Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 38

Thread: Owners' loft plans for units derailed

  1. #1
    mr funny is offline Any complaints please PM me
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    8,129

    Default Owners' loft plans for units derailed

    http://www.straitstimes.com/Money/St...ry_678253.html

    Jun 10, 2011

    Owners' loft plans for units derailed

    They bought thinking they could build extra level but find permission denied

    By Esther Teo, Property Reporter


    Twelve home owners of One North Residences in Buona Vista say sales agents had told them they could build a loft in their homes but they were later denied permission to do so. -- PHOTO: UOL

    A GROUP of 12 home owners of One North Residences in Buona Vista have banded together to seek compensation from the property developer.

    The dispute, over whether they are allowed to build another level within their units, has thrown the spotlight on a grey area of what constitutes a 'loft'.

    All 12 bought one-bedroom simplexes - single-level units with high ceilings - when the project was launched in 2007 by Vista Development, a joint venture between property-related companies UOL Group, Low Keng Huat and Kheng Leong.

    Collectively, they own 13 of the 27 simplex units in the 405-unit development.

    The owners claim that sales agents had told them during the marketing phase that they could build a mezzanine floor in their simplex unit but that they were later denied permission to do so when the project was completed.

    They also say that the floor-to-ceiling height of their completed units is only 4.7m, a shade lower than the 5m they were promised when they bought their units. One of the owners said marketing materials used by sales agents stated the height as 5m, although these materials were not distributed to buyers.

    The dispute has now reached a stalemate, with Vista Development denying all claims. But it throws the spotlight on an area of ambiguity - lofts - where home buyers are unsure what exactly is permissible under the law.

    In an interview with The Straits Times, three of the simplex owners said the project's showflat had featured a loft-styled duplex unit and not a simplex unit when the project was launched in March 2007.

    However, they claim the sales agents told them that if they bought a simplex unit, they could similarly build a mezzanine floor after the unit was completed to have it look like the duplex.

    This would increase the unit's size by at least 50 per cent and was a much cheaper alternative as it meant that the unit per sq ft (psf) price would be brought down.

    For example, one of the owners, who declined to be named, had paid $598,000 - or $1,157 psf - for a 517 sq ft simplex unit. He said that he was told by an agent that a mezzanine floor could be built for about $40,000, enlarging the apartment size to about 800 sq ft and bringing down the unit price to about $798 psf.

    This was lower than the $800 to $900 psf being charged for the other units and seemed like a good deal at the time.

    However, when the owners collected their keys in mid-2009 and tried to obtain approval from the management office to commence construction, they were told that the developer had already built to the maximum gross floor area (GFA) and that it would be illegal for them to build a mezzanine level.

    While a second mezzanine level is not possible, it appears that a smaller platform-like structure is allowed as long as it can be dismantled. This is because it is seen as part of the interior design of the unit. However, the owners are not keen on this alternative.

    Some of the simplex unit owners contacted one another and lodged a complaint to Vista in January last year. They found that similar promises had been made to all of them.

    They claim that Vista said the simplexes' dearer prices were due to their higher ceiling height, which made the apartment more spacious, and the better views.

    The 12 owners decided to band together to seek legal advice.

    In July last year, all 12 owners put their names down on a notice listing their grievances and sent it to Vista through their lawyers.

    Vista replied a month later denying all claims.

    The group recently filed a complaint with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA) and the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA). They also approached the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) but were told that Case was not an appropriate avenue to turn to for such a big issue.

    'There's no clear line of authority or government body for buyers like us to take our grievances to,' one of the owners added. They are now undecided whether to proceed with legal action due to the costs that might be incurred.

    When contacted by The Straits Times, Vista said that it had conducted detailed investigations with its marketing agents, Knight Frank and Savills, who said that they did not make the representations as alleged by the owners.

    'We have no reason to believe that the sales agents would have represented that a mezzanine floor can be constructed in a simplex unit, as such construction would involve an increase of gross floor area, and requires prior planning permission from the URA,' the consortium said.

    'Any developer would have planned to maximise the GFA of the development and planning permission would have been obtained from the URA prior to marketing the development. We are no exception.'

    Vista added: 'As part of our efforts to reach out to customers, we had also actively engaged these few buyers on the issue but have not received a response from them since August last year.'

    On the issue of ceiling height, it said that the units were constructed according to the building plans approved by the authorities and that the units were sold according to specifications shown in the sales brochure.

    On its part, the URA said that it evaluates proposals to build lofts in apartments on a case-by- case basis.

    The URA confirmed that it had received a complaint but declined to comment further as investigations were ongoing.

    Owners, developers and architects have to provide details of the proposed loft structures for URA's evaluation to determine whether planning permission is required.

