New beginnings at the Pinnacle

[Regulators]

Go check with your lawyer what fiduciary duty means

The gist of the whole issue is very simple.

Nobody is holding a gun and forcing Mr. Darien Loh to buy that 5th floor unit at the Pinnacle.

[proud owner]

The gist of the whole issue is very simple.

Nobody is holding a gun and forcing Mr. Darien Loh to buy that 5th floor unit at the Pinnacle.

well he probably didnt know that a higher floor cost less

[jlrx]

correct
now that the papers have unintentionally exposed this
the 5th flr unit owner should clarify with HDB ...
as a minority ... whether he made money already or not ... he should fight for it ..
just like the minority of Horizon tower ...
who knows ... he may get back some $$ ....
and then sue HDB if he has to ... for any cost he may incur in the process ..
spore pledges Justice and Equality mah ...

also remember that HDB owes a fiduciary duty to all Singaporeans in pricing n selling their flats at rationally n fairly (not just reasonable) so Mr Loh has every god given right to sue hdb for his money back. Fiduciary duty supercedes whatever contractual terms that hdb sets out to bind purchasers.

Go check with your lawyer what fiduciary duty means

well he probably didnt know that a higher floor cost less

Let's re-read the above news article about Mr Loh ...

In time for baby's arrival

Who lives here: Darien Loh, 30, business development executive, and his wife, Eunice, 29, bank executive
Flat type: 5th storey, four-room flat, 96 sq m
Cost of flat: $465,000
Keys collected: Dec 15
Moved in: Second week of this month

No doubt The Pinnacle is highly desirable and located in an excellent area close to the central business districts, and the skybridges are a great feature with stunning views of the city skyline.

Whatever. After viewing about three flats every week for the past two years, Mr and Mrs Darien Loh are just relieved they now live in a home they own.

They had been living with Mr Loh's parents in a flat in Clementi since tying the knot in September 2008.

'The skybridges are a nice bonus but I can probably do without them,' Mr Loh says.

When they received the selection notice in March last year, the couple initially agreed that they would not settle for a unit below the sixth floor.

In the end, they decided to buy their fifth-storey apartment.

Mrs Loh says: 'There were only four units left on the fourth and fifth floors. We went ahead and chose one on the higher floor. We did not want to pay the cash-over-valuation price and an agent's fee needed for a resale flat.'

If Mr Loh indeed sues the HDB, as suggested by some people here, I think his case will be weak.

Since there were only four units left on the fourth and fifth floors, what could HDB have done? Could they boot out Mr Ng from the 34th storey or Mr Tan from the 42nd storey?

Let me help HDB to draft a letter to Mr Ng and Mr Tan,

Dear either Mr Ng (34th Storey) or Mr Tan (42nd Storey),

Can one of you please give up your flat to Mr Loh?

HDB owes a fiduciary duty to all Singaporeans in pricing n selling our flats rationally n fairly.

Now you see that Mr Loh downstairs had wasted two years of his life viewing three flats every week (total 2 x 52 x 3 = 312 flats! ) unlike the two of you who were the early birds who caught the worm.

And by the time he came to the 313rd flat, the Pinnacle, all the high floors had already been taken by people like the two of you.

Now some people have proposed that Mr Loh should sue HDB for breaching our fiduciary duty to Mr Loh by not offering him a similar high floor flat like yours at the same price.

So please, can one of you give up your flat so HDB will not be sued?

[Regulators]

bro, you missed the point lah. even if 4 flats left, it is not in the interest of buyers for hdb to jack up the price by 66% and limited supply is no excuse. it is true that hdb owes nobody a living and it has the discretion not to sell the flats to people, but if it does selll flats to people, people are relying on hdb to sell them flats at reasonable and rational prices, not operating like private developers. the fiduciary duty comes as hdb owes singaporeans a duty of care to sell flats at rational, not erratic prices with 66% jump for same project. Likewise, if you place all ur trust on your property agent to find you a condo for you at 600k and he knowingly hides a 600k unit and markets an 800k unit to you on a lower floor to your detriment, the agent has breached his fiduciary duty towards you and you can sue him for that loss (this is backed by case law in the recent ERA case where the agent Jeremy, an ERA agent sold a seller's unit to his boss's wife). If this applies to property agencies, i do not see how this same judgement does not apply moreso to HDB since over 80% of the population relies on HDB for their housing needs.

Let's re-read the above news article about Mr Loh ...



If Mr Loh indeed sues the HDB, as suggested by some people here, I think his case will be weak.

