We are Unit Owners at Soho Central Condominium Corporation's building, a project of Century Properties Inc. from a joint venture of Meridien Development and Greenfield Development. This blog will teach and consolidate information regarding our building. Please submit comments; and if anyone would like to meet for tea/coffee to discuss the building, please send us an email. Unit Owners have been unable to witness decisions being made with our money at private board meetings.
Plan, plan and plan some more
QUESTION: Is Stonewall Central a better name for the property?
Does everyone remember this among the wonderful ads and brochures and how about the salespeople and what they told us. I hear such fantasies continue. So after watching and remembering, cry and then laugh at the truth that is being exposed.
And, if the above is not enough and you need elevated blood pressure, here is the project's brochure.
Many posts are still issues and need to be read once again. At this main hub of postings watch for new posts and updates. Please get involved by spreading the word as to the issues here. We must document all that is taking place. Many documents need retrieval and assistance is needed in getting them scanned and posted.
The memo that is now being circulated once again is not in compliance with the By-Laws of Soho Central Condominium Corporation (SCCC). Will the meeting itself also violate as all the past meetings have?
The memo states it "is earlier than usual." Well it is about time that the announcement be made early. How many years did it take from the developer controlled Board? But, it seems that the By-Laws are not being read and need to be quoted.
The form many have received for proxy IS NOT mentioned in the By-Laws and was written very cleverly. I would strongly suggest all Unit Owners follow the By-Laws or make drastic changes to the form such as removing the wording that gives the developer controlled Board's chair your vote if your proxy does not make it to the meeting. The form is outrageous!
Another opposition to the By-Laws as written in this memo made once again this year for the unmentioned form is for it to "be returned to us at least a day before the date of the scheduled meeting." The By-Laws say before the meeting and this cannot be overruled by arbitrary decisions by the developer controlled Board. If your proxy is denied your vote when they present a By-Laws recognized statement from you, you may suggest they call the police in case they are denied entry to the meeting.
Section 8. Proxy. – Any member or representative as
defined in *Section 4 hereof, may be represented by a proxy in all the meetings
of the members of the corporation. The proxy must be in writing, designating the
representative by name, signed by the member or the representative and duly
presented to the Secretary for inspection and recording before the opening of
the meeting.
Proxies shall be valid only either for the next annual or
special meeting after the execution of the proxy or any adjournment thereof. The
presence of the member at the meeting shall revoke the proxy heretofore executed
by him and such member shall be entitled to vote at such meeting in the same
manner and with the same effect as if he had not executed a proxy.
This is the proxy form created which opposes the By-Laws:
***
READ this section carefully. This Board may try
more games if the designation of "representative" is not done in writing for a
meeting. So besides the proxy to submit in writing as instructed above for those
not attending, where there is joint ownership have a written statement signed by
all the particular Unit Owners submitted to the Board Secretary. Send mail meant
for the Board to the Administration office in the building. They will then know
how to contact the Board Secretary who also holds the Minutes which as are not
kept here in the office. Yes, this place is a mess.
*Section 4.
Representation. – In cases where a unit is owned in common by two or more
persons, they shall determine one (1) from among themselves, who shall represent
them in the corporation. Except for the purpose of liquidation in case of
dissolution, the representative designated shall be considered as members
representing the unit for all purposes, in all matters related to the
corporation, including service of notice of assessment and meetings, grant of
proxies, voting on any matter, and the like. In cases of corporation, trust, or
partnership, its authorized officers shall designate who should represent it in
the corporation. In all the foregoing instances, the person duly designated (as)
representative must be registered with the corporation by filing a written
designation with the Secretary of the Corporation.
***
The memo did not properly cite Section 11. of the By-Laws which defines "delinquent." Being delinquent only involves non-payment of dues and assessments and nothing else. There is also no cut-off date for being members of the SCCC as a requirement for participation in the annual meeting in the By-Laws.
Among our remarks to the Board in the past, we made them aware of the violation written in the By-Laws as far as number of votes per unit. The language in the By-Laws contradicts the Master Deed and law; therefore, it is moot. Last year they proposed an amendment to correct the language which is illegal but added additional language which had nothing to do with the main point. Yes, another game against the Unit Owner members.
