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.

RAINBOW GARDENS

Development Name:Rainbow Garden
Property Type:Condominium
Developer:Wai Wing Properties Pte Ltd
Tenure:999-year Leasehold
Construction Year:1986
# of Units:64

Collective sale: Application for sale to the STB: Aug 2007

Rainbow Gardens' en bloc sale was approved by the STB 0n 18 May 2008.
The following is the minority appeal to the High Court, the appeal was dismissed on 12 May 2009.

Rainbow gardens High court -
.
I did a quick speed read and it seems a few procedural points were raised. Historically, procedural errors don't have a snowballs chance in hell in succeeding, I wonder why they were even attempted at this level
.
First Issue: failure to "affix a copy of the notice referred to in sub-paragraph (e) in the 4 official languages to a conspicuous part of each building comprised in the strata title plan or the development, as the case may be".
.
Decision:
37. ....Choo J’s decision in Chang Mei Wah can be used as authority to support the proposition that a technical breach will not invalidate an application to an STB if there is no prejudice to anyone, there are still the two decisions in Ng Swee Lang-HC and Ng Swee Lang-CA which are authorities in support of that proposition and I was bound by the decision in Ng Swee Lang-CA.
38.....While a strict approach may arguably lead to some certainty, I was of the view that it would be too harsh to invalidate every application for any non-compliance however slight and inconsequential.
.
Second issue: failure to attach Form 1A in the Application
.
Decision:
54 Since Form 1A was not, strictly speaking, required, non-compliance with the content of Form 1A could not invalidate the Application.
.
58 In any event, I was satisfied that there was no prejudice to the Minority and in accordance with my decision on Issue No.1, I was of the view that the absence of service of the Application did not invalidate the Application, even if there was a requirement that the Application be served.
.
Third issue: The CSA was not signed by subsidiary proprietors holding at least 80% of the share value of RG
.
62 Clause 14(b)(i) of the CSA had stipulated that the MSP [Minimum Selling Price] was not to be less than S$68.5 million. The close of an EOI exercise was on 18 April 2007 and it was learned then that Premier’s offer of $76.8 million was the highest. The Conditional SPs then signed the CSA and inserted a condition that their signatures would not be valid if the MSP was lower than $76.8 million. [Minority Lawyer] submitted that as this was a different sum from the MSP stipulated under clause 14(b)(i), the Conditional SPs had not agreed with all the terms of the CSA.
.
63 [Minority lawyer]also submitted that although clause 14(b)(ii) of the CSA had stated that the SC might raise the MSP without seeking the consent of those who had signed the CSA, the SC was required under that provision to notify the Majority of the decision to raise the MSP by a written notice. The SC did not do this until late July 2007, just before the Application was submitted.
.
Decision:
65 As for any breach to notify the others who had signed the CSA about the higher revision of the MSP, [majority lawyer] submitted that it was for the other signatories to complain about such a breach.
.
66 In Liu Chee Ming v Loo-Lim Shirley [2008] 2 SLR 764 (“Liu Chee Ming”), I had said at [50]: The appellants were not parties to the CSA even though eventually, by virtue of the decision of the Board, they were bound by its terms. Accordingly, their complaint about a breach of cl 6.1.1 was from the angle that such a breach established an absence of good faith. The vendors who had signed the CSA were not opposing the application to the Board.
.
67 Understandably, none of the other signatories had objected to any breach of clause 14(b)(ii). They had obtained a price higher than the MSP stipulated in clause 14(b)(i). However, Mr Liew’s argument was that there was no consensus ad idem among all the Majority at the relevant time. Looking at clause 14(b)(ii) in a common-sensical way, I was of the view that there would be consensus ad idem if the SC did not object to the condition, which was the case. The MSP had been effectively raised to $76.8 million. This condition was met. The notification to the others was an additional step that should have been taken but the omission to do so did not vitiate the CSA as between all the Majority.
.
68 Hence, I was of the view that by the time the Application was made (on or about 3 August 2007), the requisite percentage of share value had been obtained.
.
Fourth issue The transaction was not in good faith having regard to the sale price in the SPA

 

UOL taking half-share in Rainbow site

 

UOL Group is taking a half-share in the Rainbow Gardens site in Toh Tuck Road bought by the LaSalle Asia Opportunity II fund in a collective sale a few years ago.
The 999-year leasehold plot and an adjoining strip of state land total a land area of 130,164 sq ft. In its statutory filing with the Singapore Exchange (SGX) yesterday, UOL said planning approval has been granted for a condo project with a gross floor area of about 182,219 sq ft.
BT understands the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) approval for the site is for a five-storey condo with around 120 units although market watchers reckon that with UOL’s advent, the unit mix could be reconfigured.
In its statement, UOL said it will be investing a total of about $15.58 million for its half-share in a joint-venture company it has formed with the LaSalle fund. The sum UOL is investing comprises $1 million in ordinary shares, about $10.17 million in redeemable preference shares, and about $4.4 million in shareholders’ loans.
UOL said it and/or its subsidiaries will be appointed as the project and sales and marketing managers for the new condo to be built.
Source : Business Times – 10 Oct 2009



NEW LAUNCH - TERRENE@BUKIT TIMAH 
(FORMERLY RAINBOW GARDENS)

Project Name: Terrene @ Bukit Timah
Description: 8 Blocks of 5-storey condominium development & 1 level basement car park.
Terrene Location: Former Rainbow Garden ~ Jalan Jurong Kechil
District: 21
Site Area: 130,117 sq ft (12088.2 sqm)
Tenure: 999 years
Expected TOP: 31 March 2014
Total Nos of Units: 172 Units

More than 100 units of Terrene at Bukit Timah sold

 July 15, 2010
Property developer UOL Group has sold more than 100 units of its latest condominium project, Terrene at Bukit Timah.
This is almost 80 per cent of the 130 units released at a private preview which started on July 8.
UOL will be releasing the remaining 42 units for the official launch on Friday.
The 999-year leasehold condominium is a 50-50 joint venture between UOL and La Salle Asia Investment Management.
The apartments are priced at an average of S$1,250 per square foot for a typical unit.
They range from S$719,000 for a one-bedroom unit to S$2.79 million for a five-bedroom penthouse.
UOL said 23 of the 30 penthouse units have been sold.
Demand came mainly from Singaporean buyers, with majority from private homes in the nearby vicinity.
The five-storey development of 172 units, stretches across more than 130,000 square feet near the Bukit Timah Nature Reserve.
The development is expected to be ready by April 2014.
Source : Channel NewsAsia – 15 Jul 2010

No comments:

Post a Comment