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.

4th day of Hearing

The fourth day of the Hearing will be on Monday 21 July at 9.30am
.
Written submissions would usually take up to 3 weeks.
The panel would usually deliberate for up to 3 months
So, how will it be for poor Tampines Court?
.
There will only be 4 days before the S&P expiry:-
How many days will they give for written submissions?
Will allowance be made for the independent minority?
How many days will the panel deliberate?
Will they rush to a decision before the 25th?
.

Parliamentary assurance;- there are
"safeguards to protect the interests of the minority owners"
and that the
"safeguards are found in the procedures".
.
High Court assurance (Choo Han Teck J):-
"That said, fairness requires that the law is applied consistently to everyone in similar circumstances. It gazes upon the horse as it does the horseman. It may be the appellants today who slipped, and tomorrow the respondents. If the majority succeeds it is because it is right not because it is the majority. Likewise, if the minority succeeds it is because it is right and not because
it receives favours granted only to the underdog"
.
Have faith

28 comments:

  1. Anonymous18 July, 2008

    Sorry, when is the 3rd day of hearing? 2nd day is this afternoon.

    Thank you.

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  2. June 16 - 1st day of STB Hearing
    June 17 - 2nd day of STB Hearing
    June 18 - 3rd day of SB Hearing
    Aug 07 - original date for 4th day of STB Hearing

    July 16 & 18- Majority appeal to High Court to change Aug 07 date

    July 21 - new date for 4th day of STB Hearing

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous18 July, 2008

    Thanks. Can I confirm that if the majority won their appeal in high court today to bring the STB hearing to 21 July?

    Regards

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous18 July, 2008

    Hi, do u mean STB will give its decision on 21 july instead of 7 August with regards to the approval sale of TC?

    ReplyDelete
  5. No, the 4th day of the Hearing is a trial day.The minority lawyer will cross examine the Sale Committee Chairman (that's if he shows up, my bet is he won't) followed by whatever minority witnesses the majority lawyer wishes to cross examine (probably either 1 or 0).

    The lawyers will then give their oral submissions followed by their written submissions a few days later, if normal procedure if adhered to.

    The STB panel will deliberate for an unknown length of time and can give an oral decision earlier first followed by their written decision at a much later date.

    This all should take weeks or even months. If it takes 4 days then something is terribly wrong with the system.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Yes, the majority were successful in their appeal to bring the date forward.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    Hi, What is your thoughts on the two scenarios if it happens:

    1. If STB approves the sales before 25 Jul and minority appeals to High Court, will the sales still valid since S&P expires on 25 Jul?

    2.If STB rejects the sales before 25 Jul and the majority appeals to High Court, will the sales still valid?

    What happens to the Beta Sum amendment by majority which was withdrew on 23 June? What is the impact to STB decision?

    Thank you in advance for your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    I got a feeling that since High Court approved Majority's appeal, then STB will rush the decision before 25 Jul. Sad.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    There is a deadline to be respected and the high court has made it very clear to the STB. It is the responsibility of the STB to get an decision prior to the expiry of the contract - we are talking about a big contract here. So my bet is that STB will make the DECISION before the deadline lapses.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    This is purely academic. Supposing stb gives its approval in 4 days, the minority is still given a month to decide whether or not to go to high court. Is the developer then obliged to honour the deal? supposing the minority does go to high court, then is the approval deemed to be nullified and hence the developer no longer needs to honour the deal?

    ReplyDelete
  11. If the STB grants the sale at lightening speed then the developer has to honour the sale.

    The onus is then put back on the minority to brig it to High Court and a stay is put on the sale in the meantime.

    ReplyDelete
  12. RE: what is your thoughts...

    scenario

    1) the sale is approved, the deadline is no more and the buyer honours the sale.The minority goes to High Court and the sale just hangs until resolution.

    2) the STB throws out the sale, and unless the buyer extends the deal is dead on the 25th.

