What u see is not what u get

[Laguna]

I just collected a newly completed unit and found out that the unit delivered to me is different from what was shown in the show model. (I took pictures of the showflats and show models)

This is a ground floor unit, with ledge surrounded the unit, from the front, side and till the back. And what completed only the ledge in the front PES.

When I took up this issue with the developer. The answer given to me,

1. there is a disclaimer clause in the model, ( I could not recall)

" This model of the development, is based on Artist’s impressions and intended only as a guide. The Developer reserves the right to alter or amend the design. This model shall not form part of an offer or contract or be construed as any representation by the Developer or its agent. All areas and measurements are approximate and subject to adjustment on final survey."

2. The developer has all the right to change the design.

Subsequently, I found out that, there was a mistake made by the developer, that the plan given to build the model was not an approved plan, as the width provided is insufficient for the fire engine access, and hence took away all the ledge in order to provide sufficient width.

The developer, inform me that, if I wish to pursue the matter, is to engage lawyer.

I would like to seek the forumers' opinion in this matter.

[chiaberry]

If the total floor area of your completed unit is not less than 97% of what was stated originally, I don't think you have much of a case. Especially with the disclaimers that the developer had put in. Nowadays the brochures have such disclaimers (could be in fine print).

There will be more of such cases to come. Even worse if the unit is a tiny MM which would be more affected by changes in the plan.

[hyenergix]

Is the ledge part of the GFA you paid? Can invoke the lemon law?

[Rosegarden]

If the total floor area of your completed unit is not less than 97% of what was stated originally, I don't think you have much of a case. Especially with the disclaimers that the developer had put in. Nowadays the brochures have such disclaimers (could be in fine print).

There will be more of such cases to come. Even worse if the unit is a tiny MM which would be more affected by changes in the plan.

The total area includes the area under the boundary walls (half if the boundary wall is shared with another unit)?

[amk]

my opinion: I think you have a case. This is not about the puny 3% thing. It's material difference. However looks like developer is betting you will not go to litigation due to the hefty cost.

this thing needs more than ordinary lawyer. u will need specialist litigation lawyers, minimum fee > 50k, plus fees for third party experts which you are going to use (quantity surveyor, architect, structural engineer, etc). really going to cost a bomb.

risk of buying new.....

[chiaberry]

This is like David going against Goliath. LOL. IMO the developers probably have covered the backsides with all the disclaimers and as an individual the cost is not worth it. You can try to drum up support amongst your fellow condo owners to make a class suit then share out the costs between all of you.

[hyenergix]

If there is a case, it will be good if Laguna can sue the developer and make it public.

[flagship74]

If there is a case, it will be good if Laguna can sue the developer and make it public.

there is a risk whereby he might end up selling his unit to pay for the lawyer fee..

[lifeline]

depending on the resources you have access to, you may wish to proceed with legal redress.

however, as the developer has ceded that there were modifications and you even took photos, etc, it will be ideal if you can use this as a basis for discussion to get % rebate. a good starting point will be the 3% gfa - usually they dun pay, but on this basis, ask them to pay on basis of goodwill. see if you can secure a win-win outcome for both parties using a discussive approach, by meeting up with the senior person in charge, to avert negative publicity as well as wasted time and resources for both.

still as they have even asked you to engage a lawyer, they have thrown the ball over. dun know if you can get a compromise in this situation.

good luck!

[buttercarp]

This is like David going against Goliath. LOL. IMO the developers probably have covered the backsides with all the disclaimers and as an individual the cost is not worth it. You can try to drum up support amongst your fellow condo owners to make a class suit then share out the costs between all of you.

Yup....if the owners of the other units are willling to team up with you, then it will be easier on the pocket and you will have support emotionally and mentally.
This kind of law suit may drain you - financially and emotionally.
I don't know about you, but for myself, I will be so stressed out and I personally think it would not be worth the stress.
I would at most try to gardner the supprt of the other owners and send the developer a lawyer's letter. If nothing is done, I may go to the press. This is as far as I would go.

[fclim]

You can ask your lawyer if you have a case. There should still be a balance 13% of the purchase price that is paid to the Singapore Academy of Law as stakeholder until CSC? Can this sum be withheld?

