Review law on en bloc sales
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/...ry_495516.html
Feb 27, 2010
TREASURING HOMES
Review law on en bloc sales
IF MONDAY'S advice to treasure our homes and not use them to make a quick buck is to be heeded ('Homes are for keeps, not speculation: PM'), the Government should review the law permitting collective property sales.
Such sales exercises invite speculation in the private property market at the expense of a home owner's security.
I have not lived in peace for the past three years because my neighbours voted to go en bloc. The main argument of the pro-collective sale lobby had nothing to do with urban renewal. It was about reaping a windfall.
The bid at my condominium, Green Lodge in Toh Tuck Road, fell through last month, but there is nothing to stop my neighbours from trying again.
I dissented because I treasure my home for the reasons implied in Monday's report: It gives me peace, familiarity and stability in the twilight of my life; and it is my nest egg which I do not wish taken away from me by others' temptation to make a fast buck.
But how can I take good care of my treasured asset if I have no control over it?
The power to sell my home lies not in me but in 80 per cent of my neighbours. And that is why the law must be changed.
Tan Keng Ann
Protect reluctant parties in en bloc sales
http://www.straitstimes.com/STForum/...ry_496472.html
Mar 2, 2010
Protect reluctant parties in en bloc sales
MR TAN Keng Ann's letter last Saturday ('Review law on en bloc sales') revealed the unfair predicament suffered by a good number of people amid the frenzy of many collective property sale exercises. Instead of leaving them alone to retire in peace and contentment, young speculators callously go out of their way to make home owners like Mr Tan miserable, all to make a quick buck.
I am not involved in any collective sale, but from what I have heard from friends who are, the situation is dire and shameful. Meetings of condo owners to discuss such sales are invariably boisterous. Some turn ugly with owners hurling verbal abuse at one another, with those who refuse to sell on the receiving end. They are also harassed between meetings.
It is clear that those who put pressure on reluctant owners have much to gain if the sale goes through. Some speculators have bought several units earlier in anticipation of a successful sale. It is purely business and their aim (and that of the would-be developers) is to make money. The feelings of people like Mr Tan do not concern them in the least.
Yes, the law must change if we are serious about curbing speculation. It would protect the interest of owners who cherish their homes. Why take away the rights of owners who are not interested in the money and want to stay put? Besides, many of the condos involved are not by any stretch of the imagination obsolete in design, or in a state of disrepair.
Lee Seck Kay