    3)There is no amendment to the Beta sum. The buyer withdrew it's approval to amend the S&P.
    I do not want to second guess how the panel will rule on this issue.
    A sale can be thrown out on lack on good faith in the manner of distribution of sale proceeds.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    THE REALITY OF THE FACTS = MAJORITY 432 AND MINORITY 28

    Minority had more than 6 months to prepare case and appropriate accusations and innuendo that would be thrown out of any reasonable court as there was absolutely no case to answer.

    Truth of the matter is that each majority owner accepted the sale price of his property and signed sales agreement. Minority to complain that price is not right and claim that total land area is more relevant than price of individual units is totally out of contest, because we are talking about individual owners sales not the new block of land ready for development.

    To be just and fair we are getting good price for units and to argue for next 2 years if price is right or not it is totally out of contest considering the rampant inflation and future of jobs in Singapore.

    Delays and damage that minority has caused to sale will hopefully be open to civil litigation by majority to each minority owners to pay for lost time and accusations with out any foundations or valid cause and all based on personal interest and greed.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    To ITSHOMETOHOME Wow hypocrites and double face people like you are trying to make mockery of our legal system and parliament and rule of law and are trying to make sure that we end up with only minority making crucial decisions that affects life of majority of Singaporeans.

    High Court has made decision based on the STB acting inappropriately and breaching the Act that was passed by Parliament on 19th October 2004 and assented to by the President on 4th November 2004. STB and minority had 6 months to complete their job more than enough and real delay was caused by STB due to their inefficiency and disregard for Act Of Parliament where they are instructed to complete processing of en-block sale within 6 months time line.

    Let us hail the decision of High Court as sound and just one where majority wins all the time.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Re..double faced hypocrites.... where majority wins all the time.

    Honourable Choo Han Teck (Horizon Towers, 11 Oct 2007) said;

    8. That said, fairness requires that the law is applied consistently to everyone in similar circumstances. It gazes upon the horse as it does the horseman. It may be the appellants today who slipped, and tomorrow the respondents. If the majority succeeds it is because it is right not because it is the majority. Likewise, if the minority succeeds it is because it is right and not because it receives favours granted only to the underdog"

    This is what I meant by the system being on trial - little Tampines Court is testing this very principle.

    And I have faith that justice and fairness will win the day. Far from mocking the legal system, I am in fact putting all my faith in it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    It is because of personal interest and greed of the majority 432 that the minority 28 is being forced into selling their home. We the minority are fighting to keep our home.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Actually, it's 460 majority and 100 minority (34 objectors)

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    To ITSHOMETOHOME As you are not aware of basic rules that democratic society apply and how law operates, here is simple explanation.

    The fair and equitable rule of law is the foundation of a democratic system. It limits the authority of the state appointed statuary body (STB), protects the rights of individuals and groups, and makes possible the orderly and peaceful governance of society.

    Law is not here on trial and Tampines is not an single case as you suggest, Law in Singapore is established and functions extremely well and for sure will sort out personal baseless and greed-based objections by minority owners.

    High Court will rule in favor of majority thereby adhering to principles of sound democratic judgment and as appointed by sound democratic government.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "The fair and equitable rule of law is the foundation of a democratic system. It limits the authority of the state appointed statuary body (STB), protects the rights of individuals and groups, and makes possible the orderly and peaceful governance of society."

    True

    "Law is not here on trial and Tampines is not an single case as you suggest, Law in Singapore is established and functions extremely well and for sure will sort out personal baseless and greed-based objections by minority owners."

    The STB panel will rule on the merits of the case only.

    "High Court will rule in favor of majority thereby adhering to principles of sound democratic judgment and as appointed by sound democratic government."

    Not true. They will apply the law judiciously and impartially and find in favour of the party who is right.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Re: there is a deadline to be respected:-

    I'm sorry, but a deadline does not command respect, people do.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous19 July, 2008

    TO: ITSHOMETOHOME
    How pleased I’m that you agree that the law is impartial and will deliver decision based on judiciary basic principle in balancing the scale and effects on majority and community as a whole and the balance is simple and clear the majority wins.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I agree the law is impartial, but I disagree with your conclusion that it will always weigh in favour of the majority. That is a contradiction in terms. I have more faith in the integrity of the system than you do.

