声称公寓面积“缩水”20平方公尺，年轻夫妇入禀高庭，控告发展商！
SINGAPORE: A Singaporean couple suing a condominium developer for fraud over 20 square metres of space is being sued in turn.
Poh Her Chiew and Ling Mee Chow, both in their 40s, claim the developer misled them into thinking they were buying an executive condominium unit with a floor area of 167 square metres at Blossom Residences.
They said the actual area should be 147 square metres, as there is 20 square metres’ worth of space rendered void.
The unit was priced at S$1.12 million.
Blossom Residences is a project that is still under construction by Grand Isle Holdings Pte Ltd.
Grand Isle Holdings is a subsidiary of City Developments Limited.
The couple’s lawsuit states that the developer and its estate agent, ERA, had left out the fact about the void space in the sale brochure and documents bundled with the Option to Purchase (OTP).
It said the issue was only revealed several weeks later in the Sale & Purchase agreement.
The couple then chose not to exercise the OTP and sued the developer.
They wanted to seek repeal of the OTP and damages for wasted expenses and opportunity loss.
Their income has risen higher than the S$12,000 ceiling and this means they are ineligible to buy an alternative executive condominium unit.
While this lawsuit is to be heard in the High Court from Wednesday, the defendant is expected to bring a counterclaim against the buyers on the same day.
This is for under-declaring their monthly income by S$370.
The lawyer representing the developer is expected to ask the court to rule that the buyers forfeit the entire sum of Option Monies of more than S$56,000.
This includes the S$42,000 refunded to the buyers when they did not exercise the OTP.
The buyers are represented by Vijay Kumar Rai of Arbiters Inc Law Corporation, and the developer by Senior Counsel Ang Cheng Hock of Allen & Gledhill.
– CNA/xq
打打这类官司挺好，晚报销售量会比较好^_^
少报薪水和少了面积都要严打！哈哈！
这官司有意思，关注
搞笑
围观一下，起起哄
都不是省油的灯，这下律师又赚了！
少报370.。。。这个不算少很多呀。只要把这370报到每月可变动花红就行了吧
被告是CDL啊。这个不好办的。
预测原告要输，最多是庭下和解。
它辩称，选购权书清楚写明167平方公尺包括无用空间、冷气机平台、阳台和露台（roof terrace）。
这个是实实在在的文书证据。比起原告只是一面之词要说服力。当然，我是相信原告的。不过新加坡的法律是要看证据的。重要文件没看透，被忽悠了那就完了。
42/43 岁还叫年轻夫妇？
这报纸有时候用词真是吃不消，经常不管大小一律称呼 女郎，看了恶寒。
发展商这些年用大而无用的面积忽悠了多少买家，虽然法律上他们站得住脚，但良心确是大大的不好，这次总算碰上不肯就范的硬骨头了。鼓掌！
坡县也世风日下了…
狗咬狗，一嘴毛！
买房子不会看啊。真是糊涂虫阿。也不会看图纸阿。肯定告输得，OPT上面都写了，好不好，怎么可能没写。Agent也会go thru.
个人觉得原告应该赢不了，人家白纸黑字写得明明白白的，还狮子开大口，要发展商赔钱120W
房子升值也超过这点损失了吧。不过，真要仔细看那个厚厚的OTP，估计很多人没耐心仔细看完吧。
Void在floor plan 上会标出的, 除非CDL 犯错, 否则很难靠赢
本地很多人这样。
偶30多岁的同事，只要是雌性都叫女孩子。 经常跟我说，今天我隔壁那个60多岁的女孩子。。。。。
这个显然是夫妻无理取闹。cdl这种开发商才不会犯这种幼稚的错误。
真心请教，42/43岁该称啥夫妇？
中年夫妇?
中年夫妇?
中年夫妇