Make SgHousing your default homepage
Add SgHousing to your favourites
EMail This Post

Paterson Tower, Rose Garden up for sale

TWO large freehold residential sites have been put on the market through collective sales - Paterson Tower in prime district 9 with a price tag of $280 million, and Rose Garden at Amber Road with a $167 million price tag.

The asking price of $280 million for Paterson Tower, which is being marketed by United Premas, works out to a unit land price of $1,164 per square foot per plot ratio (psf ppr). No development charge is payable.

BT understands, however, that the actual reserve price set by the majority owners of Paterson Tower is much lower. The sale was initiated some months ago, before the recent escalation in land values in the Orchard Road belt, as seen by the sale of the 99-year leasehold Orchard Turn site in December at $1,020 psf ppr and this year’s collective sale of the freehold Angullia Mansion for $1,058 psf ppr.

Paterson Tower was last put on the market in 2000 with a reported indicative price then of $240 million or $996 psf ppr. But the owners failed to get the price they were seeking then.

The 114,547 sq ft plot, on an elevated spot at Paterson Hill, is zoned for residential use with a 2.1 plot ratio (ratio of potential maximum gross floor area to land area). It can be redeveloped into a new 24-storey condo with about 120 units averaging 2,000 sq ft each. Based on the $280 million or $1,164 psf ppr asking price, the break-even cost for a new condo will be about $1,600 psf, say property analysts.

The collective sale proceeds will be split equally among owners of the present 72 apartments. Using a figure of $280 million, they will receive about $3.88 million per unit, which is more than double the $1.85 million to $1.9 million that the apartments could fetch if sold on an individual basis, according to United Premas.

Sources say that the Far East Organization group owns six apartments, equivalent to about 10 per cent of share values in the estate. Far East is not among the majority owners who have so far consented to the collective sale, although BT understands that it may join in when a buyer is found.

Over in the Katong area, Rose Garden in Amber Road was last put on the market in 2003 with a reserve price of $169.2 million, or $422 psf ppr. No development charge is payable. However, owners failed to get the price they wanted back then, when the benchmark for the area was the $372 psf ppr paid for the Sea View Hotel site by Marco Polo Developments, now known as Wheelock Properties (Singapore).

This time around, Rose Garden’s owners feel more hopeful about being able to achieve the price they are eyeing, given last month’s sale of the 99-year leasehold Amberville site for $396 psf ppr. While the Amberville site clinched by Far East boasts a superior location with direct sea views, Rose Garden has the superior tenure.

Rose Garden’s current official expected price of $167 million indicated by marketing agent PropNex works out to $416 psf ppr, although sources say the reserve price the majority owners have agreed to for the latest collective sale agreement is much lower - under $400 psf ppr.

Source : Business Times - 21 Feb 2006

EMail This Post

The Esquire fetches $32m

Evan Lim & Co beats three other bidders for prime site in en bloc sale

ANOTHER prime property has gone for collective sale - for $32 million - showing that momentum is continuing to pick up in real-estate en-bloc deals.

This time, it is The Esquire, an 11-storey, 30-unit apartment block on Mount Elizabeth, near the famed hospital and behind The Paragon Shopping Centre. Its owners - both investors and owner-occupiers - had failed in earlier attempts to sell the entire block.

Evan Lim & Co, a general building contractor and property developer, beat three other bidders with its $32 million offer.

The price buys a building on a land area of about 16,067 sq ft and a gross plot ratio of 2.8.

The present structure can be replaced by a building of up to a maximum of 36 storeys.

In addition to the $32 million, a $3.59 million development charge is payable. Taking that into account, Evan Lim’s purchase price is about $791 per square foot per plot ratio (psf ppr).

‘This is the highest residential land rate achieved in the Mount Elizabeth/Emerald/Cairnhill location in recent years, and is the third highest in the vicinity of Orchard Road, just after the recent sales of the larger Angullia Mansion and Habitat II,’ said Tan Hong Boon, executive director of Credo Real Estate, which brokered the deal.

Angullia Mansion went to Far East Organization for a land cost of $1,058 psf ppr inclusive of development charges earlier this month, while Habitat II was sold to Wheelock Properties last year for $876 psf ppr.

Mr Tan said Evan Lim could build 20 luxury apartment units with an average 2,000 sq ft size, or 60 boutique units of 700 sq ft each.

He added that each of the 30 apartment owners will get about $1.07 million from the sale, representing a 65 per cent premium over what the apartments would have fetched individually.

Source : Business Times - 21 Feb 2006

EMail This Post

Woman wins appeal to use tycoon Oei’s driveway

A WOMAN who took a millionaire neighbour to court over the use of a driveway finally got her way yesterday.

Gynaecologist Theresa Cheng-Wong went up against business tycoon Oei Hong Leong when she wanted to buy an $11.9 million house next to his at Dalvey Road.

The reason: There was a security barrier across Mr Oei’s driveway, which also led to the house that Dr Cheng-Wong was eyeing, No. 48, Dalvey Road.

If someone wanted to access that property, the barrier, which was erected in 2004, had to be raised, either by a security guard or Mr Oei’s domestic help.

