I remember two of them are joint owners. So there are only two families as objectors. I believe in Choo's predict. Let's wait and see.
ReplyDeleteNo, they are 3 different owners of 3 different units. Two of them joined together to make a single objection for convenience.
DeleteGreat to see you are back! Enjoy your blog though I am the “ majority”
ReplyDeleteIt’s like a Motley Crue reunion of sorts here, the “LOL dude” , the “ in my opinion guy”... everyone is back... hahah Merry Christmas and Happy New Year everyone, let’s look to the New Year to get this enbloc pushed through. Yum Seng!
ReplyDeleteWhat happened to that guy who rants on and on with 10 pages of rubbish and swears at the blogger when she doesn’t publish them?
DeleteWhat happened to blogger's principle that she won't moderate her blog and later decide to close it completely and now decide to open it again ?
Deletethis is her kingdom.she is the queen.
DeleteLUP issue seem fall into a dark hole.
Welcome back, busybody. Yes, the LUP is still up in the air. I expect it won;t be an issue because Sim Lian knows how to play the game.
DeleteRio Casa will pay in full; no need to absorb DP increase. What about us? SC should know and they should tell. LUP will not scuttle this deal but high court might. It's not 557v3, only majority pays for SC legal fight. Some willing, most won't ( unfair minority dont pay; they also benefit, challenge on what grounds? won't pay to flog a dead donkey....)
DeleteThat's the fact of collective sale- Cannot please all the majority all of the time.
re 30/12 blogger reply.
DeleteLUP is a escape back door for SL,if URA assess it above 115 m.AND if
,touch wood lah,some big.bad news
SL knows before D date,ie the very last date that SL can say bye bye.
2
can blogger share what is the last date or event SL cannot cancel the deal.All who want TC must pray hard after the D date.
3
Why i say SL? Cos sometimes some pple gey newd faster ,more,n more precise than other people.
4.LUP should be put under the sun.what is the status of assessment of LUP?
http://www.tampinescourt.net/2017/10/lup-lease-upgrading-premium.html?m=1
i quote blogger wrote:
2) The Upgrading of Lease Tenure (the LUP)
Now this is done by the Government's Chief Valuer - so the Buyer has to wait and see what it is.
If it is anything more than $115m then the Buyer can abort the sale (Clause 3E in S&P)
hi blogger,tks.
Delete.very happy to read your blog again.
1
if objectors do not lodge any objection in the future,what is the last date SL can back out?
2.if go to court ,touch wood ah,
within how many days of last judgement issued that SL can back out?say go to High Court and judgement issued.
then there will be a period that lose side can lodge an appeal.
Let say this appeal period lapse and no appeal lodged.
Will SL bind by straight right or SL still,has a period to back out?
my question also apply if case go to Court of Appeal.
I would need to do a detailed analysis of the timelines in the S&P, which I have not done, there are so many extensions to extensions etc.
DeleteI am confident TC will not go to High Court and the Sale Order given on Tuesday 2 Jan.
From then on I do not see why Sim Lian would want to back out as it is a sweet deal. I shall not worry over the timeline details unless there is a need - and there isn't.
I hope the LUP has been settled and not kept hidden from us until the HC hurdle has been cleared.