Still waiting for changes to en bloc rules

MANY unit owners or subsidiary proprietors (SPs) who live in private estates are unlikely to be happy at the prospect of ‘the Republic’s next en bloc wave’ envisaged in Monday’s report, ‘En bloc debate, HK style’.

The report compared legislation in Singapore and Hong Kong. Those in Singapore who are likely to be affected cannot but feel that Hong Kong adopts a more empathetic approach to the concept that an individual’s home is his castle, with the right to undisturbed residence.

Sadly, where condominiums in Singapore are concerned, such comfort is replaced with the insecurity that a group of self-interested SPs can, and often do, band together in an attempt to sell the estate collectively – the main carrot dangled almost always being the prospect of a higher-than-market price for their unit.

As I recall, new rules governinig collective property sales were introduced from October 2007. After barely a few months, it was reported that the Ministry of Law was considering making amendments. That was almost 18 months ago.

In the meantime, there have been acrimonious lawsuits involving collective sales, which can only suggest that the rule changes were found wanting.

To the average Singaporean, buying a home is the biggest single investment in his life. In earlier years, the Government avidly pursued and promoted the admirable policy of ‘affordable public housing for the masses’.

But private housing was left basically to the law of supply and demand, which would have been admirable had it been left at that. But rules relating to private estates in general, and collective sales in particular, have left much to be desired.

If it is the intention of any would-be property buyer to live there, being ejected summarily by a group with some vested interest rather than any altruistic motives can only instil a sense of insecurity.

In any case, reducing majority approval to 80 per cent seems strangely at odds with the position in limited companies, where only the holdings of minority shareholders with less than 10 per cent of capital can be compulsorily bought out at the majority shareholders’ option.

Minorities everywhere always feel unsure of their position, and most countries take measures to ensure their rights are not abused.

This feeling must surely apply in even greater degree to SPs, many of whom would likely have struggled for years to pay off their housing loan and just want to be left in peace to enjoy their golden years.

I look forward to whatever improvements the Ministry of Law has been mulling over in the past 18 months.

Narayana Narayana