Dr Cheng-Wong saw this as an inconvenience. So, when she decided to buy the house, she made this deal with the former owners of the property, Thye Hong Manufacturing, in April last year: She would only buy it if a court declared that the unit enjoys an ‘implied easement’, or right of way, over part of Mr Oei’s driveway.

Thye Hong earlier asked Mr Oei to have a remote control supplied at its own expense to make it more convenient to raise the barrier, but this was ‘met with silence’, said Dr Cheng-Wong’s lawyers.

Before July 14, 1970, both houses formed part of one lot of land, then owned by Singapore Tobacco Company. It was later sub-divided into smaller parcels.

Last October, the High Court rejected Dr Cheng-Wong’s application for right of way, but yesterday, the Court of Appeal reversed the decision.

Dr Cheng-Wong’s lawyers argued during the appeal that she should have right of way as all four conditions of the relevant section of the Land Titles Act have been met.

They argued that the High Court had erred in finding that two of the conditions had not been met. The two issues were:

Was there approval by the ‘competent authority’ for the development of the buildings on the land?

Was the stretch of the driveway set apart to be used as access to and from the prospective property?

Mr Oei’s lawyer, Mr Loo Ngan Chor, argued that the right of way through his client’s driveway was not necessary for the ‘reasonable enjoyment’ of the property.

But Chief Justice Yong Pung How, Judge of Appeal Chao Hick Tin and Justice Kan Ting Chiu agreed with Dr Cheng-Wong’s lawyers.

Senior Counsel C. R. Rajah, who led the team, had argued successfully to introduce fresh evidence for the appeal. He produced evidence that there was proper approval - from the Singapore Improvement Trust in 1956 and the Chief Planner in 1964 - to build on the land.

He also argued that the subdivision plan clearly indicates that the driveway is the only means of access from the property to Dalvey Road.

Neither Dr Cheng-Wong nor Mr Oei attended the appeal.

Later, speaking through her lawyers from Tan Rajah and Cheah, Dr Cheng-Wong said she was ‘very grateful’ to the court for finding in her favour.

She said that she was ‘looking forward to purchasing the property and being a good neighbour to Mr Oei’.

When contacted, Mr Oei said in Mandarin: ‘I respect the court’s decision. I will continue to let the new buyer to use my land.’

Source : Straits Times - 21 Feb 2006

EMail This Post

Govt to release 30-year lease site

Land targeted for elderly but won’t be confined to retirement uses to give developers flexibility

FOR the first time, the Government plans to release a piece of residential land on a 30-year lease targeted for retirement villages.

But in order to give developers more flexibility, the land will not be restricted to the elderly, said National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan at a community event in Tampines on Saturday.

Currently, the Government sells residential sites only on 99-year leases, although sites for industrial and commercial use can range from 15 to 60 years. With the change, property experts said this could mean a whole new class of cheaper, short-lease condominiums that will make private property here much more affordable.

The Committee on Ageing Issues had, earlier this month, pushed for the Government to sell land on shorter leases so developers can build these ‘villages’ targeted at wealthier retirees.

In announcing the new site, Mr Mah said it would simply be zoned ‘residential’ and not be confined to retirement uses as this puts too much restrictions on developers.

Rather than bar younger Singaporeans who may want to stay on such property, he added, the authorities will suggest that the site is ‘more suitable for retirement villages’. Details of the location and size are expected to be revealed at the Committee of Supply debate next month.

Veteran property developer Daniel Teo said that such a site ’should be close to public transport, and amenities like hospitals and parks, for the convenience of the elderly residents’.

Mr Teo, who in 1997 tried to build a retirement village here but failed because of high costs, said the Government could further encourage developers to focus on retirees by relaxing the rules so that it is more cost-efficient to build such homes. That is because, compared to other condos, retirement homes need more space for facilities like medical centres and exercise stations.

Dr Yu Lai Boon, managing director of property consultancy Jones Lang LaSalle, said that by not restricting the use of the 30-year site, the Government could be trying to gauge the true market value of such land ahead of releasing more into the market.

Knight Frank director Nicholas Mak said that short-lease apartments would be more affordable. ‘A 99-year leasehold apartment that costs $600,000 may cost just $250,000 if the tenure was 30 years. That’s about the same price as a resale four-room flat,’ he said.

Source : Straits Times - 20 Feb 2006

EMail This Post

Who inherits assets if entire family is wiped out?

Q Is it common that when there is only a sole beneficiary of a will, the executor is also the beneficiary?

In rare cases like disasters when entire families are wiped out, who will inherit their assets if no will was written? Is it the husband’s blood relations or the wife’s?

In general, what details are needed in a will? All bank account numbers, insurance policy numbers? Can you provide a sample will?

A Yes, it is common for a named beneficiary (sole or otherwise) to be also named as an executor.

However, it may not always be possible - such as when the sole beneficiary is a minor (below the age of 21) or is of unsound mind, or lives overseas.

The disaster scenario that you have painted is possible as families often go on holiday together. Still, it is rare.

In these cases, an older member of the family does not necessarily die before the younger ones.

But for the purpose of discussion, let us assume that the husband is older than the wife, and they have two young children. Suppose they all die in a terrible accident and that the husband dies first.

In the absence of a will, the Intestate Succession Act will kick in. For details of this Act, you can visit the Ministry of Law website www.minlaw.gov.sg/ipto/ and click on ‘Distribution of the Estate of Deceased Persons Administered By The Public Trustee’.

The law will distribute assets in the following manner:

Half of the husband’s estate will go to his wife and the other half to his two children.

As the wife is assumed to be the next to have died, her estate (which now includes her share of her deceased husband’s) will be shared equally between her two children.

Now the full inheritance of the older child will pass on to the younger child, who will in turn have the whole share to be shared equally among:

(a) surviving grandparents (paternal and maternal), or in whose absence;

(b) surviving uncles and aunts (paternal and maternal).

In writing a will, there is no need to state any specific asset unless you intend to make a specific gift or bequest to a specific person and/or organisation.

In such a case, you need to specify details of the asset(s) in question, as well as details of the beneficiary(ies).

While it is true that you can draft a will yourself, you need to be mindful of the requirements for a will to be valid, such as having two witnesses.

I would recommend that you consult a lawyer to have your will done.

As for will samples, you may find some on the Web.

Bernard Lim

Fellow of the Society of Will Writers and Estate Planning Practitioners (UK)

Q My former husband died two years ago and willed some of his assets to his children who are both under 21 and in my custody. A copy of the Grant of Probate was sent to us only at the end of last year.

Unfortunately, the probate process is delayed by the two executors and trustees appointed by my former husband.

One of them is not fluent in English and the other one is advanced in age. A lawyer has been hired for advice and assistance.

When I checked with the HDB and insurance company, I was told that the executors have to personally submit and sign some documents together with the beneficiaries at their offices.

For share investments, where can I obtain relevant information?

As a guardian, how can I expedite and facilitate the probate so that funds are released for my children’s education?

A Based on the brief facts, it is difficult to comment on whether the executors and trustees were in any default.

Ordinarily, for non-complicated estates, the probate process takes three to 12 months from the time of the filing of the petition.

Probate is granted only after the clearance and payment of estate duty.

Sometimes the process takes longer because of the time taken to determine all of the assets of the deceased at the date of his death and the valuation of those assets.

When the deceased does not keep good records or a file of his assets, the job of the executors will certainly be more tedious and it could contribute to delay.

The will of the deceased specifies the parties who are appointed as executors and trustees, and they are the ones who are entrusted with the duty of carrying out the matters stated in the will from the moment of death.

In law, the deceased’s estate vests in his executors upon death.

They are empowered to deal with the assets of the deceased, and that is why the HDB and the insurance company recognises the executors’ authority to deal with them on documentation and procedures for release and transfer of the deceased’s assets.

For life insurance, under the Insurance Act, the insurer could make payment of up to $150,000 to the beneficiaries without production of probate.

For information on the share investments of the deceased, you can contact the Central Depository. But the authority to seek and obtain such information is with the executors or the lawyers instructed by the executors.

Beneficiaries or their guardian, where minors are concerned, do not have such authority.

The deceased may have wanted certain assets to be held in trust for a number of years until his beneficiaries reach financial maturity.

Thus, where certain assets are given for specific purposes such as for maintenance or for the children’s education or for investment in immovable property, chances are that the terms of the will would also have given the deceased’s executors the discretion to decide the time and the amounts to be invested or distributed for those very purposes.

It is a call by the deceased for good judgment on the part of his executors and trustees when they exercise their responsibilities, and if they act reasonably, it will be difficult to challenge their actions.

Sometimes where lay persons are concerned, the deceased would not know whether such persons whom he thought could be entrusted with such responsibilities in fact end up not being interested, tardy or incompetent in carrying them out.

The primary duty of an executor is to collect and get the assets of the deceased’s estate and then to administer them according to the testator’s will.

Other duties include the payment of the deceased’s debts and liabilities, filing of the estate duty returns and, at some point, to discharge the duties as trustee in the management and distribution of the deceased’s estate.

The office of trustee is also an onerous one as it imposes upon the trustee a fiduciary relationship with the beneficiaries.

This requires the utmost diligence, good faith and loyalty in the trustee’s discharge of his duties.

If there are any grounds to allege that the existing executors and trustees have mismanaged or defaulted in the manner of the distribution of the deceased’s estate, the guardian could initiate legal action on behalf of the minors.

If they, in their capacity as trustees, acted without care and this causes loss or detriment to the estate, they are also liable to account for their actions.

There may therefore be merits for the appointment of professional executors and trustees over a lay person, at least where a testator’s estate is complex or where the testator cannot find anyone suitable to discharge the responsibilities.

Lee ChiwiChief executiveBritish and Malayan Trustees

Advice provided in this column is not meant as a substitute for comprehensive professional advice.

Source : Sunday Times - 19 Feb 2006

Page: 1 ... 2 3 4 5 6 ... 9
For More Recommended Real Estate Books, Click SgHousing's Recomended Books