|
pearlbankapartments.com |
|
NO Enblock - My home is NOT for sale
|
|
> ENTER HERE <
14 March 2010 Dear Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, We are a group of “stayers” from condominiums across the island of Singapore who treasure our homes and wish to thank you for saying that “property is for people to buy to live in, not for speculation”. This is exactly what we believe too. However, the en bloc phenomenon has caused much distress to the many people like us who love our homes. We no more have a sense of security in owning our homes and our sense of belonging has been badly shaken. On the one hand, we are exhorted by the government to develop a sense of belonging to the country, to sink our roots here, and to treasure our homes and not use them as an easy means to make a quick profit. On the other hand, we face a constant threat of having our homes sold en bloc against our wish. The case that the government makes for allowing en bloc sales is based on the need for urban renewal in land-scarce Singapore. The case we are making is that urban renewal cannot be achieved through a laissez faire approach to en bloc sales of private residential condominiums because these are not just buildings but they are our homes. There must be tighter and enforceable laws to ensure that en blocs are done in a way that does not go against the principle and core value that we as Singaporeans are being exhorted to cultivate – that of treasuring our homes. Why do we say this, Prime Minister Lee? It is because we are very much saddened and dismayed by the way en blocs are allowed to take place. The situation now is that many, if not most, en bloc attempts are initiated by people with questionable motives. Some are out to get a quick profit – the very thing you say we should not do with our homes. As reported in the press, we see well-heeled speculators buying multiple units in our condominiums in order to reap a windfall. Others are not satisfied with selling their own unit in the market, but wish to get more by going en bloc and forcing others who don’t wish to sell to also sell. It has nothing to do with urban renewal. Our condominiums are in a good state of repair. But because they want to en bloc, they try to convince the residents that “old is bad”, that the estate is in a state of bad repair. Worse still, because many of these pro-en bloc residents are also in the management councils that are supposed to take care of the estate, they deliberately allow the estate to be run down. There are supposed to be laws and rules that govern the en bloc sales of estates. However, many of them are flouted by the collective sale committees, and the committees get away with it. And despite feedback that was given about the glaring conflict of interest when members of the management council are also in the collective sale committee, even spearheading the collective sale, no new laws were enacted to disallow collective sale committee members to also be in the management council. Nothing has changed since the amendments to the Land Titles (Strata) Act in 2007 were implemented. Time and again we see the collective sale committees running rough-shod over the owner- objectors and pushing through their resolutions with total disregard of common decency, fiduciary duty and the new laws which the Ministry of Law passed in Parliament. The minority are usually seen as the “obstructionists” and treated roughly. You would have read in the papers about Laguna Park where vandalism was wrought on en bloc-dissenters by the chairman of its collective sale committee. This is by no means an isolated incident. It is also sad to see that in the case of Horizon Towers, the Strata Titles Board had allowed the sale even though there was clear evidence that the collective sale committee had not accepted the highest bid and had concealed this from the subsidiary proprietors. The case went all the way up to the High Court where millions were spent by both sides. How many of us have such deep pockets to take our case to the High Court? We would like to propose that a new body be formed to deal with the fallout from having to deal with the greed which now pervades our estates. Many letters have been written in the Straits Times Forum Page about the negative impact of en bloc and the concerns we have regarding the way it is conducted. (We have attached some for your information.) However, it seems that no one is really listening to us and we are getting very frustrated. That is why we are bringing our case directly to you, Prime Minister Lee, and hope you will listen to us. Having to move home is one of the most stressful and traumatic events in a person’s life, next to the loss of a loved one. This must be even more stressful for those who are affected by en bloc sales, especially the senior citizens and