- POSTED: 10 Sep 2013 18:54
This graph is an experimental feature that tracks number of views over time.
Singapore-listed developer Ho Bee Investment says claims by home owners against alleged defects at The Coast at Sentosa Cove will be "vigorously defended".
SINGAPORE: Singapore-listed developer Ho Bee Investment says claims by home owners against alleged defects at The Coast at Sentosa Cove will be "vigorously defended".
The Coast's Management Corporation Strata Title (MCST) is taking legal action against the developer for alleged defects including termite-infested pool decking and flooded staircases at the high-end condominium.
The Coast was developed by Ho Bee Cove, a subsidiary of Ho Bee Investment. Completed in April 2009, The Coast boasts 249 units of three- and four-bedroom apartments as well as luxury penthouses, 41 private berthing facilities and views of the South China Sea. It is one of Ho Bee's five developments on the exclusive enclave of Sentosa Cove.
In a statement to clarify media reports on the matter, Ho Bee Investment says it has received a letter from solicitors representing the MCST, demanding that the developer fix defects identified by their building experts.
The cost of rectification is estimated to be over S$2 million.
Ho Bee adds that it then hired building expert, Robinson Jones & Associates (RJA) to conduct an independent assessment of the alleged defects.
RJA found that most defects were not genuine building defects but due to fair wear and tear or lack of adequate and proper maintenance, says Ho Bee.
RJA's view is that the cost of the rectification works as far as genuine defects are concerned would not exceed S$200,000, adds Ho Bee.
The developer also says that it has repeatedly offered to rectify genuine building defects, but the MCST had been "non-responsive and non-committal" to the offers.
Ho Bee Cove has also maintained that it is responsible and committed to the MCST to rectify the genuine defects throughout the entire process.
The developer says "Ho Bee Cove will vigorously defend the MCST's claims as many of the alleged defects are, in their and RJA's view, frivolous and the alleged cost of rectification is simply inflated".