"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.

A Sellers Cautionary Tale

This is what we all know - more proof of en bloc proceeds being only enough for a unit HALF the size or DOUBLE the price in the same area! Unlocking the value of your home ... for the benefit of the DEVELOPERS!

A Seller's Cautionary Tale
I AM compelled to share my experience as a cautionary tale after reading the report, ‘Private homes still seeing high demand’ (Sept 22). I was a flat owner of Gillman Heights, which was sold in a collective property sale exercise and for which I received $887,000 (around $520 per sq ft) for my 1,700 sqft three-bedroom unit.
By the time I received my money, I could only afford a similar unit far from the city and certainly not as central as Gillman Heights.
Former owners like me were assured we would receive priority in buying units in the new condominium – The Interlace – on the site of our former home.
But at $1,000 psf, I would have been effectively downgraded to a much smaller apartment at the same location. Worse, we were given only three days’ advance notice of the exclusive preview for us to choose our units at the Shenton Way office of the developer, CapitaLand Residential.
The preview, like the units offered to us, was unfavourable. We were not given brochures and all we had to gauge the new condo visually was an amateurish miniature model which was a stark contrast to the sleek, three-dimensional and professionally crafted model displayed at the sales office at the public launch.
The preview seemed like a half-hearted attempt by the developer to meet its obligations under the sales pact.
Was the professional Interlace model completed and ready for viewing at the off-site sales office, and if yes, why was the ‘private preview’ not held at CapitaLand’s temporary River Valley Road sales office instead?
Why were the preview for ex-owners and the public launch of The Interlace so starkly different? Former owners were not offered a discount and while it may seem like a public relations coup to announce that ex-owners of Gillman Heights would receive priority in selection of apartments in the new project, the ones we were offered were some of the most unfavourable.
So, if there is a moral to my experience for flat owners contemplating collective sale, I would say potential seller beware: Read the fine print over matters like priority purchase of the new condo.
Reginald Tan

Straits Times - 02-Oct 2009


  1. I am an ex-owner of Farrer Court which was successfully en-bloced for over $2m per unit. I have subsequently purchased a freehold prime district apartment late last year and now enjoying better facilities and amenities. (Note: Farrer Court does not have a pool or clubhouse)

    There are always 2-sides to a story.


  2. erm... the minority also played a part and I have to say Credo did a good job overall. Win-win for all.

  3. Yes, among the ex-HUDCs, Farrer Court stands alone. It is a shining example of how an en bloc should be done. Active owner participation, reactive sale committee keeping abreast of the rising market, shrewd marketing and I believe you had 100% owner agreement at the end. Your price enabled all of you the choice of moving on to a better place or downgrading and pocketing the difference.

    Waterfront View, Gillman Heights,(and another one in Hougang) had sale committees that did not do such a good job and many owners had no choice but to downgrade or downsize. Tampines Court came close but were saved by the bell.