The group formed of the consumers of the REDWOOD PROJECT will meet tomorrow to discuss the malicious and ulterior designs of the developer. since all dialogue has been blocked by the builder now its safe to understand that Era does not want to resolve our grevieances and concerns amicably. The last effort in which we had written to them has still not been answered and instead Era has started issuing cancellation letters.
Therefore tired of approaching Era and begging for our right for information, we are being forced to look at other alternatives to get redressal to our grievances and concerns.
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
Saturday, August 7, 2010
FRAUD BUILDER
NR Builders’ case: Bail plea of two rejected
Our Correspondent
Noida, March 4, 2006
After the Noida Authority lodged an FIR against the management of NR Builders for having sold flats in Sectors 48 and 142, there is total chaos.
While the bail applications of U. K. Kesarwani and Rajesh Jain have been rejected by the court, the builders of Kesar Gardens and Gulmohar Garden apartments are reported to be bringing in political pressure on the district administration and the police.
Kersarwani and Jain had collected the full price of land of three apartment buildings from the flat allottees but failed to deposit it with the Authority. Both owe Rs 10 crore to the Noida Authority.
N. K. Jain and Naseem Ahmed, managers of NR Builders, have been named in the FIR lodged in the Sector 20 police station. The builders are learnt to have announced a new scheme for Sector 142 also on a piece of land situated on the proposed Ghaziabad–Noida–Faridabad highway. This land is in the notified area, which is under the Noida Authority’s possession now.
This builder has also used the name of a cooperative housing society. But the price of the land has already been remitted to the office of the ADM, LAR, by the Noida Authority.
But N. K. Jain, MD of the firm, has claimed they have the documents pertaining to 3,622 hectares in the name of Consumer Protection and Housing Development Society. The CEO, Noida, however, stressed that this land had been notified and was in the possession of the Noida Authority.
Our Correspondent
Noida, March 4, 2006
After the Noida Authority lodged an FIR against the management of NR Builders for having sold flats in Sectors 48 and 142, there is total chaos.
While the bail applications of U. K. Kesarwani and Rajesh Jain have been rejected by the court, the builders of Kesar Gardens and Gulmohar Garden apartments are reported to be bringing in political pressure on the district administration and the police.
Kersarwani and Jain had collected the full price of land of three apartment buildings from the flat allottees but failed to deposit it with the Authority. Both owe Rs 10 crore to the Noida Authority.
N. K. Jain and Naseem Ahmed, managers of NR Builders, have been named in the FIR lodged in the Sector 20 police station. The builders are learnt to have announced a new scheme for Sector 142 also on a piece of land situated on the proposed Ghaziabad–Noida–Faridabad highway. This land is in the notified area, which is under the Noida Authority’s possession now.
This builder has also used the name of a cooperative housing society. But the price of the land has already been remitted to the office of the ADM, LAR, by the Noida Authority.
But N. K. Jain, MD of the firm, has claimed they have the documents pertaining to 3,622 hectares in the name of Consumer Protection and Housing Development Society. The CEO, Noida, however, stressed that this land had been notified and was in the possession of the Noida Authority.
Saturday, July 24, 2010
April 2010 TOI, Take a look!!!!!
PANAJI: The state consumer disputes redressal commission has directed a builder to pay an aggrieved customer Rs 5,25,000 with 12 per cent interest and Rs 25,000 towards compensation for harassment and legal costs. The builder, Sagar Builders and Real Estate Developers of Ponda, had appealed to the commission against the order of the North Goa consumer disputes redressal forum which had ordered the builder to pay the client, S Nadkarni, also of Ponda, compensation for deficiency in services.
Nadkarni had entered into an agreement with the builder wherein the latter was to construct and sell her a flat admeasuring 77.80 sq m with other specifications. The total consideration for the flat was Rs 5.5 lakh and Nadkarni was to pay Rs 5.25 lakh within 47 days from the date of signing the agreement.
