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.

GILLMAN HEIGHTS

The protracted and controversial sale of Gillman Heights finally came to an end on Friday 22 May 2009, when owners and buyers legally completed the $548 million deal.
Straits Times - 23 May 2009
*************************************************************************
Earlier reports had indicated that owners of the estate’s 607 units stood to receive between $870,000 and $950,000 for their apartments.'
.
'Chief executive of CapitaLand Residential’s Singapore operations Patricia Chia said in a statement yesterday that ‘going forward, we are looking at presenting our other projects such as the proposed development at the Gillman Heights Condominium site at the appropriate time’.
.
Now let's see how much each unit in the new development will go for - I believe the en bloc price owners received will look like peanuts compared to the sale price of new units. Another case of 'Half the size, double the price',

It's not what you get incomparison with what you paid originally- it's what you get in comparison with what you can get as a replacement that's important.
.
1-for-1 exchange - the only guarantee in an en bloc
.
Gillman Heights site sale; last minute hurdles cleared
The consortium that bought the Gillman Heights condo site in a collective sale has ‘every intention’ of completing its purchase, its lawyers said in a statement.
While the sale was not completed by the previous deadline of May 15, lawyers for the buyers and sellers are now looking at the new deadline of May 22 after two last-minute hurdles were cleared.
The buyer of Gillman Heights – a group called Ankerite, which is led by property giant CapitaLand – was supposed to have completed the $548 million purchase last Friday.
But the sale of the 99-year-leasehold estate on Alexandra Road, which has dragged on for two years now, has not been signed off yet. The deal was first inked in 2007.
Ankerite’s lawyers, Rajah & Tann, had on April 30 queried the sales committee on two issues, which have since been resolved. With those obstacles cleared, Rajah & Tann is now working with the sales committee’s lawyers from Lee and Lee to close the deal as soon as possible.
‘The lawyers of both parties are working towards May 22, 2009 to complete the purchase of the site,’ said a CapitaLand spokeswoman yesterday.
One sticking point was the transfer of $750,000 from the management corporation’s (MCST) management fund to the sinking fund in August 2007 and March 2008, which was discovered during the due diligence exercise.
Rajah & Tann wanted the money transferred back into the management fund, as money from this fund goes to the buyers upon the completion of the sale.
This issue has since been resolved. Rajah & Tann said in its statement that the money will remain in the management fund, as the management council of the MCST has annulled its previous resolutions transferring money to the sinking fund.
The second contentious point was a separate suit by a local contractor against the MCST. But this appears to have been settled as well. Rajah & Tann said that on Saturday it received a copy of the settlement agreement signed by the MCST’s solicitors and the solicitors for the contractor.
Ankerite initially comprised CapitaLand, Hotel Properties and two private funds, but CapitaLand will buy up another 5.5-10 per cent of the company from the stake now held by one of the private funds. This will make Ankerite a CapitaLand subsidiary.
The sale of Gillman Heights finally got the go-ahead in February this year after the Court of Appeal dismissed a last-ditch plea by minority owners to overturn the deal. Earlier reports had indicated that owners of the estate’s 607 units stood to receive between $870,000 and $950,000 for their apartments.
Source : Business Times – 18 May 2009

Gillman Heights en bloc deal is on
GILLMAN Heights owners can heave a sigh of relief now that the estate’s buyers Ankerite have confirmed that the group will go ahead with the purchase of the development.
Property giant CapitaLand, majority shareholder of Ankerite, told The Straits Times in a statement last night that ‘lawyers of both parties are working towards May 22 to complete the purchase of the site’.
Its latest move follows a report in The Straits Times over the weekend that Ankerite had failed to complete the sale by its due date, last Friday.
This caused anxiety amongst some owners at the 607-unit estate in Alexandra Road, who feared that the buyers got cold feet, as some owners had committed to buying other properties.
Earlier reports indicated that owners stood to get between $870,000 and $950,000 for their units.
The sale – first inked in early 2007 for a record $548 million at the height of the property market boom – has been dogged by controversy as minority owners fought at every turn to overturn the sale.
It was finally thought to be a done deal in February after the Court of Appeal dismissed a last-ditch plea by minority owners to reverse the transaction.
However, just two weeks before the sale completion date, on April 30, Ankerite raised some issues. Two points of contention were: a sum of $750,000 transferred out of the estate management fund; and separate monies allocated for a lawsuit against the estate’s management corporation (MCST) by a contractor who built the estate’s clubhouse and swimming pool in 2002.
MCST members said these issues were raised ‘at the last minute’, but Ankerite clarified yesterday that it took time to carry out the ‘due diligence process’ and access to relevant documents was granted by the MCST only on Apr 23 and Apr 24.
Ankerite said the sales committee lawyers Lee and Lee notified them that these issues were resolved on the afternoon of May 15 – the sale completion date. However, Rajah and Tann wanted proof that the outstanding lawsuit had been settled, and only received a copy of the settlement agreement on Saturday, May 16.
‘With this settlement agreement…the lawyers are working to complete the purchase as soon as possible,’ said Ankerite’s lawyers.
MCST chairman Kok Chong Weng said he was glad to hear a date has been set to complete the deal, but added that residents might be looking at options to see if any compensation can be claimed for the delay.
Meanwhile, chief executive of CapitaLand Residential’s Singapore operations Patricia Chia said in a statement yesterday that ‘going forward, we are looking at presenting our other projects such as the proposed development at the Gillman Heights Condominium site at the appropriate time’.
Source : Straits Times – 18 May 2009

