Tuesday, August 28, 2007
[RealEdge] Digest Number 955
Topics in this digest:
1. Notice
From: Alvin Yeo
2. TodayOnline Voices : A smoking room in all buildings
From: Alvin Yeo
3. BT : Some may slip through the HDB safety net
From: Alvin Yeo
4. ST : Revised en bloc law fixes imbalances in mixed estates
From: Alvin Yeo
5. BT : Law may alter the pace of en bloc sales
From: Alvin Yeo
6. ST Online : Why flat buyers should approach sellers directly
From: Alvin Yeo
7. TodayOnline : The en bloc balancing act
From: Alvin Yeo
8. ST : Collective sales of homes to be more transparent
From: Alvin Yeo
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1. Notice
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 12:25 am ((PDT))
Dear RealEdge Subscriber,
I would like to apologize for not updating you with the daily dosage of real
estate news for the past 10 days.
I was inundated with both work and personal matters. Rest assured. The
news will continue from today onwards.
However, I would like to tweak the way the emails are delivered. The
following will be what I will be doing :
1) I will deleted all bouncing accounts with immediate effect.
2) I will change all email delivery to DAILY DIGEST (If you prefer the
individual format, please effect the change using an yahoo account)
3) I will disallow posting from members as I constantly have to delete spam
or unrelated messages. Despite me telling that this is a real estate news
portal, Members still post their co-broking listing relentlessly.
There are times where the news seems a little dated. The truth is I also do
not know why. Some messages gets delivered immediately while some are lost
in cyberspace...only to reappear a few days later. (I am equally puzzled)
From today onwards, I will also copy the news to www.realblunt.blogspot.com.
I think some news requires discussion and that would be a good place to post
our comments....without having so many emails coming through the system.
Hope this arrangement will suit us better.
Warmest Regards,
Alvin Yeo
Senior Realty Adviser
Residential Associates Division
KF Property Network Pte Ltd
(A member of Knight Frank Group)
167 Jalan Bukit Merah
#06-10 Connection One Tower 5
Singapore 150167
Mobile No: +65 9100 0001
Websites : www.alvinyeo.com
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. TodayOnline Voices : A smoking room in all buildings
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:32 am ((PDT))
http://www.todayonline.com/images/print_logo.jpgThis story was printed from
TODAYonline
http://www.todayonline.com/images/hline.gif
A smoking room in all buildings
Tuesday • August 28, 2007
Letter from Law Fook Loong
I refer to the letter, "Kudos to hotels for joining smoke-free movement"
(Aug 24).
While it is good that air-conditioned buildings in Singapore are smoke-free,
the same cannot be said for the entrances and exits of these buildings.
These spots have now become smoke-filled, as many smokers gather there.
All one needs to do is walk past any building entrance or exit to smell the
stench of cigarette smoke.
Would it not be better to insist that all buildings create a smoking room so
that cigarette smoke can be properly contained and filtered?
This way, non-smokers do not have to breathe in second-hand smoke and
environmental pollution will also be reduced.
Copyright MediaCorp Press Ltd. All rights reserved.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. BT : Some may slip through the HDB safety net
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:32 am ((PDT))
Published August 28, 2007
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/mnt/static/image/ax/c.gif
Some may slip through the HDB safety net
IT is a sensible policy to encourage home ownership. Secure housing, one of
our most basic needs, also provides the place where we connect with the
wider community through education, employment and community networks. In
addition, owning one's home provides stability and makes for sound financial
planning.
As Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said in his recent National Day Rally
speech: 'Home ownership through an HDB flat is the best form of social
welfare for citizens, as it gives every Singaporean a stake in Singapore's
success. When we help you to buy a house and give you something which is
valuable and which is rooted in Singapore, when Singapore grows, property
values go up, your flat value goes up.'
A big part of the social support system in Singapore is centred on helping
Singaporeans own an HDB flat. The public housing board will assume an even
bigger role with the changes announced by Mr Lee in his speech.