Nadkarni’s complaint is that despite making the payments and following up with numerous oral requests and letters, the builder has not completed the flat. She said that she had taken a loan to make the payments to the builder and further complained that although the agreed area of the flat was 77.80 sq m, it was less by 3.90 sq m.
Nadkarni also complained that the doors were of poor quality and open casing electrical wiring was used instead of concealed wiring. She prayed that the builder be directed to hand over the flat with an area of 77.80 sq m, with all amenities as agreed upon in the agreement.
As an alternative, Nadkarni prayed that the builder be directed to refund the amount of Rs 5,25,000 and interest at the rate of 18 per cent till the payment of the said money. She also claimed an amount of Rs 50,000 for suffering mental torture and agony and the cost of the legal suit.
The builder, however, argued that the flat was ready for occupation even before the execution of the agreement and that Nadkarni had requested some additional works in the flat. The builder also claimed that Rs 88,000 was due to him from Nadkarni due to the additional work.
The district forum, however, ruled that there was deficiency on the part of the builder. The forum ordered the builder to hand over to Nadkarni the flat with an area of 77.80 sq m or, alternately, to pay her Rs 5.25 lakh with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of receipt of payment till the date of payment made to Nadkarni.
The forum also ordered the builder to pay Nadkarni Rs 25,000 towards mental torture and harassment and legal costs. The builder appealed against the order before the commission. But the commission dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the district forum.
Nadkarni had entered into an agreement with the builder wherein the latter was to construct and sell her a flat admeasuring 77.80 sq m with other specifications. The total consideration for the flat was Rs 5.5 lakh and Nadkarni was to pay Rs 5.25 lakh within 47 days from the date of signing the agreement.
Nadkarni’s complaint is that despite making the payments and following up with numerous oral requests and letters, the builder has not completed the flat. She said that she had taken a loan to make the payments to the builder and further complained that although the agreed area of the flat was 77.80 sq m, it was less by 3.90 sq m.
Nadkarni also complained that the doors were of poor quality and open casing electrical wiring was used instead of concealed wiring. She prayed that the builder be directed to hand over the flat with an area of 77.80 sq m, with all amenities as agreed upon in the agreement.
As an alternative, Nadkarni prayed that the builder be directed to refund the amount of Rs 5,25,000 and interest at the rate of 18 per cent till the payment of the said money. She also claimed an amount of Rs 50,000 for suffering mental torture and agony and the cost of the legal suit.
The builder, however, argued that the flat was ready for occupation even before the execution of the agreement and that Nadkarni had requested some additional works in the flat. The builder also claimed that Rs 88,000 was due to him from Nadkarni due to the additional work.
The district forum, however, ruled that there was deficiency on the part of the builder. The forum ordered the builder to hand over to Nadkarni the flat with an area of 77.80 sq m or, alternately, to pay her Rs 5.25 lakh with interest at the rate of 12 per cent from the date of receipt of payment till the date of payment made to Nadkarni.
The forum also ordered the builder to pay Nadkarni Rs 25,000 towards mental torture and harassment and legal costs. The builder appealed against the order before the commission. But the commission dismissed the appeal and upheld the order of the district forum.
consumer protection
Take a look this should only encourage you all...its a news piece from TOI..
NEW DELHI: If a shopkeeper doesn't give you a bill for your purchase, you may
soon be able to take him to court. At the same time, anything and everything you
buy can be challenged legally if it is found to be of poor quality. A product
need not be "hazardous" at the beginning to be "unsafe" later. Most importantly,
consumers will be able to receive extra money from consumer fora in case of
protracted litigation.
The central government is mulling a clutch of amendments to Consumer Protection
Act, 1986, to empower consumers and to inject transparency in the three-tier
consumer protection fora at the district, state and national level.
If accepted, the Act will make a shopkeeper not issuing cash memo or bills for
goods sold as guilty under the law. The possession of bill makes a consumer a
"bonafide" customer and its absence robs him of a stronger footing in courts if
he challenges a sale. It will henceforth be dubbed an "unfair trade practice".
