SGHOUSING.COM 新加坡房地产网

Court allows buyers, 13 owners to intervene in appeal.

The majority owners and the buyers of Horizon Towers joined forces for the first time in months yesterday, to argue against the dismissal by the Strata Titles Board (STB) of the development’s collective sale application.

This was after Supreme Court Judge Choo Han Teck allowed the buyers - HPL and its partners - and a group of 13 majority owners to intervene in yesterday’s appeal.

The appeal at the High Court was originally meant to involve only the majority owners, who consented to the en bloc sale of Horizon Towers in February, and the minority owners, who oppose the sale. But HPL and the group of 13 who wanted separate representation applied to participate in the proceedings, on the grounds that they had a stake in its outcome.

Judge Choo heard their submissions and ruled yesterday morning that it was ‘just and convenient’ to allow both parties in. He also said that ‘prudence requires that HPPL (HPL and its partners) be heard’, as the outcome of this appeal would have a bearing on their allegation that the majority owners breached the sales contract.

HPL and its partners - Morgan Stanley Real Estate-managed funds and Qatar Investment Authority - have sued the majority sellers for up to $1 billion in damages, alleging that the owners failed to do everything in their power to effect the collective sale.

This came after the STB in August dismissed the majority owners’ application for a collective sale order, on the grounds that it was defective because it was missing three pages.

The STB said the statutory declaration provided by the sales committee was ‘false’ because it stated that the collective sale agreement was appended when, in fact, three pages - containing the signatures of three consenting owners - were missing from it. The board also said that it had no power to amend the application and threw it out, without considering its merits.

HPL’s suit against the majority owners has been stayed, pending the outcome of this appeal.

Yesterday, majority owners and the buyers alike sought to convince the High Court that the STB had erred in its decision to throw out the application. They argued that there were no material instances of non-compliance in the application, only a minor technical one - which the STB has the power to amend.

Senior Counsel Chelva Rajah of Tan Rajah & Cheah, who represented the majority owners, and Senior Counsel Andre Yeap of Rajah & Tann, who represented the group of 13 owners, both argued that the missing pages had been a mere oversight.

‘It was only due to a clerical error that the pages weren’t included … and these missing pages were brought to the STB’s attention during the course of the hearing,’ Mr Rajah said.

Mr Yeap also argued that the missing pages had no material effect on the application. It was a point Mr Rajah agreed with - he pointed out that, even without these three signatures, the application would still have the signatures of more than 80 per cent of the owners. According to collective sale rules for older developments, the owners of more than 80 per cent of the units must agree to the sale.

Both also said that STB had the right - under Rule 12 of the Building Maintenance and Strata Management Regulations - to amend any application submitted to the board, and could have done so instead of dismissing it.

Senior Counsel K Shanmugam of Allen & Gledhill, representing HPL and its partners, echoed the spirit - if not the tone - of the majority owners’ submissions.

Mr Shanmugam said his goal was also to convince the High Court that STB had erred in throwing out the collective sale application, without considering its merits. But he warned that there were competing interests among the majority owners.

He cited examples of how some of the majority owners had tried to scupper the en bloc sale, after neighbouring developments started to fetch much higher prices. He related instances of how the sales committee had been equivocal about setting STB hearing dates and how anonymous flyers had circulated around the development, encouraging sellers to renege on the deal.

‘So I want to be joined to this action (this appeal) to ensure our interests are safeguarded,’ he said.

The hearing continues today, when the minority owners will present their objections.

Source : Business Times - 2 Oct 2007

Dragon Court case cited to persuade judge to overturn the STB decision.

THE tangled Horizon Towers case has become even more complex as a controversial collective sale four years ago was dragged into the proceedings.

In their High Court appeal yesterday, lawyers for the majority sellers of Horizon Towers cited the case of Dragon Court, where a lone owner fought against the estate being sold en bloc in 2003.

They argued that the Dragon Court ruling sheds some light on the ongoing legal tussle over the Leonie Hill estate, as it is also related to an issue of missing disclosure.

In the Horizon Towers case, the Strata Titles Board (STB) dismissed the owners’ application for a collective sale in August over a technicality: Pages bearing three consenting owners’ signatures were missing from the submitted application.

