Linhe Zaobao letter sent in by a resident of a property undergoing en-bloc...

We chanced upon a letter published in Lianhe Zaobao on June 18, 2018 and believe that it might have been written by a resident of Teresa Ville or a property similar to it. We used Google Translate App (with minor edits) to translate the same in English to share a perspective of the resident who has been facing harassment to sign the CSA.

交流站：公寓集售热潮影响邻里和谐

文 罗蕙君

联合早报，2018年6月18日

集体出售最近成了热门话题，如果手上有旧房地产，就会想着什么时候能卖出去赚一笔。

我所居住的共管公寓有33年历史，位居小山坡上，风景优美。这共管公寓单位不多，屋内面积大，且邻近乌节路，出入非常方便。由于住户不多，多年来大家和睦共处。

直到几年前，有几个在集体出售中尝到甜头的有心人士，看中我们这个共管公寓，买了几个单位，希望能集体出售成功，从中賺一笔。

从投资回报的角度来看，这无可厚非。然而，连续搞了几次都不成功后，从此住户和业主却不得安宁了。

首先，为了集体出售成功，有意出售者全部联手成为业主委员会的成员，撤掉全职管理处，改为兼职办公室。接着又对业主说，公寓账目入不敷出（尽管偿债基金有大量资金），如果集体出售不成功，公寓的维修保养也会成问题。

更有人每天等业主下班回家，上门劝说，累得业主不敢开自己的车子出入，要以德士代步；又或者劝业主，家庭成员不多，应选住较小的单位，或搬到较远的地区。诸如此类的论调层出不穷。

集体出售所得款项，绝对买不到原有公寓附近一个面积相近的单位。若是业主已退休，因不能向银行贷款，将被迫动用退休金买新房子。

我们的争论焦点是，当年买下这房地产，除了自住，也要给下一代留下祖业，因为这房地产是永久地契。我们是业主，我们是否有权利决定自己应住多大的房子？是否有权利决定自己要住在什么地区？是否有权利决定自己的去留？为何想赚钱的人要来影响我们的生活？

为什么80%业主能决定其余20%的命运？为什么要牺牲20%的利益，去迎合80%业主赚钱的目的？集体出售使得人与人之间只剩金钱和怨恨，这样的集体出售值得商榷。

English Translation using Google Translate App (with minor editing)

The collective sale has recently become a hot topic. If you have old real estate on your hand, you will think about when you can sell itand make a profit.

The condominium I live in has a 33-year history and is located on a hillside with beautiful scenery. This condominium does not contain a large number of condominiums. The area inside the house is large and it is close to Orchard Road. Access is very convenient. Due to the small number of households, everyone has been living together for many years as a harmonious community.

Until a few years ago, there were several people who had tasted the sweetness in the collective sale, fancy our condominium, and bought several units, hoping to collectively sell and make a profit.

From the perspective of return on investment, this is nothing wrong. However, after several consecutive unsuccessful attempts, the residents and owners have no peace.

First of all, in order to succeed in the collective sale, all the owners with vested interest in an enbloc have joined hands to become members of the MCST committee, removed the full-time management office and changed to a part-time office.  Then these members of the MCST committee tried fear mongering with the owners that the sinking fund of the apartment was not enough (though the sinking fund has a lot of money) and that if the collective sale was unsuccessful, the maintenance of the apartment would be a problem.

Some people even wait for the owners to come home from work every day and go to their car door to persuade them to sign the collective sales agreement. This has so exhausted the owners that they do not dare to drive their own cars and have to resort to using taxis instead. These people also tried persuading the owners that since they have fewer family members, these owners should choose to live in smaller units or move to a further way area. There are endless persuasion arguments such as this one deployed by the people who want a collective sales to happen.

The proceeds from a collective sale will definitely be unable to purchase an apartment of the same size in the vicinity of this property. If the owner is already retired, he will be forced to use his retirement savings to buy a new house because he cannot borrow money from the bank.

Our contention is that when we bought this real estate, aside for self-use, we had the intention to leave the property as inheritance to our next as this is a freehold property. As owners, don’t we have the right to decide how large a space we should live in? And where we want to live? And whether we want to stay or move? Why do these people who want to make money out of the collective sale want to interfere with our lives?

Why can 80% of the owners decide on the fate of the remaining 20%? Why should the interest of the 20% of the owners be sacrificed simply to cater to the monetary motive of the 80% of the owners? A collective sale only leaves nothing  but monetary motives and resentment between neighbours. Such a collective sale is debatable.