Since there were only four units left on the fourth and fifth floors, what could HDB have done? Could they boot out Mr Ng from the 34th storey or Mr Tan from the 42nd storey?

Let me help HDB to draft a letter to Mr Ng and Mr Tan,

Dear either Mr Ng (34th Storey) or Mr Tan (42nd Storey),

Can one of you please give up your flat to Mr Loh?

HDB owes a fiduciary duty to all Singaporeans in pricing n selling our flats rationally n fairly.

Now you see that Mr Loh downstairs had wasted two years of his life viewing three flats every week (total 2 x 52 x 3 = 312 flats! ) unlike the two of you who were the early birds who caught the worm.

And by the time he came to the 313rd flat, the Pinnacle, all the high floors had already been taken by people like the two of you.

Now some people have proposed that Mr Loh should sue HDB for breaching our fiduciary duty to Mr Loh by not offering him a similar high floor flat like yours at the same price.

So please, can one of you give up your flat so HDB will not be sued?

[cheerful]

bro, you missed the point lah. even if 4 flats left, it is not in the interest of buyers for hdb to jack up the price by 66% and limited supply is no excuse. it is true that hdb owes nobody a living and it has the discretion not to sell the flats to people, but if it does selll flats to people, people are relying on hdb to sell them flats at reasonable and rational prices, not operating like private developers. the fiduciary duty comes as hdb owes singaporeans a duty of care to sell flats at rational, not erratic prices with 66% jump for same project. Likewise, if you place all ur trust on your property agent to find you a condo for you at 600k and he knowingly hides a 600k unit and markets an 800k unit to you on a lower floor to your detriment, the agent has breached his fiduciary duty towards you and you can sue him for that loss (this is backed by case law in the recent ERA case where the agent Jeremy, an ERA agent sold a seller's unit to his boss's wife). If this applies to property agencies, i do not see how this same judgement does not apply moreso to HDB since over 80% of the population relies on HDB for their housing needs.

Agree with you, but that is in theory. In practice, it often happens i.e. breach of fiduciary duty + mis-representation (meaning the agents ).....

[Regulators]

to sum up, private developers owes no fiduciary to the people in pricing of their condos, but hdb owes a fiduciary to singaporeans to act rationally in their prices. Fiduciary duty that hdb owes to singaporean home buyers supercedes contractual relationship so there is no such thing as willing buyer, willing seller when fiduciary relationship comes into play.

[Regulators]

breach of fiduciary duty does not necessarily come with misrepresentation. willful concealment of material facts from buyer can also amount to breach. If HDB has disclosed all prices of past transactions to Mr Loh to allow them to make an informed choice, the breach will be mitigated but not negated, but I do not think HDB has done so for pinnacle.

Agree with you, but that is in theory. In practice, it often happens i.e. breach of fiduciary duty + mis-representation (meaning the agents ).....

[cheerful]

breach of fiduciary duty does not necessarily come with misrepresentation. willful concealment of material facts from buyer can also amount to breach. If HDB has disclosed all prices of past transactions to Mr Loh to allow them to make an informed choice, the breach will be mitigated but not negated, but I do not think HDB has done so for pinnacle.

Get your point about hdb lah ... but for agents, it's also in the text .. anyway, let's not get into that since your pt of contention is really about .......

[jlrx]

bro, you missed the point lah. even if 4 flats left, it is not in the interest of buyers for hdb to jack up the price by 66% and limited supply is no excuse. it is true that hdb owes nobody a living and it has the discretion not to sell the flats to people, but if it does selll flats to people, people are relying on hdb to sell them flats at reasonable and rational prices, not operating like private developers. the fiduciary duty comes as hdb owes singaporeans a duty of care to sell flats at rational, not erratic prices with 66% jump for same project. Likewise, if you place all ur trust on your property agent to find you a condo for you at 600k and he knowingly hides a 600k unit and markets an 800k unit to you on a lower floor to your detriment, the agent has breached his fiduciary duty towards you and you can sue him for that loss (this is backed by case law in the recent ERA case where the agent Jeremy, an ERA agent sold a seller's unit to his boss's wife). If this applies to property agencies, i do not see how this same judgement does not apply moreso to HDB since over 80% of the population relies on HDB for their housing needs.

1. The 66% increase could be due to HDB grossly underpricing the earlier units and later realising its mistake.

2. A lower floor on a later date costing more than a higher floor on an earlier date is very reasonable and rational. That's Propertism in action.

2. As far as Mr Darien Loh is concerned, he should be laughing all the way to the bank, paying only $465,000 for a property which is worth a million, judging by the price of private condos transacted around that area.