The most consequential change may be the widening of the definition of "defect"
and "deficiency". While the Act clubs a few shortcomings in a product to qualify
as "defect", it is proposed to keep the definition open-ended -- by replacing
"means" which follows the spelt-out defects with "includes" -- to qualify any
unspecified flaw as defect.
The seller will in future have to give the buyer every bit of information about
a commodity. It is proposed that withholding information about a good, which can
influence the choice of a customer, should be treated as an offence.
The definition of "unfair trade practice" is to be expanded to include the
unforeseen modus operandi of traders as offences. It will allow the law to not
specify every unfair practice in the law.
The changes also seek to bring transparency in consumer courts with regard to
selection of presiding officers, filing of cases and discharge of justice.
Consumers will be able to file "cases online" in what is an attempt to empower
them.
A key proposal says that presidents or members in consumer fora should be barred
from pleading before them. This includes those who either held office in these
fora or wielded administrative control there. It is an attempt to stop any
unfair clout to be pedalled in the courts.
The Act seeks to empower consumer courts to award "interest" to compensate
consumers who suffer from prolonged court battles.
State commissions are to be given more power to be able to renew their own
orders if they notice factual mistakes in the records. The powers of judicial
magistrate first class will be more explicit under the Act.
The quasi-judicial three-tier consumer disputes redressal machinery -- national,
state and district -- have seen around 34 lakh cases filed till April 2010, of
which 30 lakh have been disposed of. The rate of disposal has been around 89%.
NEW DELHI: If a shopkeeper doesn't give you a bill for your purchase, you may
soon be able to take him to court. At the same time, anything and everything you
buy can be challenged legally if it is found to be of poor quality. A product
need not be "hazardous" at the beginning to be "unsafe" later. Most importantly,
consumers will be able to receive extra money from consumer fora in case of
protracted litigation.
The central government is mulling a clutch of amendments to Consumer Protection
Act, 1986, to empower consumers and to inject transparency in the three-tier
consumer protection fora at the district, state and national level.
If accepted, the Act will make a shopkeeper not issuing cash memo or bills for
goods sold as guilty under the law. The possession of bill makes a consumer a
"bonafide" customer and its absence robs him of a stronger footing in courts if
he challenges a sale. It will henceforth be dubbed an "unfair trade practice".
The most consequential change may be the widening of the definition of "defect"
and "deficiency". While the Act clubs a few shortcomings in a product to qualify
as "defect", it is proposed to keep the definition open-ended -- by replacing
"means" which follows the spelt-out defects with "includes" -- to qualify any
unspecified flaw as defect.
The seller will in future have to give the buyer every bit of information about
a commodity. It is proposed that withholding information about a good, which can
influence the choice of a customer, should be treated as an offence.
The definition of "unfair trade practice" is to be expanded to include the
unforeseen modus operandi of traders as offences. It will allow the law to not
specify every unfair practice in the law.
The changes also seek to bring transparency in consumer courts with regard to
selection of presiding officers, filing of cases and discharge of justice.
Consumers will be able to file "cases online" in what is an attempt to empower
them.
A key proposal says that presidents or members in consumer fora should be barred
from pleading before them. This includes those who either held office in these
fora or wielded administrative control there. It is an attempt to stop any
unfair clout to be pedalled in the courts.
The Act seeks to empower consumer courts to award "interest" to compensate
consumers who suffer from prolonged court battles.
State commissions are to be given more power to be able to renew their own
orders if they notice factual mistakes in the records. The powers of judicial
magistrate first class will be more explicit under the Act.
The quasi-judicial three-tier consumer disputes redressal machinery -- national,
state and district -- have seen around 34 lakh cases filed till April 2010, of
which 30 lakh have been disposed of. The rate of disposal has been around 89%.
