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.

Back in the saddle


Well, here's a turn-up for the books - the marketing agent has decided to continue it's involvement with the collective sale of Tampines Court after all.

The Chairman of the SC sent a begging letter to Huttons and after 'discussion with the various stakeholders on their continued involvement' they replied in the positive. Who might those stakeholders be, I wonder? Are they merely referring to themselves or someone else?

Perhaps, after thinking about it long and hard, they realised it might not be good for their enbloc credentials to be known as quitters in the field, liable to give up half way through. Who would want to hire such a firm? No, better to slug it out half-heartedly to the end.

Anyway, the pain continues. The news will bring cheer to some and a groan of despair to others.

15 comments:

  1. At the end of the day, it's still about RP. They have wasted enough time. No more time to play any games. With about 1/2 year left, it's now or never.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree. We don't want to sell cheap.
      When other agencies rejected TC, Chairman had no recourse but revert back to Huttons. Our SC is now even more ineffective and impotent, ceded effective control to MA.
      Those who volunteered and with whom we entrusted, have neither the discipline nor expertise to manage this Enbloc. Tampines Court is being marketed by agents who are full of negativity of our land. Do not pin your hopes up too high. MA's recommended price will likely prevail eventually.
      I won't sign.
      Too much waffling is a sign of weakness and ineptitude. It's a Mega Million dollar deal for heavens sake. We deserve better.

      Delete
    2. Definitely the RP is paramount. But on what basis was the revised RP derived from? RLV calculation is beyond the scope of this SC. Was it based on intuition or the roll of a dice? For sure MA wants none of it.
      Up till today, we don't have a viable RP that can stand up to scrutiny. A fractured team with no coherent policy. Blatantly inconsistent and full of contradiction in their reasoning.
      A ship of fools.
      An SPs nightmare.
      Developers Goldmine.
      Enough said.

      Delete
  2. Totally agreed. Huttons CEO just wanted to save his company's credentials but I think Huttons's reputation had already spoiled in Enbloc market. It is better for Huttons to quit totally rather than quit and come back again. This reinforced TC SP's comments that Huttons is a very unprofessional company in Enbloc. I doubt SC/MA can achieve 80% by June 2017.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How I see it:
      December is a lull period for Realty, yet it's notable that Huttons took a long time to decide to commit.
      CEO Hutton did not personally reply with the ho-hum acceptance letter. Less than a minute to compose.
      MA had been exposed and vilified previously.
      Huttons continued involvement in this vain effort will contain the damage.
      MA involvement will be perfunctory.
      SC will do all the hard work.

      Delete
    2. When time is of the essence, Hutton's timing sucks. Replying just before Year end holidays means further delays.
      Do our SC possess good instincts to read into the sincerity of their partners?

      Delete
  3. It's disconcerting to read of Hutton's reply to Chairman of the 'confidence placed in Mr Terrance Lian and the trust placed in our company...' All comments in this blog and indeed even undeleted SC Facebook comments do not speak favourably of them.
    When this SC does not accept MA's recommendation, it's a contradiction to say you have confidence in them.
    Does this SC accurately reflect the hopes and aspirations of SPs of Tampines Court?
    After being spurned so publicly, what promises has this SC made to Huttons to turn them around?
    Mr Chairman, Mr Secretary please publish letter sent to Huttons on my and all SPs behalf.
    We, who you represent in the sale of our homes, have the right to know.
    Thank You.

    ReplyDelete
  4. In the interest of transparency and openess, could the SC please release ALL post resignation correspondence with Huttons. I would also like to know how many property consultants Chairman wrote to and the reasons they gave for rejection.

    ReplyDelete
  5. MA's insistence on his low RP makes 80% impossible to achieve. It was patently clear that he had no wish to see this Enbloc through.
    SC betrayed concerned SPs when Chairman reverted back to Huttons. All SPs comments clearly favored a fresh new agency for the final push. SC has gone Dark and is seriously out of touch with us.
    As admitted in their FB, SC members do not have the time to commit fully to this Enbloc. That would explain/excuse their unfamiliarity with LTSA Laws, lack of due diligence, tardiness, disorderly and muddled effort.
    We now have a reluctant MA with even less conviction to strive for our Enbloc success.
    Huttons, MA and his team and all concerned SPs realise that we have a snowball's chance in hell of a successful sale.
    Only SC is in denial.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Statutory Notices is overdue, again. It's a LTSA 4 weekly requirement, regardless of any changes. Secretary, please expedite update.
    Thank You.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just cannot figure this out
    If TC is worth $1.7 million, how come the resale value is only worth a pathetic $800,000. Some agents said it may go below $750k for a 1700 unit
    There must be an error somewhere

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TC definitely worth 1.7m or more. Anything less can forget it. Don't try scare tactics, we won't buy it !

      Delete
    2. No more scare tactics, but Enbloc in the hands of the delusional, desperate and irrational makes me quiver.
      SC lack of transparency, bad work ethic, total disregard and ignorance of the Law (latest being short shrift to LTSA 4 weekly Stat Declaration). Slackers in the little things, don't expect them to be truly professional with the big stuff.
      Madness to put your trust in a recalcitrant SC.
      Don't sell our houses on the cheap to solve your personal problems.

      Delete
    3. If SPs are confident in SC, they will not sell.
      If potential buyers believe in SC revised RP, then $ 1.2M is still profitable after ABSD and other closing costs.
      Obviously lack of confidence in successful collective sale.
      $ 750K or lower is possible post Enbloc, with distress or ill-informed sellers of which there are a few in TC.
      Be mindful that TC was commanding above $ 1M with a record of $ 1.25M, better than Raintree Gardens or Rio Casa. Rightly, our Enbloc price should be > $1.65M.
      SC revised RP is still uninspiring and insipid; a true reflection of our SC.

      Delete
    4. Correction not ABSD but SSD

      Delete