The only case he has is that he is jealous that his neighbours upstairs made even more money than he did.

What Mr Loh could do, instead of suing HDB as suggested, is to wait till his minimum occupation period is over, then sell his flat, which should be worth $1 million, in the open market.

He can ask the buyer to issue this sum in two separate cheques:

Cheque A: $465,000 which he deposits into his POSB bank account, and imagines that HDB had lost the "lawsuit" and refunded him his money.

Cheque B: $535,000 which he deposits into his DBS bank account, and imagines that he has struck 4D.

[lancelot]

my argument above is assuming Mr Loh applied for pinnacle later than the other 2 owners, but what if he applied for his flat at the same time??? If that is the case, Mr Loh should go full steam against HDB...

Anyone who is attuned to the HDB flat selection process will know that the Board prices flats the same way as private developers with respect to floor levels, ie, the higher you go, the more expensive it is. So there is no doubt that Darien bought his flat way later than James Tan did, based on their reported prices.

How much later? I did some research.

Pinnacle was launched for sale in June 2004 (not 2005 as I had said earlier). Back then, the property market was in the doldrums (the Sail wasn't even launched yet). 4 room flat prices started from $289,200 and 5 room flats began at $345,100. The response was overwhelming - all 1,848 units were sold at one go.

A few years passed. Some buyers who had booked a unit dropped out for various reasons. What are these reasons? No one is sure but a common reason is when couples break up. Applicants who don't marry or stay married will not be allowed to keep the flats they had booked, so these have to be returned to HDB). Whatever the reasons, in Sept 2008, HDB held another round of sale for Pinnacle comprising a mix of low, mid and high floors. In total there was a balance of 428 flats available for sale. By then, the cheapest 4 room was $457k and cheapest 5 room had risen to $545k. Note the big price difference in 2004 and 2008. But no matter. High or low, these balance flats were all sold out.

Even after this sale, there were sufficient number of flats returned by the 2004 buyers to warrant a third round of sale. (Perhaps some couples stayed together longer b4 breaking up). This allowed HDB to hold a final round of sale involving 111 flats in October 2009. By this time, the remaining 4 room flats were priced above $500k while 5 rooms were going for as high as $700k. Again, the flats were oversubscribed and snapped up by lucky buyers through a ballot.

As I said, I did some research. So these are not numbers plucked from air but are facts that can be verified against HDB releases or Internet archives.

Based on the fact that Darian paid $467k, it can be concluded that he bought his flat in the second sale in 2008. As we know, resale flat prices soared dramatically between 2004 and 2008. Would he or any buyer in 2008 have any ground to claim that he should pay 2004 prices?

And if you want to talk about fairness to all Singaporeans, can you honestly claim that Darien should have paid a lower price than James who bought in 2004? Darien was already very lucky to have been successful in balloting for a flat where thousands of other applicants failed. To say that he should also be paying 2004 price is asking for a double windfall and a huge market subsidy.

Any suggestion that Darien or the later buyers can sue HDB is ludicrous. Anyone who sues will be made a laughing stock and be subject to odium from society. I'm sure Darien is smarter than to that.

[Regulators]

Did I say he should pay 2004 pricing? I did not once suggest that, read carefully. So you are saying that it is all right for HDB prices to be marked up by 66% or even higher just becoz the market elsewhere or in the surrounding estate is going crazy? Our government is the one that came up with cooling measures for the property market and MM talks about steady increases in property prices (hdb) in tandem with the economy so price increases have to be based on what they preach, shouldnt it? Hypothetically if crazy private developers around pinnacle start pricing their properties higher and higher each quarter, are you telling me that hdb should relook their hdb pricing of every quarter for unsold units at pinnacle and join hands with crazy developers out there to mark up prices of hdb flats by huge percentage terms? Is HDB justified in jacking up Darien's flat by 66% in the 4 short years when our economy is nowhere near that growth rate in the 4 years? Moreover when our economy was down during the recent financial crisis, I do not think hdb factored that in when selling the flat to darien. If Darien's flat cost $280k in 2004, even a 10% increase in price on a yearly basis (which is considered high) would still not bring his flat price to $465k, the price he paid in 2008 during the crisis (presumably). It is true that hdb prices should move with the times but it has to move with the growth of the economy and not based on crazy price movements in the private property market. If the government is going to tell its people that prices of property are artificially inflated and we need cooling measures and they later start pricing premium hdb flats based on the crazy market or use that as a yardstick to determine percentage increase in prices, they are not practising what they preach.