Section 11. Voting. - Each member of the corporation shall be entitled toone vote for every unit owned. However, members who are delinquent in the payment of their dues and assessments as fixed by the Board of Trustees or as provided for in the Master Deed with Declaration of Restrictions, shall not be qualified to cast their votes in any meeting of the corporation. In the annual meeting for the election oftrustees no cumulative voting shall be permitted.
We had announced very early to prepare for the meeting. Start reading or taking notes and writing questions for the Board. Many have already seen the memo posted for the annual meeting, I will comment on its flaws in another post.
There are so many questions and concerns that have not been addressed properly since 2009 hard to know where to begin. Did you know that every annual meeting whether or not it took place have violations? All this and more needs airing of the dirty laundry.
Currently, security seems to have an excess considering the new cameras were put in. So why the money spent for cameras when security personnel has not been reduced? Let us all think, why would a Board with Directors claiming they will step down hire a new agency without our being informed then keep the same number of guards? Why would they do this and spend money on a CCTV system?
Oh, I was told how we got the company that is putting in the CCTV system and everyone is going to love this story as I was told. I wonder if the Directors know or knew the surprise about the company hired. Well I will save that for everyone at the meeting.
I was also told that that not just one but two weapons went missing in the recent past, is this so? So what happened and why was this not announced?
We are still trying to find out what took place on the 8th floor.
Why was this article less favored back home and thought to be "exaggerated?" How exaggerated was it? Those of us at Soho Central, South of Market (SOMA) and Bel-Air Soho would be more than willing to give anyone a tour of where all the money comes from for Century Properties. Let us show you how exaggerated the hype is in reality.
When not at the stockholders meeting, did anyone question the spending in relation to the company's image? After all, is not the stock price linked to the ad image and not to the product itself? Also, in past pieces in the news I see that schools were mentioned in the US and none in the Philippines. Did any stockholders ask what degrees were awarded and when to the officer? Not only Bachelors and Masters but high school? I cannot find specifics.
Biz Buzz
By the staff Philippine Daily Inquirer 8:09 pm | Sunday, July 7th, 2013
"Last month’s Vanity Fair spread detailing a $15-million residence and a $3-million self-portrait collection of Jose Roberto Antonio, son of Century Properties Group founder Jose E.B. Antonio, might have been a big hit to its readers, but it appears the article was less favored back at home.
Sources close to Antonio told Biz Buzz that the figures in the article, which disclosed that the scion’s house was designed by the Dutch Pritzker Prize winner Rem Koolhas, were “exaggerated.”
“It’s very bloated,” one of the sources said without elaborating on the actual value. The house, which will be a series of boxes stacked together in an irregular pattern, was the first residential commission by Koolhas in 15 years, the article noted. It was named “Stealth” by the younger Antonio himself and will display his art collection, which has come to include two dozen self-portraits of the 36-year-old scion by leading contemporary artists like Julian Schnabel and Takashi Murakami.
Members of the Antonio family were mum on the topic while Roberto, a managing director at Century, did a little stealth act on his own and missed the builder’s annual stockholders’ meeting early this week as he was traveling abroad.
Even as family members downplayed the article, the aspirational nature it suggests is very much in the DNA of Century Properties, which has gained recognition for its co-branding deals with international celebrities like Paris Hilton and Donald Trump. This has also caught the attention of investors. The company widened its analyst coverage to include foreign houses like UBS, Macquarie, Religaire as well as local players Abacus and COL Financial.
We hear two more houses, Maybank ATR KimEng and Philippine Equity Partners, could initiate their coverage as well. Miguel R. Camus "
I was just told some interesting news about the stockholders meeting on Monday. It seems that unlike the speed at which concerns are addressed in their buildings, the doors were shut 10 minutes after the start of the meeting. Several people were refused entry and these being older persons.
A lawyer was reportedly so angry that he made two attempts to break in through the doors with his second try bringing a decision to let him in. Various complaints about Century Properties were then heard amongst those not able to enter.
Meetings, Security not reduced, Renting now and in the future discussed below. It is time for Unit Owners to face cold hard facts. In August, there is an Annual Meeting for Soho Central Condominium Corporation (SCCC). Unit Owners are members and need to attend! We need everyone there or your proxy for serious issue discussion and election.
Do not let the developer controlled board dictate your choice for proxy. Cross out any mention of the board or chair using your proxy if your choice misses the meeting. YES, you may change or write your own proxy form or letter. Read the By-laws and Master Deed. Take the time since these documents are not being taken seriously for Unit Owner concerns. The laws of the nation are also ignored.
