- Joined
- Nov 24, 2008
- Messages
- 23,231
- Points
- 113
who owns the land on this development?
URA owns it.
In 99 years they will take it back and the descendants of all these idiots who bought it are going to have to give it up for nothing.
who owns the land on this development?
sinkie laws have land acquisition act. in other words in north american parlance, it's eminent domain (with suka suka clauses). at least in u.s., local, state or federal gov must justify use of eminent domain and public hearing is required. in sg, if your freehold property is not protected within and adjacent to estates of higher mortals, your lesser mortal lot can easily be acquired by laa laa laa.
URA owns it.
In 99 years they will take it back and the descendants of all these idiots who bought it are going to have to give it up for nothing.
No lah it is not so bad. They can enbloc right? That's the difference between buying 99-year leasehold private condo vs HDB flat.
Papsmearer you got any investments in Singapore property?
Not likely. the piece of land already has been maxed out on the density. If the owners want to en bloc later, a developer has to be able to squeeze even more units on the same piece of land. usually, if they can get 3 times more units then the current development, it may tempt them. But I don't think this is possible at all. The fact its reclaimed land makes it even more doubtful as to how high they can go for extra density.
Papsmearer are you trying to say that when it comes down to it there is very little difference between HDB and private 99 year leasehold?
The difference is night and day
Legally I understand the differences. Also in terms of who owns the land you have explained very nicely.
But when it comes to residents owning these 99 year leasehold condos that have very low possibility of enbloc then what happens to their investment when the 99 years are up?
depends on what the ground lease agreement says. I have already mentioned this before. do you have amnesia? Ground lease is the underlying lease that the landowner signs with the developer who build the high rise. In some cases, landowner is the same as the developer. The land they own might be a freehold land but they only give a 99 years lease on the high rise that they build to sell. If the buyer buys a unit there, what happens at the end of the 99 years is entirely dependent on what the terms of the ground lease is. the ground lease could according to how the terms are drawn up 1) be extended at the end of 99 years for another fixed period of time with additional payments to the land owner b) the lease cannot be extended and the land has to be returned to the owner in its original state, which could mean the high rise has to be torn down, c) the lease cannot be extended, and the improvements on it could revert to the land owner. i.e the building goes to landowner.
Stop asking what will happen. No one knows. It depends on the terms of the 99 year lease. If the underlying land owner is a stat board or govt body, there will be no extension, the land will be take back.
Sounds to me there is a lot of risk in buying 99 year lease condos anyway.
In example 1) have to cough up more money after 99 years.
Example b) it is basically same as HDB flat
Example c) also same as HDB flat
What are terms of most 99 year leases like? Is there a premium if the land is freehold and landowner is the developer?
I am not having amnesia. I am just asking more about how you decided that HDB flat and 99 year lease condos are as different as night and day? The only difference that I can see is that in all HDB the landowner is govt. but as you pointed out some 99 year leasehold condos landowner also could be govt as well.
So both are also paying to rent the place for 99 years. Unless the land is actually freehold and owned by developer then there is a chance that developer might take some money and allow residents to stay on. But there is probably no reason why landowner developer will screw the residents and ask them all to move out rebuild a new estate and sell for big bucks again. Correct?
So how is it different night and day? Maybe different morning and afternoon?
Rights are different. Condos can lease to prostitutes to stay no problem; HDB you got to be careful. Almost all cases is tenant sublet to the ladies end up neighbors complain owner mati. Papsmear this fella you gotta discount his hubris a little bit.
In the US, eminent domain gives many protection to the landowners. they will go to court with a battery of lawyers to fight the govt that is taking their land. They almost always get a premium over the market price. Not like the Leegime where you will be lucky to get 10 cents on the dollar. In the 60s and 70s and 80s URA only paid you book value. In other words, if your great grandfather bought the durian plantation for $10,000 in 1920, then $10,000 is all you will get in 1970. happened to a friend of mine. PAP and Leegime like to boast about all their surpluses. Well, if you steal people's property and homes like this, sure to get surplus even after lining your own pockets.
have you not listened to anything I have said? SIngapore is one of the most controlled property markets in the world. And its all artificial. And you want to invest here? Why don't you buy in Vancouver, the hottest property market in North America. where the words 99 year leasehold and 99 year HDB lease are foreign concepts
Sounds to me there is a lot of risk in buying 99 year lease condos anyway.
In example 1) have to cough up more money after 99 years.
Example b) it is basically same as HDB flat
Example c) also same as HDB flat
What are terms of most 99 year leases like? Is there a premium if the land is freehold and landowner is the developer?
I am not having amnesia. I am just asking more about how you decided that HDB flat and 99 year lease condos are as different as night and day? The only difference that I can see is that in all HDB the landowner is govt. but as you pointed out some 99 year leasehold condos landowner also could be govt as well.
So both are also paying to rent the place for 99 years. Unless the land is actually freehold and owned by developer then there is a chance that developer might take some money and allow residents to stay on. But there is probably no reason why landowner developer will screw the residents and ask them all to move out rebuild a new estate and sell for big bucks again. Correct?
So how is it different night and day? Maybe different morning and afternoon?
Sorry I very stupid one and I am not a doctor. Just a dog.
Papsmearer I was looking at it from the point of what happens AFTER 99 years are up. Which is the main discussion of the thread in the first place.
I see your point now. You are looking at the point of during the 99 year leasehold they are different as night and day.
But it looks like AFTER 99 years there isn't so much of a difference. Correct?
Sorry I very stupid one and I am not a doctor. Just a dog.
I do not bother to really look at 99 years, because in the end, we are all dead long before that.
But to answer your question:
HDB - After 99 years, must give up flat, walk away empty handed.
99 Year private condo - a) Give up condo and walk away empty handed
b) If land owner agree, pay land owner to extend or top up lease
c) Owners can collectively offer to buy the land from the Landowner, not a high chance