Anyone who is attuned to the HDB flat selection process will know that the Board prices flats the same way as private developers with respect to floor levels, ie, the higher you go, the more expensive it is. So there is no doubt that Darien bought his flat way later than James Tan did, based on their reported prices.

How much later? I did some research.

Pinnacle was launched for sale in June 2004 (not 2005 as I had said earlier). Back then, the property market was in the doldrums (the Sail wasn't even launched yet). 4 room flat prices started from $289,200 and 5 room flats began at $345,100. The response was overwhelming - all 1,848 units were sold at one go.

A few years passed. Some buyers who had booked a unit dropped out for various reasons. What are these reasons? No one is sure but a common reason is when couples break up. Applicants who don't marry or stay married will not be allowed to keep the flats they had booked, so these have to be returned to HDB). Whatever the reasons, in Sept 2008, HDB held another round of sale for Pinnacle comprising a mix of low, mid and high floors. In total there was a balance of 428 flats available for sale. By then, the cheapest 4 room was $457k and cheapest 5 room had risen to $545k. Note the big price difference in 2004 and 2008. But no matter. High or low, these balance flats were all sold out.

Even after this sale, there were sufficient number of flats returned by the 2004 buyers to warrant a third round of sale. (Perhaps some couples stayed together longer b4 breaking up). This allowed HDB to hold a final round of sale involving 111 flats in October 2009. By this time, the remaining 4 room flats were priced above $500k while 5 rooms were going for as high as $700k. Again, the flats were oversubscribed and snapped up by lucky buyers through a ballot.

As I said, I did some research. So these are not numbers plucked from air but are facts that can be verified against HDB releases or Internet archives.

Based on the fact that Darian paid $467k, it can be concluded that he bought his flat in the second sale in 2008. As we know, resale flat prices soared dramatically between 2004 and 2008. Would he or any buyer in 2008 have any ground to claim that he should pay 2004 prices?

And if you want to talk about fairness to all Singaporeans, can you honestly claim that Darien should have paid a lower price than James who bought in 2004? Darien was already very lucky to have been successful in balloting for a flat where thousands of other applicants failed. To say that he should also be paying 2004 price is asking for a double windfall and a huge market subsidy.

Any suggestion that Darien or the later buyers can sue HDB is ludicrous. Anyone who sues will be made a laughing stock and be subject to odium from society. I'm sure Darien is smarter than to that.

[lancelot]

well he probably didnt know that a higher floor cost less

How can he not know? The HDB sale process is very transparent compare to private developers. The HDB will give all shortlisted buyers a price list of EVERY SINGLE unit of a project that is offered for sale so as to help buyers work out the sums. In contrast, if you walk into a private development showroom and ask to see the entire price list, you will be laughed out. At very most, you can tell the agent you are interested in certain units and he will go and find out what their respective prices are. But no one will entertain you if you ask to see everything. In this respect, the HDB is more transparent than developers.

[lancelot]

Did I say he should pay 2004 pricing? I did not once suggest that, read carefully. So you are saying that it is all right for HDB prices to be marked up by 66% or even higher just becoz the market elsewhere or in the surrounding estate is going crazy? Our government is the one that came up with cooling measures for the property market and MM talks about steady increases in property prices (hdb) in tandem with the economy so price increases have to be based on what they preach, shouldnt it? Hypothetically if crazy private developers around pinnacle start pricing their properties higher and higher each quarter, are you telling me that hdb should relook their hdb pricing of every quarter for unsold units at pinnacle and join hands with crazy developers out there to mark up prices of hdb flats by huge percentage terms? Is HDB justified in jacking up Darien's flat by 66% in the 4 short years when our economy is nowhere near that growth rate in the 4 years? Moreover when our economy was down during the recent financial crisis, I do not think hdb factored that in when selling the flat to darien. If Darien's flat cost $280k in 2004, even a 10% increase in price on a yearly basis (which is considered high) would still not bring his flat price to $465k, the price he paid in 2008 during the crisis (presumably). It is true that hdb prices should move with the times but it has to move with the growth of the economy and not based on crazy price movements in the private property market. If the government is going to tell its people that prices of property are artificially inflated and we need cooling measures and they later start pricing premium hdb flats based on the crazy market or use that as a yardstick to determine percentage increase in prices, they are not practising what they preach.

If you are not arguing that he should be paying the 2004 price, then what price should he have paid? What is your benchmark?

As I said earlier, HDB has a very clear policy of using a market-based approach in its pricing of new flats. This is done so as to be fair to all first time buyers.

