RECENTLY there have been reports of minority owners of residential properties involved in en-bloc sale appealing to the Strata Titles Board (STB) to block the sale.
The most highly publicised one is that involving Eng Lok Mansion. Much has been made of the plight of the two minority owners. But what about the plight of the 'silent majority'? Nothing has been written on this.
The objection of the minority has resulted in the sale being delayed a few months. This means that money that was due to the owners would also be delayed. Who then is paying for the interest that could have been earned?
Based on today's bank-deposit rate of 3 per cent per annum, a development sold for $200 million would see a loss to the owners of $500,000 for every month of delay. A two- month delay would mean the loss of a cool $1 million. Who is going to pay the 'silent majority' for this?
Additionally, property prices in Singapore are rising. The en-bloc sellers are not able to buy, or even book, a new property because of the uncertainty that has been created by the minority's objection. If they commit, they do so at a risk because the sale could be stopped. If they don't, they would likely have to pay more later in this rising market.
I understand the need for an adequate means to allow for proper objections, thus the requirement for a significant (80 per cent) majority and the approval of the STB. However, I believe the purpose of this means of objection is to prevent fraudulent or unfair collusion among owners. Otherwise, what is the point of requiring 80 per cent approval if a small percentage of owners can stop the whole sales process?
In fact, to allow extended appeals by, say, one or two owners is unfair to the majority who have agreed to the sale. Perhaps they should be made to pay in some way for the loss arising from the delay.
I hope the authorities will look into the plight of the 'silent majority'.
Wee Hian Kok
