What a diabolical state of affairs. This decision seemingly opens up the floodgates once again to unscrupulous practices all round. The CSC, Lawyer and Marketing Agent can now get away with:
- ignoring vital steps marked out in the various LTSA Schedules
- hoodwinking owners about the DC
- disregarding their own Terms of Engagement when it suits them and
- absolving themselves from all blame and repercussion if the fault lies upon bad legal advice
Is there no litmus test for legal advice? Can all missteps and bungles be swept under the carpet simply because the bunglers were lawyers? Where does the buck stop?
If there is any justice left in the world, please let this be overturned at some higher court - or collective sales will be in danger of disintegrating into a comedy of farce and deliberate error - obliterating the past 10 years of solid work put into cleaning up the practice.
If not, then it will be back to the bad ol' days of cowboy shenanigans in the next wave of collective sales. ( I think the present wave is over)
oops.. I posted the wrong link previously.. here is the correct link:
The courts should take into account that the cooling measures are creating a big difference between owner-occupiers (who have to find replacement homes given the cooling measures) and investors (who will just take the premium over resale value), and thus a CSC needs to be kept to a much higher standard than the narrow definition in the Act of the transaction being in good faith.
ReplyDeleteEr, did you post the correct link?
ReplyDeleteA diabolical state of affairs? No loss of lives leh, all parties in the game makes $$$, from the sellers, 'professionals' handling the sale, various govt agencies, retail businesses, karang gunis, etc, etc. Who cares about community spirit?
Agreed.
ReplyDeleteSeriously flawed Professional advice to the detriment of all SPs.
Judge lamented that after discovering that DC not applicable, CSC did not extended tender deadline to engaged owners on this significant revelation. Seems like lack of transparency and a rush to sell.
Terms and Conditions of CSA and apportion of proceeds (notwithstanding the judge deemed it fair in this case) both crucial items, not voted upon and not passed through overtly. Can we infer it was covertly done or ride roughshod through.
Duty of CSC is to serve all, not just those eager and willing to sell. Should there not be a duty of transparency and engagement to all owners?
Obviously a travesty, albeit financially beneficial outcome for all. But what does the Law says.
Written judgement will make an interesting read.
What's disconcerting is despite the many examples of missteps, complacency, stonewalling unforthcoming behavior, unsound advice by Professionals listed throughout, this sale still passed.
ReplyDeleteLegalwise, many grounds to appeal; moneywise, more expedient not to challenge. We'll have to live with this.
The bar has been reset for future collective sale teams. Pity, reasonable to expect a multi million dollar deal of many peoples homes be more expertly managed to pass muster.
Dear Choo,
ReplyDeleteWill you pls give me an idea when the next round of enbloc coming based on your interest and judgement.
No idea, sorry.
Delete