If a first time buyer chooses a resale flat, he will receive a govt grant of $30k (or $40k if his parents' flat is nearby) that he can offset against the open market purchase price. If instead he chooses a new flat, he will not receive the grant but HDB wil price his flat at $30-40k discount to resale flats in the vicinity. So whether a first time buyer is buying new or resale, he starts off with a price advantage of $30-40k compared to a non subsidised buyer.

For Pinnacle flats, the nearest comparison are flats at Tg Pagar Plaza. For the whole of last year, 4-room flats at Tg Pagar Plaza transacted at $471-515k. And these were 39 year old flats built in 1970. Granted that Darien Loh's brand new 4-room flat costs him $465k, the price he paid was certainly within the $30-40k ballpark market subsidy.

Likewise, the first buyers of Pinnacle in 2004 were sold flats that were priced at $30-40k discount to the then prevailing resale prices. Fair indeed.

[proud owner]

How can he not know? The HDB sale process is very transparent compare to private developers. The HDB will give all shortlisted buyers a price list of EVERY SINGLE unit of a project that is offered for sale so as to help buyers work out the sums. In contrast, if you walk into a private development showroom and ask to see the entire price list, you will be laughed out. At very most, you can tell the agent you are interested in certain units and he will go and find out what their respective prices are. But no one will entertain you if you ask to see everything. In this respect, the HDB is more transparent than developers.

apparently the lower floor owner bought much later than the higher floor owner ..

i am just curious ... if he knew that a much higher floor was sold much lower 1-2 yr earlier ... would he still buy ?

[Cactus72]

apparently the lower floor owner bought much later than the higher floor owner ..

i am just curious ... if he knew that a much higher floor was sold much lower 1-2 yr earlier ... would he still buy ?

He may not have bought. But, I believe he won't regret now as he will still earn a profit (although not as fat as others) if he sells his house 5 years later..

[proud owner]

He may not have bought. But, I believe he won't regret now as he will still earn a profit (although not as fat as others) if he sells his house 5 years later..

even if he knew, theres ntg he could do ..HDB would not lower the price for him ...

that brings us back to a point someone was making ..

should HDB be sold like private in terms of price movement?

in the past ..all unsold HDB were sold later, at a price higher than those in the same batch, BUT lower than new ones ..

but in the case of Pinnacles .. the difference was too great ...

[jlrx]

He may not have bought. But, I believe he won't regret now as he will still earn a profit (although not as fat as others) if he sells his house 5 years later..

even if he knew, theres ntg he could do ..HDB would not lower the price for him ...

Who is "he"? Who is this alleged "victim" of HDB's pricing policy?

Is "he" Mr. Darien Loh? Is Mr. Darien Loh the "victim"?

Obviously not. Mr. Loh has made lots of money.

So HDB has commited a "Crime without Victims". Why does this sound so familiar ...

ABORTION - A CRIME WITHOUT VICTIMS

HDB's "crime" is similar to "abortion". The victims have not been born, so they cannot sue.

Therefore, if anyone should sue the HDB, as suggested by some people here, it should not be Mr. Loh.

It should be the "unborn". The "unborn" should file a class action suit against the HDB under two separate claims:

1. Unborn foetuses who have yet to come to this world (but who will be coming), that when they grow up in 30 years time, will have to pay Mr Loh more than a million dollars for his Pinnacle flat, because HDB made the flat so expensive in the first place.

2. Unborn foetuses who will be aborted because their parents feel that The Pinnacle flat's prices will be too high, and therefore decide not to have children, thus causing these "unborns" to lose their chance of coming to this world to stay at The Pinnacle.

[proud owner]

Who is "he"? Who is this alleged "victim" of HDB's pricing policy?

Is "he" Mr. Darien Loh? Is Mr. Darien Loh the "victim"?

Obviously not. Mr. Loh has made lots of money.

So HDB has commited a "Crime without Victims". Why does this sound so familiar ...

ABORTION - A CRIME WITHOUT VICTIMS

HDB's "crime" is similar to "abortion". The victims have not been born, so they cannot sue.

Therefore, if anyone should sue the HDB, as suggested by some people here, it should not be Mr. Loh.

It should be the "unborn". The "unborn" should file a class action suit against the HDB under two separate claims:

1. Unborn foetuses who have yet to come to this world (but who will be coming), that when they grow up in 30 years time, will have to pay Mr Loh more than a million dollars for his Pinnacle flat, because HDB made the flat so expensive in the first place.