What do you intend to use the ledge for? Even if you win, I dun think it is worth the effort and money if you have no intended use of the ledge in the end. Perhaps just engage a qualified QS to do a measurement of the total area that you bought and ensure that it is within the 3% to 5% deviation allowed.

You need to show evidence that the main reason you bought the unit was due to the ledge and that you had an intended use of the ledge. That use is no longer possible now, which constitutes a significant mis-representation that warrants some form of compensation.

[chiaberry]

Actually isn't it better without the ledge? A ledge can be a nuisance sometimes. Dirt and grime can gather there (or even form a comfortable place for bees to build a nest if you are on a lower floor).

[Laguna]

Thanks to ALL

This is not a GFA issue which is very easy to settle.

The developer is a listed company and has all the weight, they have the monies and know well that it is not easy for a buyer to take them to court.

I cannot get other owners to help out, as my unit is the one and only one of this problem.

If not wrong, last year, either BCA or URA has expressed the concerns on the showflat standards and the risk of buyers not getting what they seen.

What one can do are :
1. ask the journalists to write the case with name mentioned
2. register with CASE
3. write to forum
4. engage lawyers

I am fighting for the consumer rights that we shall get what we seen.

[fclim]

Thanks to ALL

This is not a GFA issue which is very easy to settle.

The developer is a listed company and has all the weight, they have the monies and know well that it is not easy for a buyer to take them to court.

I cannot get other owners to help out, as my unit is the one and only one of this problem.

If not wrong, last year, either BCA or URA has expressed the concerns on the showflat standards and the risk of buyers not getting what they seen.

What one can do are :
1. ask the journalists to write the case with name mentioned
2. register with CASE
3. write to forum
4. engage lawyers

I am fighting for the consumer rights that we shall get what we seen.

I admire your spirit. However, unless you have been greatly inconvenienced by the missing ledges, then it is something worth fighting for. The courts would generally apply the reasonableness test. If the value of the property has decreased as a result of it or you have suffered some form of inconvenience, then there is a case for the courts to consider.

What I am hearing is that the ledge is not of much use and the developer did not charge you for it. It was also not built for public safety reasons.

The courts will also determine what is written in the contract, what the breach is and whether you had signed the contract with your eyes open as an educated person should. The first question the judge might ask will be, "If you had wanted the ledge, why didn't you ask for it to be written down in the contract?"

The most recent judgement of Pearl Properties v Grange Properties(a unit of Chip Eng Seng Ltd) on misrepresentation and breach shows clearly how the courts view such cases.

[yaozong7]

Thanks to ALL

This is not a GFA issue which is very easy to settle.

The developer is a listed company and has all the weight, they have the monies and know well that it is not easy for a buyer to take them to court.

I cannot get other owners to help out, as my unit is the one and only one of this problem.

If not wrong, last year, either BCA or URA has expressed the concerns on the showflat standards and the risk of buyers not getting what they seen.

What one can do are :
1. ask the journalists to write the case with name mentioned
2. register with CASE
3. write to forum
4. engage lawyers

I am fighting for the consumer rights that we shall get what we seen.

Since you have pictures, suggest you contact Shinmin and Wanbao. From my experience in dealing with the media, this case can be easily sensationalised, and create pressure on the developer. I suggest you tell the developer that this is what you intend to do and see what they say.

As an example, a potential Wanbao headline could be "Arrogant developer challenges new home owner to sue them for misrepresentation".....haha.... Yahoo news can also be another potential source for sensational articles......haha

[august]

I admire your spirit. However, unless you have been greatly inconvenienced by the missing ledges, then it is something worth fighting for. The courts would generally apply the reasonableness test. If the value of the property has decreased as a result of it or you have suffered some form of inconvenience, then there is a case for the courts to consider.

What I am hearing is that the ledge is not of much use and the developer did not charge you for it. It was also not built for public safety reasons.

The courts will also determine what is written in the contract, what the breach is and whether you had signed the contract with your eyes open as an educated person should. The first question the judge might ask will be, "If you had wanted the ledge, why didn't you ask for it to be written down in the contract?"

The most recent judgement of Pearl Properties v Grange Properties(a unit of Chip Eng Seng Ltd) on misrepresentation and breach shows clearly how the courts view such cases.