Saturday, July 17, 2010
Divine court group
This is To inform all that the Divine court Group of customers, are meeting today at 14:30hrs at noida. This meeting is called after all efforts to get Era Landmarks to give in writing the status of all basic amenities have failed. Era has refused to acknowledge all requests send by the group to have a meeting with the management, so that these issues could be resolved by dialogue.
Hence left with no choice the groups leaders have called a meeting of all members to deliberate on all the ground realities, so that they can make Era deliver on all its original promises, Thanks.
Hence left with no choice the groups leaders have called a meeting of all members to deliberate on all the ground realities, so that they can make Era deliver on all its original promises, Thanks.
Monday, June 28, 2010
grievance and concerns of the customers of REDWOOD RESIDENCY
The,
Chairman,
Era Landmarks Ltd,
Noida.
Sir,
Subject- Questions that need urgent and sincere answers regarding the project REDWOOD RESIDENCY.
This is to bring to your attention that years and years after your initial acceptance of booking money for a residential project in Sector 82, Faridabad – We, as the customers of this project, are left with no choice but to unite and protect our rights as customers to create awareness of the issues concerning the future of our investment in your project. Hence we formed a group.
Individual queries have long been discussed by several of the customers independently but ERA LANDMARKS has never replied in writing to anyone.
The humiliation and disdain with which each customer has been treated till now, has forced us to unite for the common cause and seek redressal of our concerns. In this regard, we, as our first step to get clarity on the development of the project REDWOOD RESIDENCY, are once again sending you a summary of our queries. We would appreciate an early reply. Your procrastination, unwillingness or delay to answer our queries and concerns will force us to take necessary actions to safeguard our interest as customers of your product and services.Please understand that all the queries tabled below need an urgent answer. Do not under any circumstance ignore any one as all have their own importance and monetary value.
The queries and concerns on which we need urgent answers are:-
1) It has been Four years since we booked our apartments with you in your Redwood Residency residential project in Faridabad (Neharpar). At that time you assured that this project will be a semi-luxurious residential project, which will be developed within three years from the time of booking. Without any consent from any customer, how did you then change the location from sector-82 to sector-78? And what is the status of the semi-luxurious apartment that you are constructing, that is, what specifications/features are inbuilt to categorize them as semi-luxurious?
2) As per your marketing brochures, the advertisement in the leading national dailies and your own website of the said residential project, a very clear and indisputable area is shown as 'central green/central park' around which the whole project is conceptualized. This land – that falls in the dead centre of the said project – measures approx. 4 acres. Undeniably this was an U.S.P of this project. It has been brought to our notice that this land's title is still not in your name and that you have never made any effort/intention to procure the land from its rightful owner, thereby jeopardizing our interest/investment. As you are/ were not the rightful owner of that land why did you then use your dominant position to misrepresent facts and deceive customers by factually wrong and illusionary claims, thereby causing monetary harm to innocent and trusting customers. Your action thereby raises following concerns-
A) What is the correct status of the above said land?
B) For all purposes of getting sanctions and approvals from all regulatory bodies, did you apply with/without this land being an integral part of the project?
C) On what plan have you received your building plan approvals? Share the photocopy/duplicate of the same in your reply.
D) Was this land shown only in your marketing brochure/websites alone?
E) Do you intend to complete this project with THE CENTRAL GREEN PARK, and deliver the same as contractually agreed upon four years back?
3) As stated above, the possession was to happen within three years of the date of booking with you. Already four years have elapsed and you have not been able to construct 30% of the project. Therefore, what date of possession will you guarantee us and commit in writing? Here, we are talking about those customers who have booked in 2006 at the basic selling rate of Rs1350/sqft.
4) Late delivery/possession of apartment attracts penalty that Era Landmark is supposed to bear. We would like to know in clear words from you:
A) From which date does this penalty starts to accrue?
B) At what rate will the penalty/penal charge be calculated?
C) Kindly tell us how this rate of penalty has been arrived at. Is this rate prescribed under government/nodal agency guideline or has Era arbitrarily fixed it?
