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.

Parliamentary Debates/Speeches by Min of Law on LTSA

.
"The Minister of State for Law said:
" I had informed this House on 19th November last year that Government would be amending the law to make it easier for en-bloc sales to take place. The current position is that a single owner, for whatever reason, can oppose and thwart the sale. Government has received many appeals and feedback from frustrated owners whose desires to sell their flats or condominiums en-bloc have been so thwarted. As a result, these buildings cannot take advantage of enhanced plot ratios to realise their full development potential, which would have created many more housing units in prime 999-year leasehold or freehold areas for Singaporeans. A secondary benefit is that these developments, especially the older ones, could have been rejuvenated through the en-bloc process.
I said that the law would be amended to remove the need for unanimous consent"
.
Secondly, there will be adequate safeguards to protect the interests of minority owners. These safeguards are in the procedures as well as the substantive powers of the Strata Titles Board.
.
Let me now elaborate on the role of the Board, in particular how it acts as a safeguard.
.
If mediation fails, the sale will nevertheless proceed as long as the transaction is bone fide and at arm's length, unless there are exceptional circumstances to warrant the Board assuming a more pro-active role; for example, the sale proceeds are lower than the purchase price he had paid for the unit, or are insufficient to redeem the outstanding mortgage or charge on the unit. This is based on the assumption that none of the owners in an en bloc sale should lose out financially.
.
.
2 Sir, the main purpose of this Bill, which amends the Land Titles (Strata) Act, is to provide additional safeguards and greater transparency for all owners involved in en bloc sales, i.e. both majority and minority owners. The proposed amendments address the concerns of owners over the lack of clarity, transparency and safeguards in the current process of an en bloc sale. They also ensure that the interests of all owners are taken into consideration more adequately. While the amendments are intended to achieve those objectives, we have also borne in mind that the amended law does not make it unduly onerous to bring about an en bloc sale.
.
21 The proposed changes will not apply to developments where the required 80% or 90% majority of owners, based on share value, have signed the CSA as at the date of the commencement of the amendment Act. They will not need to comply with the new requirements set out in the amendment Act.
.

23 I would like to reiterate that the amendments to the en bloc sale legislation maintain a careful balance. They provide additional safeguards and ensure greater transparency for all owners, but at the same time, have been drafted in such a way as not to make it unduly onerous to bring about an en bloc sale.
.
(emphasis are my own)
Regent Court High Court decision March 2009
21 At the Second Reading of the Bill containing the provisions for collective sales at Singapore Parliamentary Debates, Official Report (31 July 1998), vol 69 at cols 601-607, the Minister of State for Law said:

.
I had informed this House......
.
It was clear from this speech and others made in Parliament that the main purpose of the provisions relating to collective sale in the Act was to make it easier for collective sales to go through in order to promote better utilisation of scarce land resources in Singapore and also urban redevelopment.
.
25 Whilst it is plain from the above speech that Parliament was concerned that an owner in an en-bloc sale should not lose out financially by reason of that sale, that does not mean that only a literal approach to s 84A(7) would achieve that purpose. "

No comments:

Post a Comment