retirees. According to Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan, it is important “to create an environment where our elderly can ‘age in place’….to enjoy living in familiar surroundings and among friends and neighbours”. But how will they be able to “age in place” when faced with the constant threat of en bloc? We sincerely hope that you will understand our desire to live in peace and enjoy the nest we have built over the years. If ever an estate is to undergo en bloc, it must be for the correct reason, and there must be strict laws and regulations as well as powers to ensure that the building is truly in a dangerous state of repair, and that the en bloc process is carried out according to the law. In this respect, we hope for a rapid revision of laws that (a) set conditions under which an estate can be put up for en bloc, (b) restrict the frequency of en blocs in an estate, (c) raise the minimum consent quota from 30% to 60% before an en bloc try can be attempted, (d) mandate at least two objectors to sit on the collective sale committee to ensure an open and transparent process, (e) disallow members of the collective sale committee to also be in the management council and to use MCST funds and assets for en bloc purposes, (f) limit the tenure of a collective sale committee to one year before the CSA signing kicks in and (g) invest authority in an agency/ministry to take an active role to check and follow up on complaints especially when they can be substantiated. This we believe will help. Many of us have tried to dialogue on these matters through the forum pages to no avail. We wish to express our views to a more formal and objective forum. And we do realise that unless you personally pay attention to this issue, the legal tribunals will simply “give effect to parliament intention” and make it very easy to en bloc estates. Prime Minister Lee, we are dealing with our homes. Our children’s heritage is the values we uphold today – and it all starts with our home. Our home is where our heart is, and where we build our sense of belonging. We are the “stayers” who did not look for greener pastures in other countries. As an ST reader said in his letter to the forum page a few years ago, “their roots are deeply planted there, as much as their roots are in Singapore, their nation…..What does this sense of belonging to a place mean when one can be booted out just because others with a bigger collective voice then say so….?” Thank you. Sincerely, cc DPM Teo Chee Hean Minister for National Development Mah Bow Tan Minster for Law K Shanmugam Mr Chan Soo Seng (MP for Joo Chiat) Mr Christopher de Souza (MP for Holland-Bukit Timah) Miss Indranee Rajah (Tanjong Pagar GRC) Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (MP for Holland-Bukit Timah GRC)
Download .doc file for above text Download the Form to sign the petition
electronically sign the petition and e:mail to : hope4stayers : patricklimkk@gmail.com
I refer to the letter by Chong Wan Yieng (Ms) Head, Corporate Communications, Ministry of Law, captioned "Allowing one owner to stop majority untenable" published in ST Forum on 3 March 2010. I
suppose I can’t fault the argument that if the vast majority of
co-owners of a shared piece of property wish to sell, the tiny
minority should not be allowed to impede the wishes of the vast
majority. But that is not the case. As Ms Chong Wan Yieng from
MinLaw has correctly stated, only the common areas of a strata
titled estate is shared between owners. Homeowners own the right to
their individual units. So the argument fails. Mrs
Jeannette Chong Aruldoss
I REFER to Catherine Tan's letter,
"Raiders are not welcome" (Jan 26).
PAP leadership gone senile? http://www.temasekreview.com
Tan Cheng Soing [architect of Pearlbank], now 70 and still actively designing, hopes the building will be preserved. “A large part of what we build is replaceable and mundane. But each era has its memory and icons and architecture is the proud expression of the time. Pearlbank is unique and special to me in many ways. It was born of a heroic period when Singapore was searching for its place in the sun.” see the full story from The Financial Times here | print pdf version
Will the Singapore government give a jail term to PR Penthouse One owner whom refuses to sell his 4,000 sq ft home if Pearlbank goes enblock? Are the morals of the Singapore government in question?
'Uniquely Singapore' = Unequaled GREED
Penthouse One Pearlbank has undergone a 9 year, $500,000 sgd transformation. View it here |
|
Scene City Singapore | Channel News Asia 8:31 pm | 23rd September this episode features Pearlbank Apartments + Penthouse One After all episodes are aired, watch it here. In the mean time view the trailer above
|
|
|
|
click on the header bar above to download the .pdf file for reading the text |