D) Does this rate of penalty confirm with the rate at which Era Landmarks charges its customers for late payment of installment?
E) The late payment of installment charged by you is calculated on the total installment amount due from the date of issuance of the demand letter. Will you then incorporate the total Basic Selling Price of the apartment for calculating the penalty amount owed to the customers?
5) When did Era landmarks get the sanction of its building plan approved? We would like to know:
A) On which date, month and year did you recieve the above said document?
B) From which date, month and year did you start the development work on the site?
C) From which date, month and year did you begin to call for allotment and installments as per construction link plan, thereon?
6) As all money collected prior to the sanctions is illegal, will Era give interest on the money it took in advance?
It is also known that, during this period, Era charged penalty on late payment of installments.
How will Era accommodate that money back to the customers and with what compensation?
7) Customers have till now paid more than sixty percent money of the apartment cost to you in your construction link plan.
A) Ground reality is that not even thirty percent work has taken place in the entire project, as your payment plan does not take into consideration the totality of the project and only leverages your balance sheet with 90% percent payment for just the structural work, we would like to know why this plan was drafted in this loop sided manner. It’s a well-known fact that finishing work(i.e. plumbing fittings, electrical fittings, paint and P.O.P, tiling work, wood work and other finishing work- both internal as well as external) constitute a major part of the total cost of construction. Why then you did not deem appropriate to distribute the cost evenly?
B) Is it not unfair trade practice to charge for, from a customer for more than the actual work done?
C) To highlight the above point, it is our duty to draw your attention to the PLC charged for park and floor (100%). Till date there is neither any park nor the floor of any tower has been completed as per your drawings. Wouldn't this amount to over-charging or charging in advance for work that will be initiated only towards the end of the construction period? Why was this not given prior thought and why is your construction link plan not drafted by taking these facts into account?
D) As this is a very unfair omission on your part, when will Era Landmark correct its mistake and compensate its customers on this account?
8) You must be aware that a lot of customers have taken home-loan to finance their apartments, in the banks contract it is/was clearly stated that within 18/24 months of disbursement of first installment towards Era or possession of apartment, whichever happens earlier, it will be deemed all money has been paid to Era(money applied as loan) and you (the customer) will be liable to pay EMI to the bank ( customer was only paying interest on the amount disbursed by the bank till now, but now he will be liable to pay the part of principal too). Who will bear this financial burden on the customer, which is happening due to your (Era's) non-performance and negligence. Clarify here, what compensation you would be paying to such customers?
9) We have come to know that you have sold and started constructing a new tower by the name of Tower-I , would you share with us the date on which you got permission to make and alter your original plan(naturally with duplicate copies of the same)?
A) Did you inform/ take consent from any existing customer of the change that you were bringing about?
B) How does this alter the total percentage of covered area vis-a-vie the total stipulated/ promised open area of the total project?
C) does bringing in a new block without increasing the acreage of the project size, increase/decrease the total super area to carpet area calculation?
D) if the actual area of the flat has been decreased due to the above calculation, then isn't it your duty to inform all your customers of this change and decrease the cost of the apartments proportionately?
These are some fundamental questions to which we would like straightforward answers from you. We, have already patiently waited for FOUR years to get satisfactory answers. But now we will not comply with your vague, ambiguous and insinuating statements, as these have led us only into trouble.
As customers, it’s our right to have full and rightful knowledge of the status of the project in which we have invested our hard earned life savings. More than anything else, it's your contractual obligation to provide correct and factual information.
Your reluctance/unwillingness to share or answer critical and vital information about the project automatically implies your breach of trust and contractual obligation.
Hence, it goes without saying that we would not be obliged to honour any part/clause of your contract if you, on your part don't confirm by it. Thanks, looking forward to your earliest reply, so that we can take informed decision.
Chairman,
Era Landmarks Ltd,
Noida.