Last-minute hitch threatens sale of Gillman Heights
THE troubled $548 million Gillman Heights collective sale that was due to be settled yesterday was stalled by a last-minute hitch.
The sale, which has dragged on for two controversy-wracked years, was supposed to have been signed off by last night but the owners’ lawyers told The Straits Times that the buyers did not complete the deal.
The buyers – a group called Ankerite and led by property giant CapitaLand – raised some issues out of the blue on April 30 relating to routine funds held by the condominium’s management.
Now, some owners at the 607-unit estate in Alexandra Road fear that the buyers have got cold feet and are using the funds issue to back out.
Earlier reports indicated that owners stood to receive between $870,000 and $950,000 for their units.
The sale – first inked in early 2007 – was thought to be a done deal in February after the Court of Appeal dismissed a last-ditch plea by minority owners to overturn the transaction.
But Ankerite’s lawyers Rajah and Tann wrote to the sales committee on April 30 about money left in the management corporation’s (MCST) management fund. These funds go to the buyers on completion of the sale.
Rajah and Tann wanted $750,000 transferred back into the management fund from the sinking fund and the move approved by residents at an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) before the completion date.
An MCST member who declined to be named said it was ‘ridiculous’ to request an EGM at such short notice. Residents are usually notified weeks ahead.
He also noted that Rajah and Tann did not raise the issues until April 30 – just two weeks before the May 15 completion date and two months after the appeals court gave the green light.
Ankerite’s April 30 letter also raised another contentious point – a separate on-going suit by a local contractor against the MCST.
The MCST had set aside almost $700,000 in the management fund to settle the case but Rajah and Tann requested that $2.3 million be allocated.
The MCST has since settled the suit for around $400,000. This meant it had no need to allocate the $2.3 million but it did transfer $750,000 into the management fund. This was done so that there would be ‘no excuses’ for the buyers not to complete the sale, said the MCST member.
Law firm Lee and Lee, which is acting for the sales committee, notified Rajah and Tann in a letter seen by The Straits Times that the issues raised had been resolved even though there was ‘no legal basis to claim the disputed sums’.
It also warned against delaying or deferring completing the sale of the 99-year leasehold estate.
A CapitaLand spokesman confirmed yesterday that during the ‘due diligence process’, it had ‘raised queries relating to a number of issues’. ‘With the view to…the completion of the acquisition soon, CapitaLand has been in constant discussion with the sales committee.’
Ankerite initially comprised CapitaLand, Hotel Properties and two private funds, but CapitaLand will buy up the 10 per cent holding of one private fund for $21.7 million. This will make Ankerite an indirect unit of CapitaLand.
Resident G. Kaur said some neighbours were anxious to see the deal done as they had committed to other properties, ‘but for some residents…it means that they can get to enjoy living in their homes a while longer than expected’, she added.

Source : Straits Times – 16 May 2009  
.
Possibly only a glitch ..... the buyers were so aggressive in pushing the sale through, it seems implausable that they are now looking to abort the deal at this impossibly late stage..But you never know... keep your fingers crossed Mr Kok et al.
.
CapitaLand (the buyers of GH) are not reeling from the property slump, but they nevertheless might want to shave off a development or two. They did manage a small profit in the first quarter according to the following report;-
.
CapitaLand posts $42.9m Q1earnings
Business Times-25 April 2009
.
CapitaLand meets property valuers
Business Times- 09 May 2009

"‘During these dialogues we exchange views about industry practices, market outlook and other general aspects,’ the spokesman said. ‘There are no direct references to our properties or projects.’
.
Yes, just a 'friendly chat' between of the biggest players in the game and the guys who either increase to decrease the value of their substantial portfolio according to market conditions.
.
Developers meet valuers in search for common good
Business Times -29 April

"Developers last week held a meeting with valuers amid recent complaints in some quarters that conservative valuations have derailed some home sale deals as potential buyers could not secure the required loan quantum from banks."

No comments:

Post a Comment