To help more of the lower-income own their own homes, the government will
give a more generous housing grant, raising it to $30,000 from $20,000.
Meanwhile, more people will also become eligible for the grant as the
household income limit will be increased from $3,000 to $4,000. The
government will also be helping elderly flat owners to unlock the value of
their flat and convert it into a stream of income to supplement their
retirement expenses by offering a form of reverse mortgage. HDB will buy
back the tail end of the flat's lease and leave the individual with a
shorter lease of 30 years. HDB will then pay a lump sum to the owner and
monthly payments for the rest of his or her life which will serve as a form
of annuity. These new policies will reinforce the unique Singaporean
HDB-centric social support system.
As noted in a report by Citigroup economist Chua Hak Bin yesterday, already
the current distribution of social support or transfers is heavily skewed
towards the decision to buy an HDB flat. The most generous of the subsidies
are HDB housing grants of $30,000-$40,000 and a 20 per cent price discount
for the purchase of new flats. Mr Chua posed the question of whether, over
the longer term, Singapore's social support system should shift towards a
more Workfare-centred one rather than the current HDB-centred one.
He said: 'Tying the most generous social support to home ownership may
penalise those who are too poor to purchase an HDB flat and encourage the
assumption of a heavier debt burden than otherwise. Should lower-income
households who do not exercise their privilege to buy an HDB flat be given
the lump-sum cash grant equivalent to $30,000-$40,000 (perhaps deposited
into their CPF accounts) upon reaching a certain age instead? Such an option
may produce an outcome where the social transfers are more a function of
need rather than a decision tied to home ownership.'
Singaporeans who don't own HDB flats may number 200,000 or less. Not that
large a group, but they are most likely the ones who need help most. Hence
the suggestions are definitely worth considering.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. ST : Revised en bloc law fixes imbalances in mixed estates
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:46 am ((PDT))
Aug 28, 2007
Revised en bloc law fixes imbalances in mixed estates
By Fiona Chan
HOME owners who live in mixed developments - which have both apartments and
shops or offices - will now get a bigger say if their estates go en bloc.
This is thanks to a proposed law change which will require another layer of
consent from an estate's owners for a collective sale.
Consent is granted now if owners who hold at least 80 per cent of a
development's share values vote in favour of a sale. If a development is
less than 10 years old, the requirement is 90 per cent.
But the upcoming change will add another condition to en bloc sales
regardless of whether the estate is mixed or not: The owners who want to
sell must also have units that make up at least 80 per cent of the
development's total area. Again, this is upped to 90 per cent if the estate
is less than 10 years old.
This change was made to address the imbalance in share values in a mixed
development. Share values are assigned when a unit is first sold, and help
determine what each owner pays in maintenance fees and how many voting
rights he has in an estate's management.
Although share values are partly determined by unit size, owners of
commercial units generally get more share values than home owners. For every
one share value given to a home owner, an office owner in the same estate
gets four and a shop owner, five.
This has led to complaints from residents in mixed developments who are
reluctant to sell their estate en bloc but who may not have a choice.
The proposed change has itself been tweaked since March, when the Ministry
of Law first considered a second layer of consent.
Its initial proposal was based on the total number of an estate's units,
rather than its total area. But after feedback from the public and experts,
the ministry changed its mind.
Property consultants yesterday said the new rule will make things more
equitable for home owners.
'The original plan to go by number of units would have been unfair to owners
of large units, because they would have paid more for their units but would
have only one say,' said Mr Karamjit Singh, executive director of property
firm Credo Real Estate.
Mr Lui Seng Fatt, head of investments at Jones Lang LaSalle, warned that
this new rule may make it harder for mixed developments to go en bloc.
'Also, owners with a larger floor area may now have a bigger say, not only
in voting but also in how to split the sale proceeds,' he added.