The majority owners want the High Court to overturn the STB dismissal.

Their lawyer - Tan, Rajah and Cheah’s Mr Chelva Rajah - said the STB knew those three owners signed the sale deal, and that the Board had the power to amend the application to include the missing pages.

Mr Rajah argued that even without those three signatures, the rest of the owners who had consented to the sale still held 82.51 per cent of share values - comfortably above the 80 per cent minimum requirement.

Mr Rajah also told the court that the missing pages were a ‘clerical error’.

He then cited the High Court’s ruling that upheld the STB’s decision to allow the Dragon Court sale in 2003, despite more ‘material’ information not being disclosed in the application.

Dragon Court unit owner Koh Gek Hwa tried to block the sale, arguing that a conflict of interest between the majority sellers and the buyer had not been highlighted. Nine of the estate’s 14 units were owned by a single company linked to the condominium’s buyer, she said.

But the STB, noting that there was only one bidder for that sale, decided there was no reason to suggest that the buyer was unfairly chosen. The High Court backed that ruling, saying the STB had known of the seller-buyer relationship prior to its decision.

Yesterday’s Horizon Towers hearing was somewhat quieter than Friday’s lively session, when comments from the public gallery peppered the lawyers’ speeches. The room, though, remained packed, with more than 20 lawyers from six firms and at least 40 people in the public gallery.

Justice Choo Han Teck kicked off proceedings by deciding to allow the estate’s buyers to participate, ending a row that had taken up the whole of last Friday.

The buyers - led by Hotel Properties and represented by Allen & Gledhill’s Mr K. Shanmugam - had asked to join the proceedings in order to protect their own interests. They have said that they will sue the majority owners for breach of contract if the $500 million sale does not go through.

Their request for inclusion, however, proved unpopular with the condominium’s majority sellers.

Justice Choo said yesterday he would allow the buyers’ participation as they were pursuing their commercial interests. He said it will not be ‘unjust or inconvenient to hear two more voices’, as long as he can ‘mute’ them if they prove disruptive.

Things heated up in the afternoon, when Mr Shanmugam took the court through a long retelling of the Horizon Towers saga.

Earlier case

Dragon Court went en bloc in 2002, and sole bidder Limau Heights Development offered $12.9 million.

But unit owner Koh Gek Hwa, a former accountant, opposed the sale, claiming not enough weight was given to the majority sellers’ links to the buyer.

When the STB dismissed her objection, Ms Koh became the first home owner here to take her collective sale protest to court.

The High Court ruled that the STB knew all material information before its decision.

Who’s who in the saga

The buyers

Hotel Properties, Qatar Investment Authority, funds managed by Morgan Stanley Real Estate.

Lawyers: Allen & Gledhill, led by senior counsel K. Shanmugan.

The majority sellers

As a whole, directed by the current sale committee.

Lawyers: Tan, Rajah and Cheah, led by senior counsel Chelva Rajah.

The majority sellers

A group of 13 sellers, including three members of the original sale committee.

Lawyers: Rajah and Tann, led by senior counsel Andre Yeap.

Minority owners

One group of three represented by Tan Kok Quan, led by Mr Ramesh Kannan.

One group of four represented by Harry Elias Partnership, led by senior counsel K. S. Rajah and Mr Philip Fong.

One owner represented by Phang & Co, which has given instructions to senior counsel Michael Hwang.

Source : Straits Times - 2 Oct 2007

Private home prices also up smartly; govt may make more sites available.

The property price boom seen in the past two years has filtered down to the heartlands. The Housing & Development Board’s Q3 2007 flash estimate for its resale flat price index was 6.5 per cent higher than in the preceding three months. This is the biggest quarter-on-quarter jump in the index since Q2 1999, when it rose 8.1 per cent.

Market watchers say the key factor driving the increase this time around is the army of en bloc sellers downgrading for their replacement property.

Meanwhile, the party continues in the private housing market. The Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) flash estimate shows that the official price index for private homes jumped 8 per cent in Q3 over the previous quarter, after rising 8.3 per cent in Q2. To ensure that prices do not run ahead because of a shortage of supply, the URA indicated that more sites could be made available through the Government Land Sales programme. Related link: Click here for URA’s news release

For now, the gains appear pretty evenly spread across regions. The URA said its price index for non-landed private homes in the Core Central Region - which includes the prime districts, Downtown Core and Sentosa - increased 8.3 per cent quarter-on-quarter in Q3, followed by an 8.1 per cent rise for Outside Central Region, which covers suburban mass-market locations like Woodlands, Yishun and Jurong, and 7.7 per cent for Rest of Central Region, including places like Bukit Merah, Toa Payoh and Katong.

The big price disparity among the three areas at the beginning of the year is clearly dissipating, notes PropNex CEO Mohamed Ismail. DTZ Debenham Tie Leung executive director Ong Choon Fah said yesterday’s official property data is ‘not such a bad thing. Everybody should feel a little richer’. CB Richard Ellis executive director Li Hiaw Ho says the URA’s Q3 flash estimate shows that ‘confidence in the residential market was unshaken despite periods of volatility in global stock markets caused by the sub-prime mortgage problems’.

‘While it’s not surprising that the high-end market continued to lead the way as more and more projects were marketed at above $3,000 psf, it was a big step made by several suburban projects that were launched at $850-1,000 psf,’ he added.

The URA’s flash estimate for its Q3 overall private home price index reflects a 22.6 per cent gain in the first nine months of this year, since Q4 2006.

Mr Li reckons the gain for the whole of this year may come in at 25 to 30 per cent. The uptrend will continue as there are more high-end projects to be rolled out in Q4, including Hilltops, Ritz-Carlton Residences, Grange Infinite, Phase 2 of Marina Bay Financial Centre and projects on Sentosa Cove, he noted.

Mrs Ong notes that other factors driving private home prices include still-strong liquidity, the trend of tenants deciding to become home owners, and the appeal of buying apartments for investment, given the tight rental market.

As for the HDB resale price index, Mr Ismail predicts the full-year increase will reach 15 per cent, considering that the increase in the first nine months alone amounted to 11 per cent. ERA assistant vice-president Eugene Lim forecasts an increase of 13 to 16 per cent for the whole of this year. He laments the unrealistic prices sought by many owners who are still riding on the euphoria created by record prices achieved for some five-room resale flats in the Bukit Merah area. HDB homebuyers are beginning to show some resistance and this could translate into lower resale volumes later down the road.

Mr Ismail estimates that transacted prices of HDB resale flats in Q3 reflect premiums over valuations ranging from $10,000 to $50,000. ‘A year ago, for the smaller three and four-room flats, the premium could have been $10,000-$15,000, while for bigger flats in outlying areas, many were not fetching any premium over valuation at all,’ he added. He reckons that for the next year, HDB’s resale flat price index could go up 10-12 per cent. Mr Ismail does not expect HDB resale flat prices to run away as they did in 1996, when the index rose 34.3 per cent, as the authorities will step up supply quickly to prevent public housing prices from becoming unaffordable.

HDB said it will continue to monitor the market closely to ensure ‘an adequate and affordable supply of flats’. It will be increasing its supply of new flats with plans to offer about 4,500 units under the Built-To-Order system over the next six months, after offering about 2,700 BTO flats from January to September. In addition, HDB plans to release three new sites under the Design, Build and Sell scheme that can generate about 1,500 HDB flats in central and eastern Singapore in the next half year.

As for the private housing market, the URA also gave a clear signal yesterday on its intention for the Government Land Sales programme for H1 2008, which it is currently reviewing. ‘The government will make available more sites for private residential development through the GLS programme next year if the demand continues to remain strong,’ it said.

Source : Business Times - 2 Oct 2007

I REFER to the letter, ‘HDB flat prices in Fernvale rose too rapidly’ (ST, Sept 26), by Mr Leong Sze Hian.

Mr Leong compared the selling prices of HDB’s latest build-to-order project, Coral Spring, with the selling prices of Fernvale Vista and Fernvale Court launched in May this year and September 2005 respectively.

The comparisons are inappropriate, as they did not take into account prevailing market values and the different design features of the flats.

