Disclaimer






"I am a BLOGGER NOT an expert. This is a BLOG not a 'go-to' website for official information. I represent no one's view save my own. I have neither legal nor financial training, nor do I have anything to do with the real estate industry. My understanding of the Collective Sale Process is from a layman's position only. My calculations, computations and tables are homespun and may contain errors. Please note that nothing in this blog constitutes any legal or financial advice to anyone reading it. You should refer to your lawyer, CSC or financial adviser for expert advice before making any decision. This disclaimer is applicable to every post and comment on the blog. Read at your own risk."
Drop Down MenusCSS Drop Down MenuPure CSS Dropdown Menu
There is one thing worse than an Enbloc ----- and that is an Enbloc done badly. Since the majority have the necessary mandate to sell, then they owe it to all SPs to make a success of it. Minority SPs can only watch and wait, if they sell then lets pray it's at a price we can move on with, if they don't sell, then we are happy to stay for a few more years.

STB Amendments

So, the new amendments to the enbloc process are finally here. Unfortunately too late for us.
Having lawyers present to 'clear your doubts' on the matter sounds good, but the crucial problem remains: to look for answers one must first know the questions.
I presume the 'lawyer' that will be present in future enbloc meetings/signings will be none other than the enbloc lawyer. But surely that will defeat the purpose. His clients are the SC and not the majority owners.
.
From the Ministry of Law website
.
Oral Answer by DPM Prof S Jayakumar to Parliamentary Question on En Bloc Legislation, 27 August 2007 here
.
Volume 83
Monday No. 9
27th August, 2007
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES OFFICIAL REPORT
(Recourse for unhappy residents)

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law what recourse is available to unhappy residents affected by en bloc sales of their units and who cannot afford to hire legal counsel to pursue their case, especially regarding unscrupulous and intimidating practices.

The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Law (
Prof. S Jayakumar): Mr Speaker, Sir, currently, the law allows an owner who does not agree to an en bloc sale to file an objection with the Strata Titles Board. There is no fee for filing an objection; and the owner is not required to be represented by a lawyer and he may appear before the Board himself.

Besides this, any owner who at any time feels that he is being harassed or intimidated to consent to an en bloc sale may lodge a Police report.

Let me add, Sir, that my Ministry has completed our review of the en bloc sale legislation and I shall today, after the conclusion of Question Time, introduce the Land Titles (Strata) (Amendment) Bill. The changes to the legislation will be explained in detail by myself during the Second Reading of the Bill at the next sitting of the House. For now, I will just say that in addition to the proposals that we had set out in the public consultation paper and which I mentioned during the Committee of Supply, the Government has also accepted a number of additional changes that will further enhance transparency and procedural clarity, as well as offer better protection to the owners of affected developments. Sir, I believe these changes will go a considerable way to address the unscrupulous and intimidating practices that Ms Ng referred to in her Question.

Ms Irene Ng Phek Hoong (Tampines): Sir, as the Minister has noted, there have been various reports of intimidation in the past by sales committee. Can I ask the Minister whether there are any provisions now or in the new Bill to ensure that the owners can oust the sales committee if the sales committee had been found to be either negligent, under-handed or unfair in its dealings, as well as not representing the interests of the owners but more of the buyers?
The second question is with regard to pending cases, such as Tampines Court which started the en bloc process at the end of 2002, before the property boom. The STB has yet to approve the sale, and the sale and purchase agreement will expire on 24th September, renewable by four months. I believe minority owners are opposing the sale and have filed their objections to STB. Can I ask the Minister, pending the review, how will these owners be affected by the changes that will be coming?

Prof. Jayakumar: I would ask her to be patient as it is just a matter of time before she reads the provisions of the Bill. As a general rule, I hope she will understand that I would like to avoid commenting on specific cases of en bloc sale because I do not have the details and it may not be proper as some of these cases may end up in court. The general rule in legislation is the prospective application. The Bill has certain provisions for transitional and savings provisions. And later if she has a look at these provisions, they provide that the amendments will apply to all developments, except those where 80% or 90% majority, based on share values, have already signed the collective and sale agreements at the time the amendments come into effect. And there are also provisions in the Bill concerning applications made to or pending before a Board at that time the amendments come into effect. So I think she has to study these proposals and I hope she will speak her mind when the Bill is read a Second time.

No comments:

Post a Comment