2. Unborn foetuses who will be aborted because their parents feel that The Pinnacle flat's prices will be too high, and therefore decide not to have children, thus causing these "unborns" to lose their chance of coming to this world to stay at The Pinnacle.

wow so deep

if you pushed a pregnant woman down the stairs.. and she suffered a miscarriage ..

are you sure you cannot be sued causing the loss of 'live' of the unborned ?

[lancelot]

even if he knew, theres ntg he could do ..HDB would not lower the price for him ...

that brings us back to a point someone was making ..

should HDB be sold like private in terms of price movement?

in the past ..all unsold HDB were sold later, at a price higher than those in the same batch, BUT lower than new ones ..

but in the case of Pinnacles .. the difference was too great ...

HDB has to look at the prevailing prices at the point in time when it offers flats for sale. Across the road, the very old 4-room flats in Tg Pagar Plaza are being transacted at $470k-$515k as reported in the HDB website. How much lower than these prices should HDB sell its brand new flats? To sell them at a much lower price will mean giving Pinnacle buyers a larger subsidy than what buyers of other new BTO projects get to enjoy. That's not being fair to buyers who were not to lucky to be shortlisted for Pinnacle.

Any first owners of Pinnacle at whatever entry price they got in at are already very lucky. To ask for more is surely too much. Ultimately, we should not mistake HDB for Santa Clause or God of Fortune.

[Regulators]

How do u explain the vast price differential between a 42nd floor 4rm and a 5th floor 4rm, the latter being more expensive by 100k. if both units on similar floor and price increase by 100k over 4 years, maybe it is partially justifiable (even then the govt would have to match that with growth fundamental of the economy, not the erratic pricing of property which you keep stressing on). If both units are about 40 floors apart with the a dude coming along to pay 100k more for a unit almost 40 floors down compared to one 40 floors up, don't you think there is something very wrong with hdb's pricing. You keep comparing with the surrounding developments around pinnacle and fail to see the anomaly with pinnacle itself. it might be true that darien would probably be making a pile from his future sale, but that is besides the point and out of the discussion here. There are two things HDB has to clarify:

1) Why the great price discrepancy based on the points i have raised above (referring only to pinnacle)?

2) What justification does HDB have to raise the price of darien's flat by 66% from 2004 when economic fundamentals do not justify that?

HDB has to look at the prevailing prices at the point in time when it offers flats for sale. Across the road, the very old 4-room flats in Tg Pagar Plaza are being transacted at $470k-$515k as reported in the HDB website. How much lower than these prices should HDB sell its brand new flats? To sell them at a much lower price will mean giving Pinnacle buyers a larger subsidy than what buyers of other new BTO projects get to enjoy. That's not being fair to buyers who were not to lucky to be shortlisted for Pinnacle.

Any first owners of Pinnacle at whatever entry price they got in at are already very lucky. To ask for more is surely too much. Ultimately, we should not mistake HDB for Santa Clause or God of Fortune.

[Condorich]

controlled pricing bro...

planned economy... the visible hands of the invisible man.. and a little free economy, we are mixed.... how mixed are we is the question.

Let's hear from the horses mouth when it comes to e* rally.

Everyone knows how to use the prices of new HDB flats as benchmark pricing. The problem start at the source. The source starts with one.

Don't you find the name well suited?

[Condorich]

Hey, I asked and he heard me...

3 announcements in 1 day.. wow.... this should please the ......

Business Times - 05 Mar 2010
March 5, 2010, 5.46 pm (Singapore time)


HDB to extend MOP for resale of HDB non-subsidised flats to 3 yrs: Mah
By ANGELA TAN SINGAPORE - To reinforce the principle of owner-occupation and reduce the possibility of speculation, HDB will be raising the minimum occupation period (MOP) for resale of nonsubsidised flats from one and 2.5 years to three years.
National Development Minister, Mah Bow Tan, told Parliament on Friday that this will align the MOP for home owners to resell and fully sublet non-subsidised flats.
The extension of MOP will apply to all flats, not just larger flats, Mr Mah said as the focus of the revised MOP is to foster owner-occupation and not about affordability per se.

Copyright © 2010 Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. All rights reserved.

HDB to lift upgrade condition for 2nd concessionary loan: Mah

March 5, 2010, 6.04 pm (Singapore time)

HDB to lift upgrade condition for 2nd concessionary loan: Mah

SINGAPORE - The Housing and Development Board (HDB) will remove the upgrading condition for the second concessionary loan to households, Mah Bow Tan, Minister for National Development said on Friday.

