I REFER to Miss Ng Kheng Lau's letter 'How is en-bloc payout tied to 'share value'?' (ST, Oct 24) questioning the fairness of the payouts with a 'different size, same payout' argument.
I have another poser. How about 'same size, different votes'? Should voting rights in an en-bloc sale be equal regardless of the unit's size? This is very important because it underpins the meaning of home ownership in Singapore.
Share value, as stated by the Building and Construction Authority's guide 'Strata Living In Singapore,' helps to accord maintenance contributions of each unit based on the 'perceived usage of common facilities.' This is usually determined by occupancy, assumed in proportion with the floor area.
The law states that voting rights for an en-bloc sale also go by the share value. But how is this useful in en-bloc sale decisions? There is a distinction between the two - a final discharge of ownership versus that of daily maintenance of an estate.
In my case, 30 years ago before the Building and Construction Authority or Strata Titles Board ever existed, the developer allocated two shares to larger low-rise units against five for tower block units of smaller size due to higher maintenance (lifts etc). Going by the BCA and STB's rule, I now have less than half the en-bloc sale voting rights compared to some of my neighbours. After buying a larger unit, how is it that I don't get the full rights to say whether I stay or sell?
Relying on the archaic origins of share value reflects a lack of depth in the policies and laws. En-bloc sale concepts are new and they never existed when share values were dished out then. Should the authorities suspend all collective sales to prevent unfairness? Has the property industry thought about the impact of the share value on the price of an apartment?
Share value is totally irrelevant and it is a wrong method to allocate voting rights in an en-bloc sale. Each unit is a home to a family, which should be given full and equal rights and not be subjected to an outsider who decides whether the family stays or sells out.
It is bad enough that the 80 per cent majority can push out the 20 per cent, but what about the 20 per cent having less than their equal voting rights?
Four weeks ago, I wrote to the BCA, which passed the matter to the SLA and then to the STB. There is still no response except for the acknowledgements.
How are Singaporeans and foreign talent going to reconcile this issue with home ownership? Is this practice 'Uniquely Singapore'?
Koh Kek Jin