I must also clearly state that the Soho Central Condominium Corporation (SCCC) is not a Homeowners Association. A Homeowners Association is a different entity under Philippine law. Such an entity has not been formed at Soho Central. There are several terms and entities being referred to incorrectly. As you speak, ask for others to make corrections and ask questions so that this and so much else gets clearer.
---
So the security force was replaced or was it? Yes, several personnel moved to the new company and number about 1/3 of the new guard. Clean slate we do not have. What we do have is the same number of guards. Same number some may ask after pointing to the expense of CCTV cameras being installed. Yes, same number. So where is the savings? What is happening with OUR MONEY in those secret and private board meetings?
Remember, what do we call words?
I want us all to recall past and current sales agents for the various condominium development companies in their many remarks talking about purchasing for the opportunity to rent. Time for the messenger to pop that bubble.
There is a glut. I have just read in the papers that the banks here will not interfere with the current loans. Yes, reminds me of the predicament of Europe, Japan and the US. China is just starting their dive. But why learn from the mistakes of others. Now for the bubble. But do not tell anyone. After all, let us all hope it does not happen and a miracle takes places.
Has everyone been reading the building memos? Oh, that's right those living abroad are treated as second class unit owners. Well do not be too concerned since those of us living here are 11/2 class unit owners since meetings take place with various decisions impacting us and we are not even allowed to witness. Now I have just been told of a meeting with brokers and some unit owners who rent.
This meeting as told to me was with the property manager who said that units must be at priced at 18,000 pesos month. Hmm. Who can enforce this? No one. And let me tell all unit owners a little secret, there are thousands of units coming online within the next few years. What will happen to rents? I guess what we were all told by the sales agents is true? Talaga? Or, will reality finally hit?
The sales gimmick may be shown for what it is.
Unit Owners, we all spent MILLIONS of pesos on our unit(s). Why is there not vocal and consistent outrage at the lack of unit owner control and the ignoring of hard cold facts?
I had posted what Armando Ang wrote in his book, "The Guide to Homeownership." Has anyone thought about his comments on renting & value not only of an individual unit but the building as a whole?
Do not be afraid of the hard cold facts embrace them and let them teach you what you must do to maintain value if not increase it for your property.
***
UPDATE (07/06/13): So much happens and I get so many calls, texts and emails about the continual nonsense in the managing of the building sometimes I just do not know where to place comments or should I create a new post. But since I had written a small piece in this message on security here is another recent comment on this serious matter. from a caretaker: "Hi, number of security was NOT REDUCED. Still 35 including 10 from former agency. If we could reduce due to CCTV installed, Association Dues can lessen too. On my email they said, 'why spend budget for installation of CCTV if security will still be 35 guards on duty. Money is just wasted and decisions were done without votes of Soho members.'" Yes remember, the members, Unit Owners, who are supposed to be important factors in the Soho Central Condominium Corporation? Remember members, Unit Owners, who are refused witness to the Board meetings and now Residential Area Committee meetings comprised of Directors appointed not elected by members, Unit Owners. All meetings are secret and private. All Minutes & Resolutions of these entities have not been given to us for posting. Why? It has been many months when many requests and demands have been made. Letters were even composed and then 17 letters were submitted asking for information on issues once again. We are laughed at with some of us called "foreigners" and some of us "FAGGOTS" by Directors on the Board. Xenophobes and homophobes sit on the Board and we cannot witness meetings. We have also been getting reports from this Residential Area Committee where signatures are written with no titles. Why no titles? These individuals were appointed by the unelected developer-controlled Board to be on the Board and then given appointment to this committee. Why no open meetings for Unit Owners to witness how our MONEY and building is being handled? What is taking place behind all the closed doors? Can it be as bad as what some have surmised and stated to me? Here is another thing they may copy, open the meetings to Unit Owners answering not only the 17 letters but all other questions. Or, will this be another Bel-Air Soho with so much damaged and then subsequent legal complaints and investigating.
I know, I know, why bother? After all, the building is deteriorating and all decisions are made in secret and private meetings with insults and threats flaring their ugly nostrils when confronted with questions and demands.
But, the form may be needed for those willing to build cases for complaints to be heard by the government and legal cases presented in court. So instead of the small form which runs out at the concierge, here is the form enlarged and available at will.
