Results 1 to 28 of 28

Thread: Seaview condo defects: Residents hit snag

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

    Default Seaview condo defects: Residents hit snag

    http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...dents-hit-snag

    Seaview condo defects: Residents hit snag

    Mar 18, 2016

    High Court rules developer, main contractor, architect can use independent-contractor defence

    Selina Lum


    Residents of The Seaview condominium, who sued four parties involved in the development over numerous alleged defects, have hit a snag in their fight for $32 million in damages.

    Three defendants - the developer, the architect and the main contractor - are largely off the hook for negligence claims following a landmark ruling on construction liability by the High Court.

    In a written judgment on Wednesday, Justice Chan Seng Onn ruled that Mer Vue Developments, a subsidiary of Wheelock Properties; main contractor Tiong Aik Construction; and RSP Architects Planners & Engineers can rely on the independent-contractor defence.

    In other words, they can put up a defence against negligence claims on grounds that they are not vicariously liable for the negligent acts of the independent contractors to whom they had delegated work.

    Developers have been able to use this defence to absolve themselves of blame for building defects since a seminal ruling in 2005, but this is the first time a court has clarified that the main contractor and architect can also rely on this defence.

    However, Tiong Aik and RSP can still be held liable for work not delegated to independent contractors.

    The implication is that if the management corporation (MC) of the Amber Road condominium wins its lawsuit, which is due to be heard in July, the amount of damages that the homeowners can get will be limited.

    To pursue the negligence claims, the MC will have to go down the chain to sue the sub-contractors responsible for the design or construction of the development.

    The fourth defendant, mechanical and electrical engineer Squire Mech, did not rely on this defence.

    The ruling does not establish negligence and it has no implications for contractual liabilities.

    Besides suing all four parties for negligence, the MC had also sued Mer Vue for breach of contract.

    But only those who bought units directly from the developer can sue for this. In the current case, original buyers make up a small minority of the residents represented by the MC.

    The Seaview, which was completed in 2008, comprises six blocks with a total of 546 units. In a suit filed on behalf of homeowners in 2011, the MC alleged many defects in the common areas, including foul odours, falling concrete and popping swimming pool tiles.

    Last July, a hearing started on the preliminary issue of whether Mer Vue, Tiong Aik and RSP could rely on the independent-contractor defence, which is based on the principle that the employer should not be vicariously liable for the negligence of an independent contractor.

    In 2005, the Court of Appeal applied this in the context of a developer delegating the duties of design and construction to independent competent contractors.

    Mer Vue's lawyer, Mr Christopher Chuah, had argued that the developer had taken care to appoint independent contractors who were professionals. Justice Chan agreed and rejected the MC's arguments that Mer Vue could not use the defence as it had exerted control over the works of Tiong Aik and RSP.

    In a statement through its lawyer, Mr Samuel Seow, the MC said it was disappointed with the decision and is discussing its options with its legal team, including the filing of an expedited appeal.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reporter2 View Post
    http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...dents-hit-snag

    Seaview condo defects: Residents hit snag

    Mar 18, 2016

    High Court rules developer, main contractor, architect can use independent-contractor defence
    .....
    Three defendants - the developer, the architect and the main contractor - are largely off the hook for negligence claims following a landmark ruling on construction liability by the High Court.

    ....To pursue the negligence claims, the MC will have to go down the chain to sue the sub-contractors responsible for the design or construction of the development.
    ....
    But only those who bought units directly from the developer can sue for this. In the current case, original buyers make up a small minority of the residents represented by the MC....
    It is good to be big.
    Always delegate and delegate some more.
    Another takeaway for me is developer usually build the condo units to standard (to get CSC and 100% payment) but let the common areas go to S**T, since 1st year MC is appointed by developer, and 2nd year, it is hard to gather the owners together for a single purpose, what more to cough up more money.


    I maybe wrong, my take is not only original buyers, but sub-sale buyer also can sue developer, since S&P also issued by developer. Resale buyer (after TOP) that buy from developer also can sue, since S&P by developer. It is only resale buyer (after TOP) that buy from non-developer that cannot sue developer.

    Just curious how come Lum Chang-Nishimatsu JV cannot use the independent contractor defense ? Don't tell me they don't use sub-cons.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    113

    Default

    strange...they are the ones who collected money from buyers so shd rightfully bear most of the responsibility....if not the loophole can be exploited in future...whats to stop them from deliberately awarding/delegating jobs to less than competent (aka lowest quote) sub-contractors....? this ruling is unfriendly to home buyers who most likely cannot afford to go after sub-contractors....

