|
I REFER to Mr George Lim Heng Chye's letter, 'Penalise those who break en-bloc contract' (ST, Feb 5).
I do not agree with his argument. We define en-bloc sellers, usually known as Consenting Subsidiary Proprietors (CSPs), as the owners who have agreed to sign the Collective Sale Agreement.
Needless to say, they had signed the CSA because they had been offered a good premium, usually about 50 per cent above what they would get if they were to sell their property individually in the open market. The higher the premium is, the faster and easier for a Collective Sale to get the 80 per cent threshold required by the Strata Act.
The real problem lies with how the Sales Committee awards the contract. An en-bloc process, from the beginning until a buyer is procured, will need at least six to nine months. In the event the property price escalates - and let's assume that by the time a buyer is procured the premium left is only 10 to 15 per cent - do you think the owners will still be keen to sell? How many per cent of the CSPs will still be keen to proceed? Remember that they had agreed to sign the CSA because of the 50 per cent premium promised to them.
Therefore, in my opinion, it is very important to have the CSP meeting before the Sales Committee awards the contract, to confirm whether they still have the 80 per cent mandate. Otherwise, the 80 per cent mandate they had achieved before would only be symbolic in the number of CSA signed. In reality, the 80 per cent does not exist anymore because the owners are not interested to sell their property anymore.
So, how could you penalise these sellers? Imagine if your agent had sold your property now at a price you told him six months ago without consulting you again, and you knew the price of the property had increased. How will you react?
Hendra Gunawan
|