Sunday, February 3, 2008

CapitaLand Tells Gillman Heights Owners To Honour Sale

Source : The Straits Times, Feb 2, 2008

Resident circulates letter to stop deal; developer warns of breach of contract

ANOTHER collective sale dispute is brewing between the majority sellers of a condominium and its buyer.

This time, it is the owners of Gillman Heights in Alexandra Road that are locking horns with property developer CapitaLand, which agreed to buy the sprawling 607-unit estate in February last year.

The condo's minority owners are already filing an appeal against the $548 million deal, which got the green light in December from the Strata Titles Board (STB), the body that governs collective sales.

But even some Gillman Heights majority owners, who originally agreed to sell, are not all happy about the sale.

At least one home owner has circulated letters to his neighbours, calling for a concerted application to the High Court to invalidate the collective sale agreement.

The letters, distributed at the beginning of last month to residents' mail boxes, prompted a quick response from CapitaLand after they were brought to its attention.

It sent out at least two lawyers' letters addressed to all Gillman Heights majority owners, warning them 'not to do anything...that may hinder or prevent' the sale.

These strongly worded letters, sent through law firm Rajah & Tann, identified the dissenting majority owner as Mr Jerry Lum.

Rajah & Tann also sent a six-page letter addressed specifically to Mr Lum, urging him to 'take notice' - in full capital letters - that CapitaLand 'may have no option' but to take legal action against him unless he stopped circulating the letters and organising any similar activities.

The letters stressed the sale agreement is 'binding' on all who have signed it and any attempt to block the sale could be viewed as a breach of contract.

A copy of the letters was obtained by The Straits Times this week. When contacted, Mr Lum confirmed he had distributed letters and had received the lawyers' letters, but declined to comment further.

Among other things, Mr Lum argued in his original letters that the sale should require consent from 90 per cent of owners, rather than the usual 80 per cent. This is due to a dispute over Gillman Heights' completion date.

He was also unhappy with the sale price, which he said 'many neighbours' feel is 'so, so cheap'. Each owner can expect to receive about $890,000 to $950,000 from the collective sale.

Although Mr Lum was the only one who signed off on his letters, the liberal use of the pronoun 'we' in the letters suggests he may have been writing on behalf of other like-minded, but unidentified, owners.

However, the Gillman Heights sales committee has claimed no knowledge of any activities aimed at obstructing the collective sale. It responded to CapitaLand's letters with a letter of its own, sent through its lawyers Lee & Lee. In its letter, it said it 'has every intention to and will carry out' its obligations under the sale agreement.

Meanwhile, a group of 22 minority owners at Gillman Heights are appealing to the High Court to overturn STB's approval of the sale. They filed it on Jan 16 and are awaiting the hearing. They are appealing on the grounds that the sale price is too low, and that more owners' consent is required.

The Gillman Heights brouhaha is the latest in a series of unusual conflicts between an estate's majority owners and its buyer. Historically, the quarrels have involved minority owners instead, who are unwilling to sell their homes.

But recent cases such as Horizon Towers in Leonie Hill and Regent Garden in West Coast Road have thrown up examples of majority owners who signed on the dotted line but later wanted to back out.

The Horizon Towers owners ended up being sued by the buyer - the suit is now on hold. The Regent Garden owners managed to get the sale dismissed earlier this week.


Letters making their rounds

THE letter-writing saga at Gillman Heights (above) was kicked off by home owner Jerry Lum, who distributed two letters to his neighbours dated Jan 1 and Jan 3.

Mr Lum called into question the estate's sale price and the level of consent required for its collective sale. He also flagged rising home replacement costs, saying a High Court application would hold up the sale and let residents delay finding another place to stay.

CapitaLand responded with three letters - dated between Jan 4 and Jan 9 - reminding the majority owners of their contractual obligations and warning of breach of contract.

In reply, the estate's sales committee wrote on Jan 10 that it was unaware of and did not support activities obstructing the sale. If anyone was involved in such activities, he would have to take 'personal responsibility'.

No comments: