OUE (formerly: Overseas Union Enterprise)

[tianyudi]

OUE share price remain stagnant. Market doesn't seem to react to this piece of news.

[opmi]

Dodgy.....Naked swimmers spotted.

Hindsight confirmation of SG property bubble. Fraud/Dodgy deals are typical symptoms of bubbles.

http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw/head...medium=rss


UOB sues Lippo Group subsidiary and 7 others

Straits Times
Date
07 Jan 2015
AuthorElena Chong
Bank alleges in $181m suit that they conspired to get inflated home loans

UNITED Overseas Bank (UOB) has launched a $181-million suit against a subsidiary of Indonesia's Lippo Group and seven individuals, claiming they conspired to get inflated housing loans.

The loans were for the purchases of 38 condominium units at the high-end Marina Collection in Sentosa - developed by Lippo Marina Collection (LMC). Launched for sale in 2007, each apartment at the 124-unit development costs an average of $6 million.

UOB, in its statement of claim, alleges that while the development enjoyed "fairly strong" sales at the start, property cooling measures in 2009 and the additional buyers' stamp duty introduced in 2011 saw interest dip. From late 2011 to July 2013, UOB was approached to provide housing loans for the purchase of 38 units. Of these, 37 have defaulted.

The bank alleges that LMC and the other defendants failed to inform it of "very substantial" discounts of between 22 per cent and 34 per cent given to the buyers. That meant the buyers paid a lot less for the units than what was indicated on the loan forms.

The loans were therefore not just in breach of Monetary Authority of Singapore rules, but were even in excess of what the buyers actually had to pay for the 99-year leasehold units.

UOB says it gave out the loans after Lippo's lawyers confirmed that the buyers had paid the remainder of the purchase price - but this was untrue. The remainder was instead set off against discounts or "furniture rebates".

In addition, UOB alleges that many buyers were fronts and did not have the financial means to service the housing loans. Instead, the real buyers were five people who had links with the two property agents involved in the alleged scam - ERA housing agent Goh Buck Lim and freelance housing agent Aurellia Adrianus Ho.

UOB alleges that sums ranging from $200,000 to $1.2 million were transferred between bank accounts of the "buyers" and several defendants. This was to give the bank the impression that whoever was applying for a loan had at least $200,000 in their UOB accounts - one of the criteria for the loan to be granted.

According to UOB, one of the so-called buyers admitted being paid $100,000 to act as a proxy.

LMC denies being part of any conspiracy to cause loss to UOB and will vigorously defend the claims made against it. In its defence, LMC says the loans were a matter solely between the buyers and UOB, and that it had no knowledge of any alleged misrepresentation of the purchase price. It added that the bank should have done its own independent checks.

The developer also said it dealt with the buyers only through Mr Goh. It was the agent who asked if LMC could give a discount in the form of furniture rebates.

LMC agreed to give rebates of between 25 per cent and 34 per cent to promote the sale of units, adding that this was a "fairly common sales and marketing strategy".

The bank is represented by Tan Kok Quan Partnership and LMC by Premier Law. The other defendants are defended by Straits Law.

elena@sph.com.sg

Source: Straits Times © Singapore Press Holdings Ltd. Permission required for reproduction.

[corydorus]

So we know now. All the housing deal marketed.... need to ask for 30% discount
That's how they keep the price stagnant "officially".

[Louhan]

So we know now. All the housing deal marketed.... need to ask for 30% discount
That's how they keep the price stagnant "officially".

MAS should investigate whether this practice is widespread among other developers! The property agents should be charged and penalized too!

[opmi]

"UOB alleges that sums ranging from $200,000 to $1.2 million were transferred between bank accounts of the "buyers" and several defendants. This was to give the bank the impression that whoever was applying for a loan had at least $200,000 in their UOB accounts - one of the criteria for the loan to be granted." - are these guys dumb enough to use UOB accounts to transfer to each other???!!! hahaha...

Qn: Can civil cases get access to other banks info under bank secrecy laws???

[corydorus]

If you need to base on cash in saving to decide, I would think access is needed else it has to all be in UOB accounts. So the question should be asked in another way. Is the staffs dumb enough not to check those transfer records over the months or there are something else deeper ... deeper ...

[propertyinvestor]

OUE HT to acquire Crown Plaza from OUE for $495m. A special dividend from OUE soon?

Thats a good 100M net profit for OUE in a short span of 3 years after they purchased it from LCD Global for 300M

[specuvestor]

^^^ no profit for 3 years actually for the hotel... The extra $200m is from the extension

"The manager of the trust said OUE H-Reit will pay $290 million for the 320-room hotel and $205 million for the extension, which is currently under construction."

http://www.straitstimes.com/news/busines...tension-49

[butcher]

NAV of OUE @ $4.23
That means a discount of approx. 48.5% to NAV at current px of $2.18!
This is most heavily discount property counter I would say in SGX

[cyclone]

Changed its name to OUE Limited