    Let's agree to disagree and leave it at that. No more posts please.

    ReplyDelete
  23. anxious1819 July, 2008

    I cannot understand how the above commentator can be so arrogant and cocksure that the majority will win.

    If it is always the majority that will win, what is the role of STB?

    STB has the important role of making absolutely sure that only the right party win!

    I too have my faith in the STB.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous25 July, 2008

    JUSTICE NOT CARRIED OUT

    In blaming the sales committee, lets make clear justice has not been carried out the sales committee has done excellent job for 2 long years 24 hours and 365 days a year without any pay or remuneration they have been working hard to bring this sale so all of us can benefit.

    Submission to STB by Sales Committee (ST) was done on time STB had 6 months to resolve and they failed and breached the Act that was passed by Parliament on 19th October 2004 and assented to by the President on 4th November 2004. Further STB tried to delay decision by 1 month and that is why CS was forced to bring the matter to High Court to reverse decision on hearing date that was 1 month in delay.

    Today in last moment and as instructed by High Court withing few hours deliberation STB made decision in retaliating to Sales Committee in saying “Sales Not Done In good Faith” and rejected the sale. (Note in 6 months STB was unable to make decision).

    Their decision cannot be contested in High Court at all due to last minute decision and STB knowledge that developer will not seek extension due to the poor economic situation in real estate across Singapore.

    Basically what we have here it is decision made by STB that cannot be challenged in High Court. Today grave injustice has been carried out against majority of residents and let it be known it is the STB who carried out grave injustice today.

    Regretfully STB decision has killed hopes of majority to be able to sell home at good price and to move on and improve life and find better place to live. Commercially Tampines district has lost largest development in East and new development of 1800 modern new homes, new residents and millions of dollars in development. End loss is to every citizen of Tampines as a whole. We are no winers, now losers left with dilapidated estate without any facilities at all and in worst state than any other HDB estate.

    ReplyDelete
  25. anxious1826 July, 2008

    I will like you to do the sum. If the Sales go through, the developer pays Tampines Court residents a total of $405 million flat.

    Their new development of 1,800 units at 1,300 sq ft at $700 psf (a conservative figure) will allow them to reap a revenue of $1,638 million (or $1.638 billion).

    After allowing for other costs that the developer needs to incur like development charges and building costs, the developer is likely to end up with a huge profit margin. Who is the winner? You tell me.

    With the compensation of $400 psf for Tampines residents, which condominium can you buy? Even Simei Green is selling at around $600 psf or more.

    Will we be better off with the Sales? I believe we are not. My rough figures had stated it quite clearly so.

    You should not be slamming STB. In all fairness, STB had done a fine job.

    The TC Sales Committee must take the blame for poor management of the whole process, i.e. doing things without proper consultation with the Majority SP and keeping everybody in the DARK.

    From this moment onwards, let's work together to make this a really MARVELLOUS Estate to live in. Majority SPs or Minority SPs, we are all the same now.

    ReplyDelete
  26. The STB HAS done a fine job! But the appeal to High Court, change of date, lightening submissions and rushing the decision at the end was very, very scary - unprecedented in STB history, in fact.

    The fact that they have decided that the sale was done in bad faith not in one but TWO areas is a great relief.

    The STB panel are my favourite people in the world, at this moment :)

    I love the STB.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anonymous26 July, 2008

    Give the guys in the SC a break. They worked hard and it is thankless. If STB verdict was for the majority I do not believe itshometime would say that are her or his favourite people. See we are humans after all. Lets start being neighbourly and hope for the besat. Those who intend selling hopefully someone can come up with an excellent price for them too. Plaesant weekend

    ReplyDelete
  28. It was a joke - note the smiley :)

    ReplyDelete