Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Condo owners sue for $32m; defendants try to shift blame

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    10,829

    Default Condo owners sue for $32m; defendants try to shift blame

    http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...to-shift-blame

    Condo owners sue for $32m; defendants try to shift blame

    Jul 4, 2015

    Selina Lum


    Residents of The Seaview condominium, unhappy over what they say are numerous defects in their estate, have sued four parties involved in the development for $32 million.

    But three defendants are pushing the blame down the line.

    Developer Mer Vue Developments, a subsidiary of Wheelock Properties; main contractor Tiong Aik Construction; and RSP Architects Planners & Engineers are arguing that they had taken care to engage competent independent contractors to carry out the works, and so are not responsible for any faults.

    A four-day hearing on this preliminary issue started yesterday for the High Court to decide if the developer, main contractor and architect are entitled to rely on the so-called independent contractor defence.

    The fourth defendant, mechanical and electrical engineers Squire Mech, is not relying on this defence.

    The actual trial is scheduled to be heard later this year.

    The management corporation (MC) of the Amber Road condo sued in 2011 over the alleged defects. In his opening statement, Mr Samuel Seow listed the complaints of the residents: foul smells, infestations of flies and leaking windows.

    Blocks of concrete fell with lightning strikes; paint peeled from walls; and swimming pool tiles popped out at whim, he said.

    "Wheelock appears to have made healthy profits from The Seaview by building (it) as cheap as possible," said Mr Seow. The remark brought a swift objection from Tiong Aik's lawyer, Mr Ravi Chelliah.

    Mer Vue's lawyer Christopher Chuah said the issue at hand was the independent contractor defence and it was unfair to disparage the defendants.

    Mr Seow argued that there was no merit in this defence. If everyone along the chain of development is allowed to push the blame down the line, eventually home owners can seek damages only from the worker who paints the walls, he said.

    Mr Chuah, however, argued that the developer had delegated the design and construction work to Tiong Aik, a highly graded contractor and RSP, a reputable architectural firm.

    The employer should not be vicariously liable for the negligence of an independent contractor, he noted, and cited a seminal 2005 Court of Appeal ruling that all a developer needed to prove was that it took care in hiring the contractor.

    Mr Chelliah asked MC chairman Brian Selby if he was personally aware of any flouting of regulations by Tiong Aik. Mr Selby replied: "All that I have personal awareness of is that there are $32 million worth of defects in our estate, brought about by one or more defendants, together or independently."

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    2,438

    Default

    I like this - "If everyone along the chain of development is allowed to push the blame down the line, eventually home owners can seek damages only from the worker who paints the walls". LOL !!!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Good show.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,217

    Default

    There will be debate on defects at the parliament today. Could be some implications.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thomastansb View Post
    I like this - "If everyone along the chain of development is allowed to push the blame down the line, eventually home owners can seek damages only from the worker who paints the walls". LOL !!!
    This also apply to the current DBSS also. It is the Bangla workers fault for building corridor at 1.17m instead of 1.20m, and also their fault for tiles popping, etc.

    hence, Government will pass a law, a portion of Bangla workers salary (20%) will be retained and put into project specific funds, to ensure they have enough funds to pay if there are building defects.

    Only after 10 years there are no defects then the funds will be disbursed.
    Any unclaimed funds will go to the govt purse, eg if bangla workers go back already and cannot trace their whereabouts.

    It is about time that Bangla workers be held responsible for construction defects. They can no longer claim they cannot read construction blueprint, dont understand english to avoid responsibility. Ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    1.20m wide corridor? Seriously unacceptable.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    2,438

    Default

    It is always the foreigners' fault. LOL


    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    This also apply to the current DBSS also. It is the Bangla workers fault for building corridor at 1.17m instead of 1.20m, and also their fault for tiles popping, etc.

    hence, Government will pass a law, a portion of Bangla workers salary (20%) will be retained and put into project specific funds, to ensure they have enough funds to pay if there are building defects.

    Only after 10 years there are no defects then the funds will be disbursed.
    Any unclaimed funds will go to the govt purse, eg if bangla workers go back already and cannot trace their whereabouts.

    It is about time that Bangla workers be held responsible for construction defects. They can no longer claim they cannot read construction blueprint, dont understand english to avoid responsibility. Ignorance is not an excuse in the eyes of the law.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    2,438

    Default

    Not only that. I saw some pictures. 10x worse than BTO. The lights are those cheapo hanging vertical lights - http://pbs.twimg.com/media/CITNV7SWcAA5MGK.jpg

    It is like those flats built in 1970s. I think even prison looks better.



    Quote Originally Posted by august View Post
    1.20m wide corridor? Seriously unacceptable.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,988

    Default

    haha hopeful you are so funny, never failed to entertain

    back to this story, I hope the court can set a precedence for cases like this: buyer sues for compensation from the developer (as buyer only has a contract with the developer not the others), developer has to settle with buyers for compensation; afterwards if developer thinks his main con is at fault, developer can sue the main con to recover his cost; and if main con thinks his sub con is at fault, main con sues sub con, etc.

    fundamentally buyer cannot sue end workers for another reason: the profit margin is stripped down level by level, i.e. I pay 1mil to developer, developer pay 800k to main con, main con pay 600k to sub con, sub con pays 200k to workers. Workers cannot be sued for compensation in excess of their contract value (only 200k). For this reason alone, the "end level" should not be the party to be sued for liability compensations as it is not equitable

Similar Threads

  1. All owners have a say in condo management
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 0
    -: 29-08-16, 19:54
  2. Don't blame ABSD for overseas property buys
    By reporter2 in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 1
    -: 19-03-15, 20:18
  3. Don’t blame it all on TDSR
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 3
    -: 20-09-13, 23:13
  4. Shame name blame game
    By TheOnlyGayInTheVillage in forum Coffeeshop Talk
    Replies: 5
    -: 24-06-13, 08:28
  5. Don't put the blame on PRs: Khaw
    By PN in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 24
    -: 19-01-12, 13:19

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •