Bid to stop Waterfront View en bloc sale fails

Published April 28, 2007

Bid to stop Waterfront View en bloc sale fails

By WEE LI-EN


THE bid by minority owners of Waterfront View to stop the Bedok estate from being sold en bloc failed in the High Court yesterday.

The owners Yeo Loo Keng and his wife opposed the sale saying they will suffer financial losses to their CPF accounts, because the net proceeds are insufficient to fully repay the outstanding bank loan and fully return CPF monies with drawn to buy the property.

The couple bought their apartment 12 years ago for $515,000 and will be paid about $660,400 from the sale but argued that that was not enough. They said they have to pay off a bank loan of $342,844 plus CPF principal amount and interest of $407,599, which makes a total of $750,443.

However, the Strata Titles Board (STB) ruled in a landmark decision in February that the principal amount withdrawn from CPF accounts and the accrued interest cannot be taken into account when determining whether a financial loss has been suffered by owners involved in such a sale.

Justice Belinda Ang yesterday dismissed the minority owners' appeal with costs and upheld the STB's decision, noting the CPF Board had said the couple will not need to make up for the shortfall if the net proceeds of the sale, after repaying the bank loan, are less than the amount they owe the CPF. The former HUDC estate was sold for $385 million last May.

On whether the Yeos will lodge an appeal, their lawyer Leong Yung Chang from Veritas Law Corp told BT they are 'still looking' at whether they have 'further avenue for appeal'.

April 28, 2007

Couple loses appeal to block Waterfront View sale

By Tan Hui Yee


THE couple opposing the collective sale of the Bedok condominium Waterfront View yesterday lost their appeal in the High Court.

Mr Yeo Loo Keng and his wife Cheryl Lim, the only owners in the 583-unit former HUDC estate still holding out against the sale, had argued that they stood to make a loss of about $90,000 in their Central Provident Fund accounts if the sale went through.

This argument was rejected by the Strata Titles Board (STB) in February, in a landmark ruling. It was the first time the STB had to decide if CPF money can be considered a financial loss in the sale of homes.

High Court judge Belinda Ang yesterday upheld that decision, noting that Mr Yeo, a 43-year-old businessman, and Madam Lim, 40, would still be able to redeem their existing mortgage with the money from the collective sale.

The shortfall in their CPF accounts cannot be considered a deductible expense.

The couple, who bought their 14th-floor, 1,711 sq ft apartment about 12 years ago for $515,000, stand to be paid about $660,000 from the sale.

But they say they will make a loss of $88,340.37 - a part of their CPF principal amounts and the interest accrued to their CPF accounts - after redeeming their outstanding mortgage.

The CPF Board has said they need not make good on that shortfall.

Waterfront View's sales committee member Kevin Tan said the High Court ruling made it clear what can or cannot be accounted for in a collective sale.

'You prevent a situation where you end up compensating someone because you don't know what the situation is,' he said.

Dr Tan estimated that about 300 Waterfront View owners had already bought new homes, while at least 150 have moved out of the estate.

Waterfront View was sold for $385 million last May to FCL Peak, a joint venture between Frasers Centrepoint and Far East Organization.

A disappointed Mr Yeo told The Straits Times yesterday that he was now going to start looking for a new home.

'Who is to say that the next place that we buy may not be sold en bloc and we may be hit again? I would have to think hard about buying another place in Singapore,' he said.