But the change may not have much impact on the en bloc market - 90 per cent
of deals done since last year were in purely residential estates, said Mr
Nicholas Mak, director of research and consultancy at Knight Frank.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. BT : Law may alter the pace of en bloc sales
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 1:59 am ((PDT))
Published August 28, 2007
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/mnt/static/image/ax/c.gif
Law may alter the pace of en bloc sales
Amendments could see sales surge in near future, but sites may take longer
to launch later
By KALPANA RASHIWALA
(SINGAPORE) Proposed changes to the law will make the en bloc sale process
more transparent and include safeguards to ensure that the various
stakeholders get a fair deal.
Sales committees will have to be properly formed and elected. Collective
sales agreements (CSAs) will be witnessed by lawyers who can clarify doubts
and explain terms and liabilities. Even after they sign, potential sellers
will have a five-day 'cooling-off period' during which they can change their
minds. Even the definition of majority consent has been tweaked.
In the immediate future the changes, which are expected to become law in
early October, could serve as a catalyst to speed up the signing of CSAs,
says CB Richard Ellis executive director Jeremy Lake. 'Otherwise it appears
that everything may have to be unwound and the process restarted under the
new law,' he added.
But in the longer term, the pace at which en bloc sites have been galloping
into the market may slow. This is largely because new rules and procedures -
including how sales committees conduct their business - mean it could take a
longer time to launch a site for sale. However, the pace of collective sale
deals sealed will still depend largely on market conditions, reckons Credo
Real Estate managing director Karamjit Singh, who welcomed the spirit of the
changes that promote greater transparency.
Law firm Rodyk & Davidson's partner Norman Ho said lawyers' fees for
collective sales, usually $3,000 to $4,000 per unit, could double or triple
because of the extra work involved - primarily because lawyers will now be
required to witness signatures and certify the monthly updates on the
consent level. 'This will also aggravate the current shortage of en bloc
sale lawyers,' Mr Ho reckons.
Agreeing, Credo's Mr Singh said requiring lawyers to witness signatures will
'create a bottleneck in the process'.
Like many in the industry, Mr Ho questioned the need to get lawyers to
witness signatures, especially since a cooling-off period is also being
introduced.
A key amendment is an additional requirement for the definition of majority
consent for en bloc sale, to be based on the area of the units in the
development.
The existing condition, that requires consent from owners controlling at
least 80 or 90 per cent of a development's share value - depending on
whether it is more than 10 years old or less, respectively - will still
apply. But a second condition will now require consent from owners of units
that form 80 or 90 per cent of area in the development - again depending on
its age.
This is different from the Ministry of Law's earlier proposal in March,
which had sought to peg the second condition of consent on 80 or 90 per cent
of the number of units owned in the development. Feedback showed that basing
the second requirement on area will mitigate bias against residential owners
in a mixed development - who typically have lower share values. At the same
time, the requirement would not work against commercial unit owners,
especially those whose units have much larger floor areas.
Another big section in the Land Titles (Strata) (Amendment) Bill tabled for
first reading in Parliament yesterday by Deputy Prime Minister and Law
Minister Prof S Jayakumar governs the formation, composition, constitution
and proceedings of en bloc sales committees.
A sales committee will have to be elected by more than 50 per cent of owners
present at a general meeting of the management corporation before signing of
the CSA may begin. Eligibility criteria of committee members are listed and
the sales committee will have to convene general meetings to consider key
issues such as the appointment of the property consultant and lawyer,
apportionment of sales proceeds and the terms and conditions of the CSA.
The sales committee will also have to provide monthly updates - instead of
every eight-weekly currently - of the consent level, to keep owners better
informed.
Every launch for sale must be through a public exercise like a tender or
auction. However, the sales committee can engage in follow-up negotiations
with any bidder, especially if the tender/auction fails to achieve the
desired price. But a sale by private treaty must be concluded within 10
weeks of the close of the tender/auction. Otherwise, the tender will have to
be relaunched for sales efforts to resume.
