"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.

Let's get this straight

The issue of 1-4-1 exchange was decided by the SPs at EGM 4 and as far as I am concerned, that is where the matter rests. Talking about it now is a moot point and I have nowhere and at no time brought the subject up again on this blog since EGM 4.  

I have nothing whatsoever to do with the present ding-donging drama being played out between the sale committee and an SP in the estate on this matter. The first time I heard about the commotion was through the notice board, and the first time I heard about the recent  flyer was from another SP. It may seem incredulous that I should claim such innocence but those are the facts, these regrettable incidents happened without my knowledge. I have tried to stop the nonsense since but am stuck between a rock and a hard place; I cannot condone the SP in his actions but neither can I lambast either side in this matter. I am therefore remaining neutral and mum on the matter and hope all parties concerned can iron out their differences without resorting to drastic measures. 

It is also unfair to land upon 1 comment made by 1 Anonymous poster amongst thousands of other comments. A comment I don't even pretend was posted accidentally but rather because it seemed harmless to me at the time.  I did not see it's 'insidiousness' perhaps because of it's cryptic S'inglish style and would not have let it pass if I had.  I removed it IMMEDIATELY on the Chairman of the SC's request as he found it offensive, so it wasn't even up that very long. By posting all comments from all sides,  I endorse none.

I came across the Blog 'Yawning Bread' which had a legal letter requesting that a comment be removed and their letter posted.

3. The allegations against our client that you have referred to in the Blog Comments have been put up primarily by a person who calls himself “scroobal’ on the internet. The allegations are false and scurrilous.

4. Our client has instructed us to try and trace “scroobal’ in order to sue him. But the internet being what it is. “scroobal’ has been untraceable so far.

5. Likewise, others who have repeated the allegations made by “scroobal’ have so far been untraceable.

6. Our client’s instructions are to commence proceedings against anyone who makes such allegations against our client.

7. We request that you take down the Blog Comments, and publish this letter in full on your website.

Yes, I am a fierce critic and stickler for detail - and not without merit judging by the number of amendments/u-turns/withdrawals made over the past year.  Someone has to play devil's advocate otherwise owners will be fodder for the en bloc canon.

No comments:

Post a Comment