<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR>HDB's remedies for officer's failing not enough
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I WENT to the Housing Board to book a unit in Punggol Sapphire on Sept 15 last year.
At the time, we had in mind 10 preferred units. Fortunately, at the point of selection, my second preferred unit was still available. However, the customer service manager denied my opportunity, claiming my documentation was incomplete. At the same time, she wanted us to wait for her colleague to come back a few days later before she could book my unit.
When I requested to see her superior, she insisted there was no need for that. I asked her to reserve the unit first even if she needed to do her backroom checks, but she ignored my request. Left with no choice, we left the HDB feeling frustrated and hopeless.
Three days later, the manager called and informed me that I could go down to book a unit. However, all my 10 preferred units were already booked.
The HDB acknowledged its fault, reinstated my two chances as a new flat applicant and told us that the officer had been counselled. It also allowed my queue number in the next booking exercise for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats to be pegged according to the previous percentile in the Punggol Sapphire one.
But to me, the remedies are not fair enough.
Because of an HDB officer's fault, I need to apply for a new BTO flat, which will be completed several months later and cost more potentially. Why is this extra burden transferred to us when it is not our fault?
To be fair to me and my family, we would like to be put in the priority queue or allowed to select directly without queueing. Tan Chin Hock
</TR><!-- headline one : end --><!-- show image if available --></TBODY></TABLE>
<!-- START OF : div id="storytext"--><!-- more than 4 paragraphs -->I WENT to the Housing Board to book a unit in Punggol Sapphire on Sept 15 last year.
At the time, we had in mind 10 preferred units. Fortunately, at the point of selection, my second preferred unit was still available. However, the customer service manager denied my opportunity, claiming my documentation was incomplete. At the same time, she wanted us to wait for her colleague to come back a few days later before she could book my unit.
When I requested to see her superior, she insisted there was no need for that. I asked her to reserve the unit first even if she needed to do her backroom checks, but she ignored my request. Left with no choice, we left the HDB feeling frustrated and hopeless.
Three days later, the manager called and informed me that I could go down to book a unit. However, all my 10 preferred units were already booked.
The HDB acknowledged its fault, reinstated my two chances as a new flat applicant and told us that the officer had been counselled. It also allowed my queue number in the next booking exercise for Build-To-Order (BTO) flats to be pegged according to the previous percentile in the Punggol Sapphire one.
But to me, the remedies are not fair enough.
Because of an HDB officer's fault, I need to apply for a new BTO flat, which will be completed several months later and cost more potentially. Why is this extra burden transferred to us when it is not our fault?
To be fair to me and my family, we would like to be put in the priority queue or allowed to select directly without queueing. Tan Chin Hock