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nydeidith View Post
    strange...they are the ones who collected money from buyers so shd rightfully bear most of the responsibility....if not the loophole can be exploited in future...whats to stop them from deliberately awarding/delegating jobs to less than competent (aka lowest quote) sub-contractors....? this ruling is unfriendly to home buyers who most likely cannot afford to go after sub-contractors....
    sub-contractors can also take the cash out of their companies and let the company go bust.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    It is good to be big.
    Always delegate and delegate some more.
    Another takeaway for me is developer usually build the condo units to standard (to get CSC and 100% payment) but let the common areas go to S**T, since 1st year MC is appointed by developer, and 2nd year, it is hard to gather the owners together for a single purpose, what more to cough up more money.


    I maybe wrong, my take is not only original buyers, but sub-sale buyer also can sue developer, since S&P also issued by developer. Resale buyer (after TOP) that buy from developer also can sue, since S&P by developer. It is only resale buyer (after TOP) that buy from non-developer that cannot sue developer.

    Just curious how come Lum Chang-Nishimatsu JV cannot use the independent contractor defense ? Don't tell me they don't use sub-cons.
    which project was lum chang sued for?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    which project was lum chang sued for?
    the nicoll highway collapse, how come they cannot use independent contractor defense?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    the nicoll highway collapse, how come they cannot use independent contractor defense?
    different right? the collapse happened before it was completed.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,943

    Default

    This ruling has far reaching impact.
    1. Only original buyer can sue, but you can't sue the developer as they engage the independent contractors. You can't sue the contractor or their sub contractors under contract as there is no contract.
    2. You can only sue under tort as negligence.
    3. The legal cost is too high.
    4. Developers now can promise everything without liable to it. The interest of all property owners are not safeguarded by any contract. Developers will be forever the winner.
    5. All contractors will form small companies to undertake projects and eventually wind up..or no money...

    If this become the defacto rules, it will be applied to all commonwealth countries.

    We need to rally here to support The Seaview to overturn this decision !

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Buy new slightly better???
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    different right? the collapse happened before it was completed.
    the principle should be the same right?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    THE SEA VIEW AMBER ROAD Condominium 15 RCR Freehold Resale 1 2,550,000 - 1,410 Strata 06 to 10 1,808 Jun-13
    THE SEA VIEW AMBER ROAD Condominium 15 RCR Freehold Resale 1 2,980,000 - 1,647 Strata 16 to 20 1,809 Oct-15
    THE SEA VIEW AMBER ROAD Condominium 15 RCR Freehold Resale 1 3,000,000 - 1,647 Strata 11 to 15 1,822 Sep-13
    THE SEA VIEW AMBER ROAD Condominium 15 RCR Freehold Resale 1 1,030,000 - 560 Strata 16 to 20 1,840 Mar-16
    THE SEA VIEW AMBER ROAD Condominium 15 RCR Freehold Resale 1 2,900,000 - 1,518 Strata 11 to 15 1,911 Mar-15

    psf still so strong leh. there are >1800psf transactions regardless of whether it was in 2013, 2015 or 2016.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    the principle should be the same right?
    when completed, u receive keys liao, then u kaobei = can use the damn principle?

    when not completed, haven't handed over, contractor liable?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laguna View Post
    This ruling has far reaching impact.
    1. Only original buyer can sue, but you can't sue the developer as they engage the independent contractors. You can't sue the contractor or their sub contractors under contract as there is no contract.
    2. You can only sue under tort as negligence.
    3. The legal cost is too high.
    4. Developers now can promise everything without liable to it. The interest of all property owners are not safeguarded by any contract. Developers will be forever the winner.
    5. All contractors will form small companies to undertake projects and eventually wind up..or no money...

    If this become the defacto rules, it will be applied to all commonwealth countries.

    We need to rally here to support The Seaview to overturn this decision !
    in my opinion, only 2 things are protected by law
    1) strata area is within 3% tolerance. if smaller by more than 3%, developer have to compensate the difference
    2) completion period. if late completion, developer have to compensate.

    other than above 2, developer are not held responsible.
    In the extreme case of condo collapse, developer will also be most likely not responsible. Can only wait for a condo to collapse to see what the court say.

    If see pasir ris one and the BCA response about 1.2m being just a guideline, then buyers can only face meet palm

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    when completed, u receive keys liao, then u kaobei = can use the damn principle?

    when not completed, haven't handed over, contractor liable?
    i really wonder how far the independent contractor defense can go.
    based on the "The ruling does not establish negligence and it has no implications for contractual liabilities.", i supposed if homeowner pay for 1000sqft. the developer is contractually liable to deliver 1000sqft (+-3%) within a speciific timeframe. other than that, it is all artist's impression.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,988

    Default

    nah, 3% thingy is also "independent contractor" 's fault. how's that.

    very disappointing ruling.

    an unrelated case: pedestrian getting hit crossing the road right in the middle of green light needs to bear 15% responsibility.

    the judges are getting out of hand.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    in my opinion, only 2 things are protected by law
    1) strata area is within 3% tolerance. if smaller by more than 3%, developer have to compensate the difference
    2) completion period. if late completion, developer have to compensate.

    other than above 2, developer are not held responsible.
    In the extreme case of condo collapse, developer will also be most likely not responsible. Can only wait for a condo to collapse to see what the court say.

    If see pasir ris one and the BCA response about 1.2m being just a guideline, then buyers can only face meet palm
    the developer only liable to the original buyers directly bought from them. Not any sub sales buyers as there is no contract between sub sales buyers and developer.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    3,943

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amk View Post
    nah, 3% thingy is also "independent contractor" 's fault. how's that.

    very disappointing ruling.

    an unrelated case: pedestrian getting hit crossing the road right in the middle of green light needs to bear 15% responsibility.

    the judges are getting out of hand.
    this judge is too much to say if hit at green man...you take 15% of liability....

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amk View Post
    nah, 3% thingy is also "independent contractor" 's fault. how's that.

    very disappointing ruling.

    an unrelated case: pedestrian getting hit crossing the road right in the middle of green light needs to bear 15% responsibility.

    the judges are getting out of hand.
    the 3% and completion period is specify in the housing act. others are not and therefore very much open to artist's impression
    BCA guidelines are just guidelines, if breach a little bit also ok. so if 51% corridor greater than 1.2m, the rest smaller than 1.2m it is ok.

    do be aware of contempt of court. however we are small fries, so our words are most likely noises to them.

    what about damages about the NS man not being able to serve the nation? Oh I forgot, minister josephine teo say "service for the country cannot be measured in dollars and cents"

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    972

    Default

    All these condo, flat and apartment build in recent years seems to hv a lot of design, build and quality issue?

    Let me nag abit here......no ill intention ... For discussion sake only

    Was it becos of the internet where issue become overly amplify?
    kiasu behaviour, things get overly blow out of proportion

    Was it due to the sudden increase in building so many at so short period of time?
    After so many year building so little, where to bump up the number of skill Architect, inspector, builder, workers etc。

    Architect of old probably has the commonsense to know 1.2 m is a guide, what kind of thinking is going thru the mind of current Architect; optimize the computer to max out the profit for developer?

    Was it due to expectation of consumer has changed?
    People upgrade but instead see a downgrade on size n quality. Will you be angry?
    One or two house is different, but if many flat n condo are like this..... Pray that people get use to this conditioning


    Was it due to the high price that change the expectation?
    pay so much to get micky mouse room n lousy material spec and workmanship, greedy developer?

    A lot for the industry and relevant agency to ponder
    It takes 50 years to build a nation, it can take less than 10 years to ruin one。
    Last edited by Good house; 21-03-16 at 18:32. Reason: Typo
    What ia a good house?
    It is a good house as long as you love it

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amk View Post
    nah, 3% thingy is also "independent contractor" 's fault. how's that.

    very disappointing ruling.

    an unrelated case: pedestrian getting hit crossing the road right in the middle of green light needs to bear 15% responsibility.

    the judges are getting out of hand.
    Totally agree with you. The recent court rulings are totally baffling and do not instill confidence in the judiciary to act in the interests of the common man.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    2,419

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by august View Post
    Totally agree with you. The recent court rulings are totally baffling and do not instill confidence in the judiciary to act in the interests of the common man.
    Tell me one case in Singapore where the little guy's interest is protected against the big guy. Minibonds, Pinnacle Notes, and similar cases are all ruled in favor of the investment banks and against the investors. Singapore is the most business friendly country in the world. Minibonds investors have to hire an American to sue Morgan Stanley in the US to get justice. No Singaporean law firms would take the case because they know they would lose and lose big.

    You see the pattern now?

  22. #22
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Building Quality issue?
    - May be because of rise in material costs and manpower costs, and developers trying to cut costs and squeeze out more profits?

    Design issue?
    - This is confirmed developers trying to squeeze out more profits!
    What's more, URA/BCA (don't know who lah!) is partially responsible for the bad "design"......

    E.g.: URA/BCA allow developers to build balconies up to 10% of GFA that is free to developers (NOT included in land x plot ratio GFA) that they can sell.......
    So, after that we see so many condos with huge balconies!

    E.g: URA/BCA allow developers to build planter areas and bay windows up to 10% (or thereabout?) of GFA that again is free to developers (NOT included in land x plot ratio GFA) that they can sell.......
    So, after that we see lots of condos with huge planter areas and bay windows, many not even usable!
    In 1 project I saw, they have planter areas outside the Master bedroom toilet! In order to access this planter area, you have to climb out of the Master bedroom toilet! Do you dare? Mind you, the planter area is not walled!

    So, end up these new condo units has effective usable area that is only about 80% of the quoted floor area!

    Another one: In the past, the common corridors from lifts to your unit eat up GFA but developers cannot sell to you.
    So they come up with a good idea: Build "private lifts", and all sqft from the lift to your unit can now be sold to you as "private lift lobby"!!!!!!!!
    What "private lift"? Do your unit alone can use the lift that is why it is "private"? Whole load of bullshit!
    The worst is when your "private lift" breaks down, please go climb the stairs (because you only have 1 private lift)!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Now they have other tricks!
    In big estate, instead of building more facilities on the floor, they choose to build less facilities.
    Instead, they build the towers lower and take up more land space (because build higher up is more expensive), so have to cut facilities!
    In the past, a 400 units estate has at least 3 tennis court and 2 swimming pools (1 Olympic size).
    Now 1000 units estate has only 2 tennis court and 2 swimming pools where area is even smaller than the 400 units estate!


    Quote Originally Posted by Good house View Post
    All these condo, flat and apartment build in recent years seems to hv a lot of design, build and quality issue?

    Let me nag abit here......no ill intention ... For discussion sake only

    Was it becos of the internet where issue become overly amplify?
    kiasu behaviour, things get overly blow out of proportion

    Was it due to the sudden increase in building so many at so short period of time?
    After so many year building so little, where to bump up the number of skill Architect, inspector, builder, workers etc。

    Architect of old probably has the commonsense to know 1.2 m is a guide, what kind of thinking is going thru the mind of current Architect; optimize the computer to max out the profit for developer?

    Was it due to expectation of consumer has changed?
    People upgrade but instead see a downgrade on size n quality. Will you be angry?
    One or two house is different, but if many flat n condo are like this..... Pray that people get use to this conditioning


    Was it due to the high price that change the expectation?
    pay so much to get micky mouse room n lousy material spec and workmanship, greedy developer?

    A lot for the industry and relevant agency to ponder
    It takes 50 years to build a nation, it can take less than 10 years to ruin one。

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amk View Post
    an unrelated case: pedestrian getting hit crossing the road right in the middle of green light needs to bear 15% responsibility.

    the judges are getting out of hand.
    actually i am ok with 15% responsibility.
    What i am not ok is the judges establish 15% after the fact.

    Why not have a table of responsibilities for pedestrian before the thing happens, so all is very much clear.
    1) 5 % - look right, left, right before crossing, green light.
    2) 15 % - look right, left, right before crossing, red light.
    3) 50 % - did not cross at the proper crossing
    4) 0 % - if driver is legally drunk
    etc

    Case law very much depends on judges intepretation. if sleep in sofa the night before, the harsher intepretation.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    one thing about independent contractor defence intrigues me.
    can it be used in other industries ?

    for example, automobile defects, i wonder why GM, Ford, Toyota has car recalls. Afterall, a car is made of thousand of components made by thousand of suppliers. A car manufacturer is just an assembler. If a component defect, well it is independent manufacturer fault.

    How about drugs? A drug manufacturer outsource the "safetiness" of drugs to 3rd party independent labs. If another case similar to thalidomide happens, drug manufacturer is not liable since it relies on independent contractor for the drug safety.