What this means in future is that both HDB flat upgraders and those who downsize will be eligible for the second HDB loan, with the focus on helping families to right-size their housing choices, he said.
'With greater economic volatility, the flexibility to right-size will become more important. Therefore, I have decided to remove the upgrading condition for the second concessionary loan.'
Mr Mah was responding to feedback that by providing the second concessionary loan to households only for upgrading may inadvertently drive some people to upgrade even though it may be more prudent for them not to do so.




March 5, 2010, 6.29 pm (Singapore time)

New quota for PRs buying resale HDB flats: Mah

By ANGELA TAN
SINGAPORE - To prevent foreign enclaves from forming in HDB estates, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) will introduce a new quota for permanent resident (PR) families buying resale flats, Mah Bow Tan, Minister for National Development said on Friday.

Mr Mah said even though PR enclaves are not a problem today, precautionary measures should be put in place early.
PRs will be subject to quotas of 5 per cent and 8 per cent at the neighbourhood and block levels respectively.
A PR family cannot buy a flat if the neighbourhood or block already has 5 per cent or 8 per cent of flats owned by other PR-PR families.
The quota will only apply to non-Malaysian PRs. Malaysians are excluded, because of Singapore's close historical and cultural links.
In 2009, PRs make up 14 per cent of Singapore's resident population. But PR families own only 5 per cent of HDB flats.

[Reporter]

Hey, I asked and he heard me...

3 announcements in 1 day.. wow.... this should please the ......

..........
..........

March 5, 2010, 6.29 pm (Singapore time)

New quota for PRs buying resale HDB flats: Mah

By ANGELA TAN
SINGAPORE - To prevent foreign enclaves from forming in HDB estates, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) will introduce a new quota for permanent resident (PR) families buying resale flats, Mah Bow Tan, Minister for National Development said on Friday.

..........

The quota will only apply to non-Malaysian PRs. Malaysians are excluded, because of Singapore's close historical and cultural links.

..........

..... this should please the .....
..... the Malaysian PRs as they are excluded.


Anyway, on a separate note, the top 2 A-level students for 2009 are from China.

[lancelot]

How do u explain the vast price differential between a 42nd floor 4rm and a 5th floor 4rm, the latter being more expensive by 100k. if both units on similar floor and price increase by 100k over 4 years, maybe it is partially justifiable (even then the govt would have to match that with growth fundamental of the economy, not the erratic pricing of property which you keep stressing on). If both units are about 40 floors apart with the a dude coming along to pay 100k more for a unit almost 40 floors down compared to one 40 floors up, don't you think there is something very wrong with hdb's pricing. You keep comparing with the surrounding developments around pinnacle and fail to see the anomaly with pinnacle itself. it might be true that darien would probably be making a pile from his future sale, but that is besides the point and out of the discussion here. There are two things HDB has to clarify:

1) Why the great price discrepancy based on the points i have raised above (referring only to pinnacle)?

2) What justification does HDB have to raise the price of darien's flat by 66% from 2004 when economic fundamentals do not justify that?

How can one look at only Pinnacle in isolation and ignore market forces that affect residential prices islandwide? Give you an example. What if, instead of rising, the housing market fell like what happened between 1998 and 2003? Suppose Tg Pagar 4-room flat prices fell from $300k to $200k btw 2004 and 2009? Can HDB continue to price its Pinnacle flats in 2009 at the original level (refering only to Pinnacle) and ignore PREVAILING market conditions? Will they find buyers for subsidised flats at $270k when resale prices for a similar flat are going for $200k?

If you choose to be obtuse in the face of facts and reasons, no amount of debate can enlighten you. You should stick to your "principle" and advise your aunt to give Dawson a miss since you clearly believe HDB is inherently unfair in its pricing policy.

[proud owner]

How can one look at only Pinnacle in isolation and ignore market forces that affect residential prices islandwide? Give you an example. What if, instead of rising, the housing market fell like what happened between 1998 and 2003? Suppose Tg Pagar 4-room flat prices fell from $300k to $200k btw 2004 and 2009? Can HDB continue to price its Pinnacle flats in 2009 at the original level (refering only to Pinnacle) and ignore PREVAILING market conditions? Will they find buyers for subsidised flats at $270k when resale prices for a similar flat are going for $200k?

If you choose to be obtuse in the face of facts and reasons, no amount of debate can enlighten you. You should stick to your "principle" and advise your aunt to give Dawson a miss since you clearly believe HDB is inherently unfair in its pricing policy.

i think you miss his point totally ..

assuming in 2006, the 40th fl was sold at 300k ..
the 4th floor would say cost 200k ..naturally since it was a MUCH lower level ...BUT NOT SOLD ..

in 2009 ..prices all higher ..say moved up 100k ..

the 40th floor now worth 400k..4th floor SHOULD BE SOLD at 300k ..