    'As a principle, large loft structures that form part of the structural element of the building, such as mezzanine floors, are considered part of the GFA of the development and will require planning permission from the URA,' it said.

    If the site has already fully maximised its allowable gross plot ratio (GPR) as stipulated in the 2008 masterplan, however, the additional loft structure will not be allowed.

    On the other hand, furniture or fixtures - they do not form part of the structural element of the building - which are about the size of a normal bed will not constitute GFA nor require planning permission, URA said.

    Any such structure, however, will also have to comply with the requirements of other relevant technical agencies.

    Vista is 50 per cent owned by Kheng Leong, which marketed the project. UOL holds 30 per cent and the remainder is owned by Low Keng Huat.

    [email protected]

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,890

    Default

    See lah... Confirm mis selling but very hard to prove if no black n white.

    Tennery? Miltonia 5.3 ceiling 1 bedder? Etc

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,013

    Default

    I think in this case, its not the developers but the agents serving the buyers then who promised them that they can build without getting direct instructions from developer... the agents must compensate instead!!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    7,482

    Default

    Anything outside of specs have to ask for black and white. Cannot rely on agents word.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    1,788

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kingkong1984
    See lah... Confirm mis selling but very hard to prove if no black n white.

    Tennery? Miltonia 5.3 ceiling 1 bedder? Etc
    Tennary, showroom did put up a sample double deck bed on it. this one maybe is real

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ysyap
    I think in this case, its not the developers but the agents serving the buyers then who promised them that they can build without getting direct instructions from developer... the agents must compensate instead!!!
    But they are appointed by the developer wor......so we claim from developer and developer claim from agent.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    3,006

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lovelle
    Tennary, showroom did put up a sample double deck bed on it. this one maybe is real
    the we should take picture to show proof, just in case.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    1,741

    Default

    basket! when i go to see THE CAPE, the agent preach the same thing, say can build another lvl. KNNZ

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    6,003

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,385

    Default

    what about those existing loft units condo..

    legal or illegal..??

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    6,003

    Default

    Many condo owners also put decking on the planter areas to increase GFA. I think government just closes one eye...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    377

    Default

    but don't the sales and purchase agreements have the specific property agent's name on it? why can't they sue the agents as well as KF and savills for telling them bullshit? i am sure these agents will be cross examined in court.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,493

    Default

    Next time take photos of the showrooms for evidence

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,385

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Geylang OKT
    Next time take photos of the showrooms for evidence
    might as well take video clips, from the moment u step in showflat til sign on the dotted line

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    7,482

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hyenergix
    Many condo owners also put decking on the planter areas to increase GFA. I think government just closes one eye...
    Those are part of the built in that was sold to you so isn't it under GFA? In any case, those decking can be easily removed.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    532

    Default

    Greenwich also got loft with mezzanine as shown in their ad

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    6,003

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kane
    Those are part of the built in that was sold to you so isn't it under GFA? In any case, those decking can be easily removed.
    No. Planters and bay windows were not part of GFA.

    http://www.propnex.com/resources/Pol...20of%20GFA.pdf

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwong71
    what about those existing loft units condo..

    legal or illegal..??
    Since this issue has been raised in court, let the relevant authority issue clear and unbiased rules and laws governing this ambiguity so all will understand better!

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    D15
    Posts
    5,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jwong71
    what about those existing loft units condo..

    legal or illegal..??
    The empty spaces above a loft floor unit are NOT "live-able" spaces. How are u to ensure that the structure will hold the weights? Unless as suggested in the article, you construct one that can be dismantled.

    Be aware when you are buying high ceiling units, the "spaces" above may be "counted" in as floor area. If you want to expand the area, you are in actual fact EXPANDING the FLOOR which holds the weights.

    That is not like hacking walls or adding rooms with no tonnage issues and therefore this floor adding can be dangerous.

    This is NOT right. Just My Humble Opinion Only, always correct me if I am wrong

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,857

    Default

    All I can say is, GREED blinded their eyes...

    They were so eager to snap up the 'star buys' that they did not want to waste time doing the necessary groundwork.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mantrix
    All I can say is, GREED blinded their eyes...

    They were so eager to snap up the 'star buys' that they did not want to waste time doing the necessary groundwork.
    errr....what necessary groundwork need to be done? can educate the forummers here?

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,013

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blackjack21trader
    The empty spaces above a loft floor unit are NOT "live-able" spaces. How are u to ensure that the structure will hold the weights? Unless as suggested in the article, you construct one that can be dismantled.

    Be aware when you are buying high ceiling units, the "spaces" above may be "counted" in as floor area. If you want to expand the area, you are in actual fact EXPANDING the FLOOR which holds the weights.

    That is not like hacking walls or adding rooms with no tonnage issues and therefore this floor adding can be dangerous.

    This is NOT right. Just My Humble Opinion Only, always correct me if I am wrong
    If the spaces above are counted in as floor area, that means can have floor in those space lah... otherwise its not floor area!!!

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    D15
    Posts
    5,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ysyap
    If the spaces above are counted in as floor area, that means can have floor in those space lah... otherwise its not floor area!!!
    I dunno about lofts here,BUT just be careful:

    NOTE: UNIT AREA INCLUDES VOID, LOFT & AIRCON LEDGE. xxxxxxxxxxxx...
    here's another:


    Notes:
    (a)
    Floor area refers to the estimated area of the whole apartment, inclusive of the area of the air-conditioner ledge and voids (where applicable).
    (b)
    Internal floor area refers to the estimated area of the apartment computed based on the centre line of the apartment wall.
    (c)
    The indicative prices do not include the cost of optional components. Actual selling prices will vary according to the attributes of the individual units at the time of selection.
    xxxxxxx
    YET ANOTHER !!

    xxxx(400 sqft floor + 400 sqft air of the 2nd floor) is counted "twice" as GFA. xx
    OMG !
    Last edited by blackjack21trader; 13-06-11 at 10:12.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,943

    Default

    I got reply from URA on this subject

    "The strata floor area quoted by developers is the area which will be reflected in the subsidiary strata certificate of title of the unit when it is completed. The Land Titles (Strata) Act (LTSA) administered by the Singapore Land Authority, requires the dimensions of a strata unit to be clearly marked out on the strata certified plan so that the strata area of a unit and the common property are shown on the plan. The LTSA however, does not prescribe what constitutes the strata floor area of a unit.

    We understand that developers usually include “double volume” space as part of the strata area, e.g. the empty space above the living room which extends to the second storey ceiling in a penthouse unit. You may wish to find out more information from the developers of the projects you mentioned on how they have computed the strata area of the units "

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,419

    Default

    I can tell a lot of forummers bought units at Tennery and such thinking that they can build a mezzanine level.

    Now they are panicky. Well, if not in black and white, don't take agents' word for it. if you did, it is too late to annul the transaction.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    15,307

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by stalingrad
    I can tell a lot of forummers bought units at Tennery and such thinking that they can build a mezzanine level.

    Now they are panicky. Well, if not in black and white, don't take agents' word for it. if you did, it is too late to annul the transaction.
    for tennary/greenwich, developer will actually build the 'loft' for them

    so i actually duno whether developer oredi got the approval anot...anyone knows?

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    D15
    Posts
    5,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laguna
    I got reply from URA on this subject

    "The strata floor area quoted by developers is the area which will be reflected in the subsidiary strata certificate of title of the unit when it is completed. The Land Titles (Strata) Act (LTSA) administered by the Singapore Land Authority, requires the dimensions of a strata unit to be clearly marked out on the strata certified plan so that the strata area of a unit and the common property are shown on the plan. The LTSA however, does not prescribe what constitutes the strata floor area of a unit.

    We understand that developers usually include “double volume” space as part of the strata area, e.g. the empty space above the living room which extends to the second storey ceiling in a penthouse unit. You may wish to find out more information from the developers of the projects you mentioned on how they have computed the strata area of the units "
    Thanks for sharing, brother That really helps clear up the air , in my opinion.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    D15
    Posts
    5,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devilplate
    for tennary/greenwich, developer will actually build the 'loft' for them

    so i actually duno whether developer oredi got the approval anot...anyone knows?
    Ya.. some1 could help find out how this project loft approval works out. It could be the model for our next purchase consideration

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    333

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by devilplate
    for tennary/greenwich, developer will actually build the 'loft' for them

    so i actually duno whether developer oredi got the approval anot...anyone knows?

    The easiest to know is that if your floor plans reflect a second floor then YES! Its approved and when u recieve your unit, it will be what u bought for. Other than that... Likely self application or no prior approval given. Hope this will clear your doubts!

    Cheers

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,890

    Default

    see the drawings given by developer. What u see is what u get. Same as cars. No need to say much. Everything else is your own greed.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    -: 18-11-21, 09:03
  2. #1 Loft, 80 units, Geylang
    By mcmlxxvi in forum District 14
    Replies: 1395
    -: 04-10-17, 06:28
  3. More HDB flat owners holding on to units after MOP
    By oops in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 3
    -: 04-06-14, 20:20
  4. More HDB flat owners renting out units
    By reporter2 in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 1
    -: 19-08-13, 23:31
  5. Professional Cleaning Services for High Ceiling Loft Units?
    By gwlip in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 2
    -: 24-12-12, 14:23

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •