"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.

Fishing for contact details

At the EGMS, the sale committee asked owners present at the meeting to leave their names, units and contact details such as email addresses and hand-phone numbers if they wanted to be contacted by the marketing team/SC and receive material about the collective sale etc. All well and good, there were those that did just that and so were happy to receive whatever emails/text messages going around. (They have my contact information but, alas , never send me any information, perhaps I am on a blacklist of sorts?). I presume those eager at the beginning were the same ones who signed up early, and once signed, the marketing team/SC would have  no further need to contact them. Those fish have been hooked and  landed.

Other owners did not leave their contact details - for whatever reason, but presumably because they did not want to be contacted through their hand-phones or receive unsolicited marketing material.  There is no compulsion to give over your personal details even when the sale committee is legitimately elected. They simply do not have that kind of power. So, what is the marketing agent/sale committee to do when they run out of honestly gathered contact details? 

They could:
  1. earn their marketing fee the hard way and go door to door
  2. look up land line numbers in the phone book one by one
  3. get their skids on and set up a better website/blog and post material accessible to owners 24/7
  4. send their flyers through SingPost bulk mail
    1, 2 &3 cost time and energy and 4 spondulicks. There is a fifth way and that is to get their hands on a ready-made list of owner contact details and bypass owner permission altogether.

    And who would have such a ready-made list?    Answer: the management office.

    I read the minutes of the last Management Council meeting on the Notice Board today and apparently there was an attempt to get such a list from the office. Now, the office cannot hand over a list of owners details to third parties, nevermind the sale committee. The LTSA rules only specify that the sale committee can request for and receive the Strata Roll on paying a fee (in fact the BMSM allows any owner such liberty) and the strata roll does not reveal contact numbers, only names and addresses.

    Thankfully, the management office did not hand over the telephone numbers/email addresses. The Management Council members also made an emphatic stand on the matter as they understood perfectly well how such a thing would compromise their neutrality in the collective sale and that divulging private information would be a gross abuse of position on their part .......  and in my opinion, might even be a reportable offense to the BCA (btw; I am not on the MC in case you think otherwise).


    1. You never fail to amaze me with your negative comments. That you have so much energy to criticize is amazing. You could have volunteered to be in the Sale Committee but you didn't. Instead you choose to be a critic and lament on procedures not done properly, which would have been if only you were in the committee. Anyone can criticize. I find you obnoxious and very opinionated. For example, the issue of 1 4 1. Despite the overwhelming majority voting against it, despite the fact that it is not feasible, you stubbornly proceed to pour scorn on it. Do not blame this dissatisfactory process when you could have been in the committee.

      1. I have not spoken about 1-4-1 since the EGM and have not 'stubbornly proceeded to pour scorn' as you said. Perhaps I should join the litigation bandwagon and demand your real name so I can sue you in open court! It is a false accusation, as the blog itself can attest Sir.

        But relax. I do not believe in litigation. In round 1, the victorious minority group had the option of putting the ex-sale committee members into bankrupty but the group decided that that would not be a neighbourly thing to do. We did not 'go for blood' even though we had the legal right and legal advice that we could. I was part of that decision making, and I still hold that viewpoint today. Neighbours do not sue neighbours, we are not the PAP and should have thicker skins than that.

        Your personal attack on my perceived character is nothing new to me, and I actually am not offended by it in the least - as it is almost certainly true:) As for committees, they are not my bag. I rub people up the wrong way too often to be of much service. My powers of persuasion are nil.

        Empty criticism or exposing faults? Which do I do?