Coral Spring is a Premium project while the two earlier projects cited by Mr Leong are Standard projects.

HDB’s Premium projects come with enhanced architectural designs, landscaping and better-quality finishes, compared to Standard projects.

In addition, the flats at Coral Spring also come with many improved design features, such as bay windows and planters, as well as a larger floor area.

The Fernvale area has also undergone significant development since the launch of Fernvale Court two years ago. With the LRT system in operation, improved road network, as well as more amenities and established facilities, the flats in the Fernvale area have appreciated in market value. This can be seen from recent resale transactions in the area, where four-room flats were transacted at between $275,000 and $287,000.

We would like to reiterate that HDB has continued to price its flats such that they are affordable to the vast majority of flat buyers.

New HDB flats are priced below their equivalent market values so that buyers can enjoy a substantial subsidy from the Government.

In addition, the Government has recently revised the Additional CPF Housing Grant Scheme for first-timers to allow households earning up to $4,000 in income to qualify, with the highest-tier grant increased from $20,000 to $30,000.

Kee Lay Cheng (Ms) Deputy Director (Marketing & Projects) For Director (Estate Administration & Property) Housing & Development Board

PREMIUM DIFFERENCE

Coral Spring, a Premium project, also comes with features such as bay windows and planters, as well as a larger floor area.

Source : Straits Times - 2 Oct 2007

THE rich heritage of Katong and Joo Chiat district will get more protection from the wrecking ball with a further 228 buildings earmarked for conservation status.

The buildings include landmarks such as St Hilda’s Church, the Bethesda (Katong) Church and the former Grand Hotel in Still Road South.

Three bungalows - in Marine Parade Road, Chapel Road and Joo Chiat Road - have also been selected.

The buildings were selected to serve as markers of the area’s heritage.

St Hilda’s Church, for example, was built in 1949 and is designed in a simple English parish church style while the former Grand Hotel building was built in 1917 in the ornamented Victorian style with a slight Indian influence.

There are already about 700 buildings under conservation orders in the East Coast area, traditional home of Singapore’s Eurasian and Peranakan communities and a haven for food-lovers.

The plan was announced by National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan yesterday at the Urban Redevelopment Authority’s (URA) Architectural Heritage Awards ceremony.

The URA has told the building owners about the conservation plan. Its final decision will be made after feedback.

Conservation orders mean owners cannot demolish the building or make major alterations to structures or facades.

But the URA noted that most can be redeveloped to their full economic potential even if conserved.

One owner, Ms Lyn Lee, 34, wants the certainty a conservation order would bring. Ms Lee, who owns the Awfully Chocolate cakeshop chain, lives in a pre-war, three-storey shophouse in Tembeling Road, one of a row of 10 houses.

She and her husband bought the ageing freehold property for $880,000 six years ago and have spent about $500,000 renovating it into a home for themselves and their three children. They do not intend to move.

‘It’s very important that someday, somebody won’t come and mow down three houses and build a pink-tiled monstrosity,’ she said.

Some of her neighbours are considering upgrading the neighbourhood if it is eventually conserved.

The 228 buildings proposed for conservation were chosen from about 1,000 buildings in the area that are more than 30 years old. More than 6,500 buildings have been conserved in Singapore.

The announcement was bittersweet for interest group Historic Architecture Rescue Plan, which has been lobbying the Government to conserve various properties in the district.

One - a 95-year-old Amber Road bungalow - could only be partly conserved. Earlier this year, its developer agreed to build a hybrid apartment block incorporating some elements of the old building, but it plans to tear down its much vaunted crescent-shaped section.

Mr Mah told the ceremony guests that Singapore had to strike a constant balance between redevelopment and conservation.

Six projects were singled out in the URA awards yesterday for sensitive or innovative restoration work, including the National Museum and Chek Jawa Visitor Centre in Pulau Ubin.

Mr Mah also announced the URA would be enhancing various districts next year. These include a 4.9km waterfront promenade from Punggol Point to Sungei Serangoon and a coastal promenade in Woodlands.

It will also improve roadside infrastructure in Siglap and Upper Serangoon Road.

Source : Straits Times - 2 Oct 2007