Credo's Mr Singh welcomed the 10-week deadline, saying it 'instils
discipline as the market has shown itself to be very dynamic'.
'In fast-moving markets, private treaty negotiations do not give you comfort
that you are dealing with the best buyer. But a tender does, because you are
inviting more participants to the negotiating process rather than limiting
yourself to one or two,' he added.
A MinLaw spokesperson said: 'The proposed amendments to the Land Titles
(Strata) Act are to provide additional safeguards and to ensure more
transparency for all owners, that is, the minority and majority owners, but
in a way that does not make it unduly onerous to bring about an en bloc
sale.'
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/mnt/media/image/launched/2007-08-28/20070828
_infographic_4.jpg
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. ST Online : Why flat buyers should approach sellers directly
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:03 am ((PDT))
Aug 28, 2007
Why flat buyers should approach sellers directly
I READ with interest the article, 'Complaints against unethical housing
agents on the rise' (The Sunday Times, Aug 26). Allow me to share my recent
experience.
I put up my HDB flat for sale two weeks ago, with the intention of handling
the transaction myself.
Since then, I have received tonnes of calls from property agents and some of
the tactics they employ are an eye-opener for me.
The most common calls are from agents who ask to co-broke. When they realise
that I am the seller, they ask for details of the flat before ending with
their most important question - whether I will be paying them a commission
should they bring potential buyers for a viewing.
Some never call again when I reply 'no', while others will still bring the
buyers in.
If a buyer expresses interest in my flat, the agent asks for the final
asking price. Say I quote a figure of $300,000. The agent then asks if I
will agree to reflect a price of $303,000 in the documents and pay him
$3,000, as 'the buyer needs to show a higher price for loan purposes, and is
willing to pay the commission on your behalf'.
Common sense tells me that this is untrue. Chances are the buyer will simply
be told that the seller is asking for $303,000 and, if the deal is sealed,
the agent ends up with commission from both sides.
Another tactic - an agent even put up an advertisement for the sale of my
flat, even though I have not engaged one.
I discovered this when I posed as a buyer and pretended to make a viewing
appointment.
It is interesting that PropNex's CEO called for the Government to step in,
as this case involved a PropNex agent.
I strongly urge all buyers to consider bypassing agents and approach owners
directly where such an option is available.
Otherwise, their viewings will be limited to properties that the agents have
'shortlisted', which are likely those where sellers are willing to pay a
commission.
Worse, the price that they pay may have been inflated to build in the
seller's commission.
Tan Bee Hong (Ms)
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
7. TodayOnline : The en bloc balancing act
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:39 am ((PDT))
http://www.todayonline.com/images/print_logo.jpgThis story was printed from
TODAYonline
http://www.todayonline.com/images/hline.gif
The en bloc balancing act
Bill aims to protect interest of minority and majority owners through
step-by-step policy
Tuesday • August 28, 2007
Derrick A Paulo
derrick@mediacorp.com.sg
THE law on en bloc sales looks set to be beefed up, on the back of lessons
learnt from the many tussles of the past year.
When the Bill to amend the Land Titles (Strata) Act was introduced yesterday
in Parliament, it contained far more rules than the Ministry of Law (MinLaw)
had proposed five months ago.
This, on the back of over 400 suggestions it received during public
consultation in April and May. Then, the ministry called for a further round
of focus group discussions with stakeholders.
The result? Not only a new balance between the interests of minority owners
objecting to a sale and that of their majority neighbours — MinLaw's stated
intention from the start — but also, a step-by-step policy to govern en-bloc
sale proceedings.
The current lack of regulations has led to growing complaints by residents
about the conduct and validity of collective sale agreements. At Gillman
Heights in Telok Blangah, for example, objections have been filed to the
Strata Titles Board about how the sale is being apportioned, among others.
The new rules attempt to address this by involving owners in the important
decisions of an en-bloc sale — from the formation and composition of the
sale committee, to the governance of the committee's proceedings.