BUT it was sold at 500k ... meaning the 4th floor moved alot more from point of first sale ..


doesnt that sound weird to you ?

[proud owner]

How can one look at only Pinnacle in isolation and ignore market forces that affect residential prices islandwide? Give you an example. What if, instead of rising, the housing market fell like what happened between 1998 and 2003? Suppose Tg Pagar 4-room flat prices fell from $300k to $200k btw 2004 and 2009? Can HDB continue to price its Pinnacle flats in 2009 at the original level (refering only to Pinnacle) and ignore PREVAILING market conditions? Will they find buyers for subsidised flats at $270k when resale prices for a similar flat are going for $200k?

If you choose to be obtuse in the face of facts and reasons, no amount of debate can enlighten you. You should stick to your "principle" and advise your aunt to give Dawson a miss since you clearly believe HDB is inherently unfair in its pricing policy.

in the reverse scenario ..

it is as if ...

in 2006 40th floor sold at 300k .. 4th floor worth 200k but not sold ..

market collapsed .. down 100k

in 2009 .. 40th floor now worth 200k .. and the 4th floor which SHOULD worth 100k .. instead was sold at 200k ..

[Regulators]

it seems you have caught the drift but lancelot seems to catch no ball even though we have explained a few times....

i think you miss his point totally ..

assuming in 2006, the 40th fl was sold at 300k ..
the 4th floor would say cost 200k ..naturally since it was a MUCH lower level ...BUT NOT SOLD ..

in 2009 ..prices all higher ..say moved up 100k ..

the 40th floor now worth 400k..4th floor SHOULD BE SOLD at 300k ..

BUT it was sold at 500k ... meaning the 4th floor moved alot more from point of first sale ..


doesnt that sound weird to you ?

[jlrx]

wow so deep

if you pushed a pregnant woman down the stairs.. and she suffered a miscarriage ..

are you sure you cannot be sued causing the loss of 'live' of the unborned ?

If HDB had sent one of its officers to push a pregnant woman down the stairs, thus causing her to suffer a miscarriage, of course she could sue.

However, if HDB had caused a pregnant woman to abort her foetus because she felt she could not afford to raise a child and pay for a flat at The Pinnacle at the same time, then I doubt she would have a case.

Similarly, if the pregnant woman had been surfing the internet using her Blackberry along the corridor and, after reading comments in this forum that some people here had suggested that HDB could be sued for pricing The Pinnacle too high, laughed so hard that she rolled down the stairs and suffered a miscarriage, I doubt she could sue anyone here in this forum.

[Regulators]

nobody said anything about pinnacle being priced too high by market comparison to other projects, you must be disillusioned. i think only proud owner understands the bone of contention here. i thought you were more intelligent than that....

If HDB had sent one of its officers to push a pregnant woman down the stairs, thus causing her to suffer a miscarriage, of course she could sue.

However, if HDB had caused a pregnant woman to abort her foetus because she felt she could not afford to raise a child and pay for a flat at The Pinnacle at the same time, then I doubt she would have a case.

Similarly, if the pregnant woman had been surfing the internet using her Blackberry along the corridor and, after reading comments in this forum that some people here had suggested that HDB could be sued for pricing The Pinnacle too high, laughed so hard that she rolled down the stairs and suffered a miscarriage, I doubt she could sue anyone here in this forum.

[jlrx]

nobody said anything about pinnacle being priced too high by market comparison to other projects, you must be disillusioned. i think only proud owner understands the bone of contention here. i thought you were more intelligent than that....

The bone of contention is that there are two camps of thoughts, which do not see eye to eye.

I know where you are coming from.

Your view is that the HDB owes a duty to Singaporeans as buyers in general, especially the lower income group who have no choice but to purchase HDB flats; my view is that even though it owes such a duty, when it comes to the actual execution of the sale, this duty is difficult if not impossible to fulfill on an individual basis because the sale can only be made to one person, in this case Mr. Darien Loh, and he is already going to make a lot of money from it, on an individual basis.

And while from my perspective, nobody is forcing Mr. Darien Loh, as an individual, to buy that Pinnacle flat since it is "willing buyer, willing seller" and keeping the price low benefits only that individual buyer; your view is that the lower income group, as buyers in general, have no choice but to buy HDB flats, hence HDB has breached it's fiduciary duty to this group of people, as a whole, by ramming up the price of The Pinnacle so steeply.

I am sure this dilemma is also a headache to the HDB's policy decision makers.