    What about banks? How many bank workers are actually "outsourced"? the "bankers" are actually independent contractors. Banks rely on CFA certification that their independent contractors are competent and professional. Why these independent contractors have A in CFA ethics module

    Insurance industry? Insurance agents are independent contractors. They have CFP certification to show they are qualified, competent. So any mis-selling, mis-representation, insurance company not liable.

    Lastly:
    Why does developer not rely on BCA for defense? BCA certifies that it is fit for stay, so it issues TOP. If any problem, owners please get in touch with BCA Shouldnt BCA also be in the dock?

    from a previous article:
    A sickly sweet smell would sometimes seem to come out of the walls. This is due to the lack of a U-trap: a device that separates waste from the kitchen and the toilet. Refuse from the two just merge into a common pipe, and choke up.
    Isn't a U-trap good industry practice? or installing a U-trap a guideline that can be ignored just like 1.2m corridor a guideline that can be safely ignored.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Laguna View Post
    the developer only liable to the original buyers directly bought from them. Not any sub sales buyers as there is no contract between sub sales buyers and developer.
    I not sure because for subsale, there is a new S&P between developer and sub-sale buyer.

    from a previous article:
    "In his opening statement to the court today, Mr Samuel Seow, one of the lawyers representing the condo residents, said the independent contractor defence seeks to “push the defence down the line”, which means that “eventually the only people to whom homeowners can seek compensation from would be the painter who (did not) paint the primer onto the walls, or the worker who did not do a good job of waterproofing the swimming pool”."

    Why not sue the painters and the waterproofing workers?
    The purpose of suing them is to show how stupid the independent contractor defense is.
    No need to engage expensive lawyers, cheap ones will do since painters are small fries, they also cannot engage lawyers.

    Make the courts and judges look bloody stupid

  26. #26
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Actually what you say makes sense.
    It is not a matter of really want to sue the small fry like the workers, but to demonstrate how stupid that independent contractor defence clause is and create a bigger rapport among everybody including the rank-and-file workers (that make up the majority of voters) and also create a big hop-ha NEWS internationally that if people can tolerate such nonsense as "independent contractor defence" for shielding property developers, that is what the rank-and-file workers will get (since if that clause can stands on its feet, then obviously lowest down the line it must be the workers' fault for causing the defects!)


    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    I not sure because for subsale, there is a new S&P between developer and sub-sale buyer.

    from a previous article:
    "In his opening statement to the court today, Mr Samuel Seow, one of the lawyers representing the condo residents, said the independent contractor defence seeks to “push the defence down the line”, which means that “eventually the only people to whom homeowners can seek compensation from would be the painter who (did not) paint the primer onto the walls, or the worker who did not do a good job of waterproofing the swimming pool”."

    Why not sue the painters and the waterproofing workers?
    The purpose of suing them is to show how stupid the independent contractor defense is.
    No need to engage expensive lawyers, cheap ones will do since painters are small fries, they also cannot engage lawyers.

    Make the courts and judges look bloody stupid

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    3,721

    Default

    Yes, for sub-sale a new S&P is issued.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    9,217

    Default

    My lawyer said there is a new S&P between developer and sub-sale buyer. So, can sue.
    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    I not sure because for subsale, there is a new S&P between developer and sub-sale buyer.

    from a previous article:
    "In his opening statement to the court today, Mr Samuel Seow, one of the lawyers representing the condo residents, said the independent contractor defence seeks to “push the defence down the line”, which means that “eventually the only people to whom homeowners can seek compensation from would be the painter who (did not) paint the primer onto the walls, or the worker who did not do a good job of waterproofing the swimming pool”."

    Why not sue the painters and the waterproofing workers?
    The purpose of suing them is to show how stupid the independent contractor defense is.
    No need to engage expensive lawyers, cheap ones will do since painters are small fries, they also cannot engage lawyers.

    Make the courts and judges look bloody stupid

Similar Threads

  1. Lawsuits over alleged condo defects
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 0
    -: 28-02-22, 10:01
  2. Fight over defects at The Sail condo to be heard in court next month
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 0
    -: 19-01-18, 18:52
  3. Austville residents seeking compensation for alleged defects
    By reporter2 in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 0
    -: 08-05-17, 20:39
  4. Defects at Punggol executive condo
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 4
    -: 25-07-15, 14:34
  5. The Peak residents see red over defects
    By reporter2 in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 3
    -: 08-01-13, 12:14

Posting Permissions

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