One of the new "main purposes" of the 42-page Bill is to enable any
subsidiary proprietor who has signed a collective sale agreement to retract
his agreement to sell.
This can be done within a cooling-off period, similar to provisions for
timeshare and direct sales here and property transactions elsewhere, such as
in Australia.
For future en-bloc sales, owners have five days and can exercise this right
only after signing the agreement the first time. In theory, this would
address complaints that owners are forced to sign agreements. For example,
Today has reported on such complaints at Minton Rise in Hougang.
Another requirement, devised to tackle allegations of duress or
misrepresentation, is to ensure a lawyer is present when an owner signs an
agreement, if done in Singapore — so that the legal terms and liabilities
are explained and the latter's doubts addressed.
Even so, the en-bloc sale committee must now list all the important elements
of the agreement to owners: The reserve price, the apportionment method, the
fees payable to lawyers and marketing agents, and so on.
Bernard & Rada Law Corporation associate director M Kumaran, who oversees
his firm's en-bloc cases, believes lawyers will welcome the new Act because
of the clarity of the procedures.
"When you have greater room for judgment calls, there's a greater risk all
round," said Mr Kumaran, who cited two other areas where there is greater
transparency under the Act.
The first is as simple as publicising the minutes of the sale committee
meetings within a certain period, while the other is as significant as
regulating the mode of sale.
MinLaw has revised the Bill so that every sale launch must be by public
tender or auction. While the sale committee can engage in follow-up
negotiations with any bidder, a sale by private treaty must be concluded
within 10 weeks of the close of the tender/auction. Otherwise, the committee
must go back to the tender results or launch again.
This helps owners to know better if they are getting the best sale price,
said Mr Kumaran.
In his experience, buyers prefer private treaties because it gives them more
control of the bidding process. While popular developments are more
competitively sold through tender, it is also not uncommon for these to be
concluded via private treaty before the end of the tender, he said.
Research director Nicholas Mak of property consultancy Knight Frank believes
the en-bloc process "may be lengthened" with the additional requirements to
be met and with greater involvement of owners.
For example, the decision to form a sale committee and the election of its
members can only be done at a general meeting of the management corporation,
not on an ad-hoc basis.
The committee must bring up the appointments of the property consultant and
the lawyer at a general meeting before it makes its decision. Owners can
even decide to take away these decision-making powers.
MinLaw has also specified the eligibility criteria for election to the sale
committee, and made clear it cannot use the funds of the management
corporation for its activities.
Other feedback MinLaw has considered includes the additional consent
requirement by owners. It had proposed, in addition to the threshold of
80-per-cent consent based on share value, that 80-per-cent consent by number
of units also be required.
It has now amended this second requirement to 80 per cent by area, and 90
per cent if the development is less than 10 years old. This will largely
apply to mixed developments with residences, offices and shops, mitigating
the shift in interests from commercial owners' to those of residents.
Copyright MediaCorp Press Ltd. All rights reserved.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
8. ST : Collective sales of homes to be more transparent
Posted by: "Alvin Yeo" alvinyeo@pacific.net.sg sgalf
Date: Tue Aug 28, 2007 2:40 am ((PDT))
Aug 28, 2007
Collective sales of homes to be more transparent
Home owners to get more say with proposed changes to Land Titles (Strata)
Act
By Joyce Teo
HOME owners faced with the momentous decision of selling their home en bloc
will soon benefit from a clearer, fairer sales process - and the right to
change their minds within five days.
Amid a record number of collective sales in the past two years, some home
owners have been left unhappy at the sale process over issues such as how
the sales committee is formed.
En-bloc sellers have been plagued by rumours and a lack of clear information
on sale procedures. Some home owners with strong emotional attachments to
their homes have felt pressured to sell.
In one high-profile dispute, the sale of Horizon Towers for $500 million was
blocked on a technicality - the paperwork was not in order - by the Strata
Titles Board, after action was taken by owners who were opposed to the sale.
They had disputes over issues including the transparency of the sale
process. The developers have now taken the sellers to the High Court for
failing to see the sale through.
One of the proposed changes will give more power to the board, which can
disregard any technical irregularity if it is satisfied that it will not
prejudice any owner's interest.
Another key change is the introduction of strict guidelines on the currently
unregulated process of setting up an en-bloc sales committee to oversee a
sale. For instance, owners can only form a sales committee and elect members
at a general meeting.
Another major change will provide for a five-day 'cooling off' period after
a collective sale agreement is signed during which a home owner may change
his mind.
The proposed changes are contained in an amendment to the Land Titles
(Strata) Act, introduced to Parliament by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister
for Law Professor S. Jayakumar yesterday.
He first outlined some of the changes in March. More proposals were added
after public consultation in April and May - which attracted hundreds of
suggestions - and talks with industry experts.
Prof Jayakumar said the extra changes will further enhance transparency and
procedural clarity, and offer better protection to affected home owners.
There are more than 30 proposed amendments to take effect as soon as early
as October.
One change addresses an imbalance in voting rights in some mixed retail,
office and residential developments - by adding a new level of owner consent
by floor area, before a sale can proceed.
To ensure owners are kept in the know, general meetings must be held to look
at issues such as appointing lawyers and consultants, or dividing sales
proceeds.
Also, a lawyer must be present to witness the signing of the collective sale
agreement, and to explain the legal terms and liabilities. Observers say
this move will prevent owners from complaining that they were forced to sell
under duress.
To assure owners the best price is reached, a collective sale launch must be
made by public tender or public auction. If this method fails, the sales
committee can follow up and negotiate with any bidder. Still, a sale by
private treaty must be concluded within 10 weeks of the close of the tender
or auction.
And an independent valuation has to be obtained on the date the tender
closes with bids to be revealed to the owners as soon as practicable - to
help them decide if the bids are favourable.
Another change will return any remaining money in a condo's management and
sinking funds to owners - not the purchasing developer.
The Strata Titles Board can increase the amount a minority owner gets from
sales proceeds if, say, he spent a lot to do up his home before finding
about the sale.
'All the changes will give owners more say in a collective sale,' said Mr
Nicholas Mak of consultancy Knight Frank. 'But they come at a price as the
sale process will most likely be lengthened.'
Also, professional fees will inevitably rise, said Credo Real Estate's
managing director Karamjit Singh.
<mailto:joyceteo@sph.com.sg> joyceteo@sph.com.sg
_____
On the cards
SUMMARY of key proposed changes affecting collective sales
Additional consent requirement
Additional approval required from owners of units forming at least 80 per
cent of area if the development is more than 10 years old and 90 per cent of
area if the development is less than 10 years old.
Formation of sales committee
Sales committee to be formed, and its members elected, at a general meeting
before the signing of a collective sale agreement can start. More general
meetings to be held to consider key issues such as appointment of lawyer and
consultant or agent, apportionment of sales proceeds, contract terms and so
on.
Collective sale agreement
Lawyer to be present to explain legal terms and liabilities when an owner
signs the collective sale agreement. But the owner can change his mind
within a five-day cooling-off period after signing the collective sale
agreement for the first time.
Mode of sale
A collective sale launch must be made by public tender or public auction. As
well, an independent valuation is to be obtained on the date of the close of
the tender and bids to be revealed to the owners as soon as practicable.
STB empowered to raise proceeds
The Strata Titles Board can increase the amount that minority owners can get
from sales proceeds if it finds that these owners have not been treated
fairly. This proposed increase will be at least $2,000, or at most, 0.25 per
cent of the sale proceeds for each unit.
Return of monies in management fund and sinking fund Upon sale completion,
the money in the condominium's management fund and sinking fund to be
distributed to owners.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Real Estate News Provided Freely
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RealEdge/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/RealEdge/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:RealEdge-normal@yahoogroups.com
mailto:RealEdge-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
RealEdge-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
