Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Implications of Revising OTP after completion of SnP

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default Implications of Revising OTP after completion of SnP

    Need advice from forummers here on this unique problem of my friend.


    He sold his landed LH99 to a Singaporean and his Chinese wife.
    The plan was for him to buy under his own name. OTP was eventually prepared under both names.

    The exercise was meant to be quick, but eventually got delayed cos the Chinese wife changed her nationality to US, and then exercise was done. She is a Singapore PR as well.

    SnP completed and money disbursed.

    Now my friend's lawyer called - Land Dealings Approval Unit <LDAU> wants a revised OTP - to include 'subject to LDAU approval'. On top of that, major AnA already underway - complete walls hacked, etc.



    slip-ups at all levels, esp buyers' side.


    I see many issues:



    1. Accede to request - add in subject to LDAU with both buyers' names.

    If LDAU rejects, then friend got to return money? with walls hacked +++?
    potential risk... somemore also completed SnP and received money already.

    If approved, buyer got to pay stamp duty again?? got to pay any ABSD again?? dun know how many properties they have. any other implications to friend?



    2. Accede to request - but modify change to husband's name only - without the subject to LDAU.

    same as above - buyer pays stamp duty again? unless IRAS agrees to waive.
    any implications to friend?



    3. Dun accede to request - then property cannot be properly transferred, more legal headaches.



    4. Others ?



    Has anyone encountered such situations before?
    any suggestions and comments will be useful and appreciated.


    Thanks in advance.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    218

    Default

    From experience, that clause will be required by authorities no matter what. Would suggest option 2... No need to pay SD again.

    Otherwuse, use option 1, but add clauses for buyer to indemnify all costs.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Thanks silver023. Guess that's the way to go.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    218

    Default

    You're welcome.

    Just paperwork, so should be no material issues from your friend's perspective, esp since transaction completed.

    Good luck! PM me if you need more info

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    142

    Default

    The chinese wife was a SPR before buying the house?

    If so why put her name?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,943

    Default

    To play safe, suggest to table the options to SLA LDAU for consideration first.

    Option 2 is better.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    4,990

    Default

    Failing which, can always have a 'National Conversation' on this unique issue with Ministers...

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by may2012
    The chinese wife was a SPR before buying the house?

    If so why put her name?
    Not sure, think she was already SPR then. Was told that they wanted to put husband's name only at first and rushed the exercise date. Then delayed cos changed the wife's nationality to US. We thought this may be due to the FTA with US, but no difference in ABSD treatment between US and SPR.

    Prob just want equality and asset under her name. Prob the flipflop resulted in omission of the LDAU clause.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    218

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laguna
    To play safe, suggest to table the options to SLA LDAU for consideration first.

    Option 2 is better.
    I dun think SLA being regulatory will accept buffet-style choices. It's more like you put up your option and they approve or otherwise.

    Agree option 2 is better.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silver023

    thanks once again! also found quite a number of other links as well while surfing.

    ultimately whose responsibility is it?
    the agent? - buyer's or seller's
    the lawyers? - buyer's or seller's
    the seller or buyer?
    or everybody?

    are you with SLA ?

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carbuncle
    Failing which, can always have a 'National Conversation' on this unique issue with Ministers...

    aiya... "small" matter la.
    try to solve locally first and no need to escalate to that level la...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    another implication:

    if go by option 2, that is, husband's name only, there will be a need to redo the SnP to change the name from couple name to husband only.

    sounds complicating...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    218

    Default

    No la, not SLA.

    Assuming buyer's agent met the wife before, the buyer agent should have checked and advised buyer. Both lawyers should have also checked (esp buyer's given they had full buyers' info).

    But blame attributing will get messy without resolution.... Focus on rectifying paperwork. If they want Option 2, then just have them change the paperwork themselves (stamp duty should be payable (by new owners)).

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    yes, focus on rectifying paperworks.
    incidentally buyer's agent is the husband's brother.
    will see how they sort out things.
    thanks again.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    update:

    buyer's lawyer trying to get matter resolved asap esp with the price having moved up further n QE3 announced.

    anyway friend has decided to acceded to their request to add addendum to otp: for both names subject to LDAU approval, else buy in husband's name alone. make things easier for them, rather than void the otp due to technicality; afterall sales completed already.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    4,063

    Default

    Did not see this thread initially.
    Wow, so messy situation.
    Hopefully solved.
    Lesson learnt - as a landed seller, we have to be cautious when it comes to non singaporean buyer who is PR.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Posts
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by buttercarp
    Did not see this thread initially.
    Wow, so messy situation.
    Hopefully solved.
    Lesson learnt - as a landed seller, we have to be cautious when it comes to non singaporean buyer who is PR.


    actually friend's friend said if void, will be to his advantage. however he decided to do the right thing and honour the original agreement.

Similar Threads

  1. Re-pricing of loan implications
    By bargain hunter in forum Finance and Legal
    Replies: 34
    -: 20-12-13, 14:04
  2. Andy Xie: On implications of strengthening Dollar
    By sgbuyer in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 69
    -: 07-02-13, 21:27
  3. Social Implications of Property CRASH...
    By radha08 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 118
    -: 10-04-12, 20:16
  4. Revising BTO income ceiling has its justification: Khaw
    By mr funny in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 0
    -: 20-06-11, 13:11
  5. Marked as Conservation Area - Implications?
    By penguin in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 1
    -: 31-08-09, 14:54

Posting Permissions

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