I dont think any judge will ask such a question as it has a biased tone. In any case the S&P has detailed floor plans which parties to the agreement can be said to rely upon.

[fclim]

I dont think any judge will ask such a question as it has a biased tone. In any case the S&P has detailed floor plans which parties to the agreement can be said to rely upon.

Quite true. Anyway, defence lawyers will surely ask. Another misrepresentation case that did not succeed was the Raffles Town Club class action suit. But, they were awarded some relief, like $3,000 or something.

[Poloclub]

This should help

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stori...195962/1/.html

[phantom_opera]

first question, is developer owned by Temasek or GIC and their lawyer is Lee & Lee

[speculator]

Is this a big developer or those small time ones?

You might stand a chance if they're big/reputable developer.

[Laguna]

Just to update everyone here...

I wrote to BCA, and BCA directed the case to URA.
First reply from URA, Noted your case, we cannot do much, pl take it up with the developer or the lawyer. Nevertheless, the law governing the showflats is out alr. So your caes sori, we cannot do anything.

Immediately, I replied with cc to their CEO, and so fast, their response came, talked to me, informed me that the developer had made a mistake and asked me what I want in order to close the case.

[radha08]

Just to update everyone here...

I wrote to BCA, and BCA directed the case to URA.
First reply from URA, Noted your case, we cannot do much, pl take it up with the developer or the lawyer. Nevertheless, the law governing the showflats is out alr. So your caes sori, we cannot do anything.

Immediately, I replied with cc to their CEO, and so fast, their response came, talked to me, informed me that the developer had made a mistake and asked me what I want in order to close the case.

Reply that this issue has caused you stress/sleepless nites/distraught....
and only way to relieve that is by $$$$$ compensation...

good luck...

[roly8]

Just to update everyone here...

I wrote to BCA, and BCA directed the case to URA.
First reply from URA, Noted your case, we cannot do much, pl take it up with the developer or the lawyer. Nevertheless, the law governing the showflats is out alr. So your caes sori, we cannot do anything.

Immediately, I replied with cc to their CEO, and so fast, their response came, talked to me, informed me that the developer had made a mistake and asked me what I want in order to close the case.

URA also cannot do anything but just entertain you via email..
Don't expect anything good at the end of the day..

probably going to waste your time..

[Laguna]

Reply that this issue has caused you stress/sleepless nites/distraught....
and only way to relieve that is by $$$$$ compensation...

good luck...

no lah! if every property I have causing me this type of stress, how to enjoy life! small matter to me...

[Laguna]

URA also cannot do anything but just entertain you via email..
Don't expect anything good at the end of the day..

probably going to waste your time..

I know how to manage....not just entertaining....I know who to approach..

[Blue]

Admire your determination. Please let us know more update.

I was also shortchanged when the showroom sales told me that my windows are going to be tinted. But when the time it is built, no tinted windows.

But because there was no black and white on this, and the only person that can testify is the sales agent, I decided not to waste my time and $$$ to pursue.

[Laguna]

URA wrote to me this morning :

We have written to the developer to urge them to look into your request to construct the ledge over the backyard of your unit and to resolve the matter with you amicably.

Now I have to fight with the developer. If cannot win, will write to the forum and then the newspaper to publishise it.

[hopeful]

URA wrote to me this morning :

We have written to the developer to urge them to look into your request to construct the ledge over the backyard of your unit and to resolve the matter with you amicably.

Now I have to fight with the developer. If cannot win, will write to the forum and then the newspaper to publishise it.

Laguna, i am mystified by this.
according to you, the ledge shown to you during showflat is not from approved BCA plan.
Now URA asking developer to build the ledge, which will contradict the approved BCA plan, and also restrict fire engine access??

[Laguna]

Laguna, i am mystified by this.
according to you, the ledge shown to you during showflat is not from approved BCA plan.
Now URA asking developer to build the ledge, which will contradict the approved BCA plan, and also restrict fire engine access??

The ledge at the side of the unit along the access path for fire engine cannot be built but the backyard can be done.

[roly8]

I know how to manage....not just entertaining....I know who to approach..

ok...
me also can't comment much since me still not very experienced in property field