24 February 2009

6. DIGESTIVE: Why skew the law?

Despite understanding and agreeing (YES, "agreeing"!!!) with why en bloc law was (and still is) needed, my resentment simmers over the light touch of the finger of law in the pie AFTER the Gahmen interfered with market forces by introducing legislation that effectively wedged a big foot into other people’s main door. And I remain perturbed about the way the present law continues to be skewed AGAINST owners (except en bloc flippers). Otherwise, how else could the Gahmen ensure that built-up prime/popular residential land would be easily available for RE-development through the incidental interplay of market forces? How else could corporate developers be highly successful predators of such choice bites?

Most of us were (and some are still) barking up the wrong tree … cursing our neighbours, condemning the Sale Committee members, shouting at marketing agents, sneering at lawyers, smearing corporate developer-buyers, some even resorting to criminal acts! Sure, these people are not totally blameless. Naturally, behavioural science and econophysics came into play! But the source (and therefore underlying primary cause) of en bloc disputes is the Almighty Law itself! The disputes are merely the symptons and side effects. That was why I sliced-and-diced-and-spliced the en bloc legalese in my last National Day’s blog entry of 6 Aug 2008 entitled “Greek mythodology: The SOURCE and Themis”. http://singaporeenbloc.blogspot.com/2008/08/so-whats-alternative-in-end.html

I don’t know about the Law gazing “on the horse as it does the horseman”, as Justice Choo Han Teck said in his first Horizon Towers en bloc judgement when he threw the case back to Strata Titles Boards for yet another round. But there is something Trojan about this horse because reality stares us in the face (not just gazing!) – the number of en bloc battle wins by desperate yet determined Minority Dissenters could be counted on less than five fingers of one hand! This is despite the phenomenon of everybody suing every one – Minority sues Majority, and vice versa. Developer-buyer sues some Majority or threatens to sue all Majority. Majority sues Developer-buyer. Majority even challenged the Strata Titles Boards!

When Singaporeans who, by-and-large are not particularly litigious as a people, start suing each other – left, right and centre – it is yet one more litmus indicator that something is fundamentally out-of-sync at its core! Since the source can be traced back to the Almighty Law itself, then it follows to a logical point that the law is at the core of this hullabaloo.

Hey, when you are promised Utopia during en bloc and end up in Ethiopia after en bloc – what do you expect??? When you realize that en bloc "windfall” is "shortfall” hype – what then? When it is at double the price; half the size; quarter the value” post-en bloc, how does it all add-up? This topic was delved into in my last National Day blog entry dated 6 Aug 2008 entitled “IN-BETWEEN: Why en blocs are NOT right for Majority Consenters nor Minority Dissenters?” http://singaporeenbloc.blogspot.com/2008/08/en-bloc-why-it-is-not-right-for.html

2 comments:

Midlife Crisis 6 said...

That is 'bagus' - they promise Utopia but we end up in Ethiopia. Buay tahan, really buay tahan.

The Pariah said...

This rude shock of "Utopia to Ethiopia" was coined by someone who posted this comparison in ST Interactive last year. I thought it was a very clever use of words. Kudos to that ST Forum commentator!