Sir,
Subject- Questions that need urgent and sincere answers regarding the project REDWOOD RESIDENCY.
This is to bring to your attention that years and years after your initial acceptance of booking money for a residential project in Sector 82, Faridabad – We, as the customers of this project, are left with no choice but to unite and protect our rights as customers to create awareness of the issues concerning the future of our investment in your project. Hence we formed a group.
Individual queries have long been discussed by several of the customers independently but ERA LANDMARKS has never replied in writing to anyone.
The humiliation and disdain with which each customer has been treated till now, has forced us to unite for the common cause and seek redressal of our concerns. In this regard, we, as our first step to get clarity on the development of the project REDWOOD RESIDENCY, are once again sending you a summary of our queries. We would appreciate an early reply. Your procrastination, unwillingness or delay to answer our queries and concerns will force us to take necessary actions to safeguard our interest as customers of your product and services.Please understand that all the queries tabled below need an urgent answer. Do not under any circumstance ignore any one as all have their own importance and monetary value.
The queries and concerns on which we need urgent answers are:-
1) It has been Four years since we booked our apartments with you in your Redwood Residency residential project in Faridabad (Neharpar). At that time you assured that this project will be a semi-luxurious residential project, which will be developed within three years from the time of booking. Without any consent from any customer, how did you then change the location from sector-82 to sector-78? And what is the status of the semi-luxurious apartment that you are constructing, that is, what specifications/features are inbuilt to categorize them as semi-luxurious?
2) As per your marketing brochures, the advertisement in the leading national dailies and your own website of the said residential project, a very clear and indisputable area is shown as 'central green/central park' around which the whole project is conceptualized. This land – that falls in the dead centre of the said project – measures approx. 4 acres. Undeniably this was an U.S.P of this project. It has been brought to our notice that this land's title is still not in your name and that you have never made any effort/intention to procure the land from its rightful owner, thereby jeopardizing our interest/investment. As you are/ were not the rightful owner of that land why did you then use your dominant position to misrepresent facts and deceive customers by factually wrong and illusionary claims, thereby causing monetary harm to innocent and trusting customers. Your action thereby raises following concerns-
A) What is the correct status of the above said land?
B) For all purposes of getting sanctions and approvals from all regulatory bodies, did you apply with/without this land being an integral part of the project?
C) On what plan have you received your building plan approvals? Share the photocopy/duplicate of the same in your reply.
D) Was this land shown only in your marketing brochure/websites alone?
E) Do you intend to complete this project with THE CENTRAL GREEN PARK, and deliver the same as contractually agreed upon four years back?
3) As stated above, the possession was to happen within three years of the date of booking with you. Already four years have elapsed and you have not been able to construct 30% of the project. Therefore, what date of possession will you guarantee us and commit in writing? Here, we are talking about those customers who have booked in 2006 at the basic selling rate of Rs1350/sqft.
4) Late delivery/possession of apartment attracts penalty that Era Landmark is supposed to bear. We would like to know in clear words from you:
A) From which date does this penalty starts to accrue?
B) At what rate will the penalty/penal charge be calculated?
C) Kindly tell us how this rate of penalty has been arrived at. Is this rate prescribed under government/nodal agency guideline or has Era arbitrarily fixed it?
D) Does this rate of penalty confirm with the rate at which Era Landmarks charges its customers for late payment of installment?
E) The late payment of installment charged by you is calculated on the total installment amount due from the date of issuance of the demand letter. Will you then incorporate the total Basic Selling Price of the apartment for calculating the penalty amount owed to the customers?
5) When did Era landmarks get the sanction of its building plan approved? We would like to know:
A) On which date, month and year did you recieve the above said document?
B) From which date, month and year did you start the development work on the site?
C) From which date, month and year did you begin to call for allotment and installments as per construction link plan, thereon?
6) As all money collected prior to the sanctions is illegal, will Era give interest on the money it took in advance?
It is also known that, during this period, Era charged penalty on late payment of installments.
How will Era accommodate that money back to the customers and with what compensation?
7) Customers have till now paid more than sixty percent money of the apartment cost to you in your construction link plan.
A) Ground reality is that not even thirty percent work has taken place in the entire project, as your payment plan does not take into consideration the totality of the project and only leverages your balance sheet with 90% percent payment for just the structural work, we would like to know why this plan was drafted in this loop sided manner. It’s a well-known fact that finishing work(i.e. plumbing fittings, electrical fittings, paint and P.O.P, tiling work, wood work and other finishing work- both internal as well as external) constitute a major part of the total cost of construction. Why then you did not deem appropriate to distribute the cost evenly?
B) Is it not unfair trade practice to charge for, from a customer for more than the actual work done?
C) To highlight the above point, it is our duty to draw your attention to the PLC charged for park and floor (100%). Till date there is neither any park nor the floor of any tower has been completed as per your drawings. Wouldn't this amount to over-charging or charging in advance for work that will be initiated only towards the end of the construction period? Why was this not given prior thought and why is your construction link plan not drafted by taking these facts into account?
D) As this is a very unfair omission on your part, when will Era Landmark correct its mistake and compensate its customers on this account?
8) You must be aware that a lot of customers have taken home-loan to finance their apartments, in the banks contract it is/was clearly stated that within 18/24 months of disbursement of first installment towards Era or possession of apartment, whichever happens earlier, it will be deemed all money has been paid to Era(money applied as loan) and you (the customer) will be liable to pay EMI to the bank ( customer was only paying interest on the amount disbursed by the bank till now, but now he will be liable to pay the part of principal too). Who will bear this financial burden on the customer, which is happening due to your (Era's) non-performance and negligence. Clarify here, what compensation you would be paying to such customers?
9) We have come to know that you have sold and started constructing a new tower by the name of Tower-I , would you share with us the date on which you got permission to make and alter your original plan(naturally with duplicate copies of the same)?
A) Did you inform/ take consent from any existing customer of the change that you were bringing about?
B) How does this alter the total percentage of covered area vis-a-vie the total stipulated/ promised open area of the total project?
C) does bringing in a new block without increasing the acreage of the project size, increase/decrease the total super area to carpet area calculation?
D) if the actual area of the flat has been decreased due to the above calculation, then isn't it your duty to inform all your customers of this change and decrease the cost of the apartments proportionately?
These are some fundamental questions to which we would like straightforward answers from you. We, have already patiently waited for FOUR years to get satisfactory answers. But now we will not comply with your vague, ambiguous and insinuating statements, as these have led us only into trouble.
As customers, it’s our right to have full and rightful knowledge of the status of the project in which we have invested our hard earned life savings. More than anything else, it's your contractual obligation to provide correct and factual information.
Your reluctance/unwillingness to share or answer critical and vital information about the project automatically implies your breach of trust and contractual obligation.
Hence, it goes without saying that we would not be obliged to honour any part/clause of your contract if you, on your part don't confirm by it. Thanks, looking forward to your earliest reply, so that we can take informed decision.
Friday, June 25, 2010
One year !!!
Exactly one year ago on this day we had started a group to create awareness among customers of Era Landmarks " REDWOOD RESIDENCY" project in Neharpar, faridabad, sector78, Haryana.
Since the we have not only grown in strength in terms of the number of people in our group, but have in total met about four hundred people of other projects of the same builder in NCR. Its so sad that all projects of ERa Landmarks are languishing in dust, due to malicious and callous attitude and work ethics of the developer. total families that are suffering today due to shoddy and corrupt practises of Era Landmarks would easily be more then 2000.
Such a large number of people cannot get justice and are running from pillar to post for a simple reason that they are not together and that ,they fear all the money that they have paid the builder will go down the drain, as he being powerful and the one who controls the market with his dominance will further delay(deliberately) the possession of their plot/flat/floor/shops. Also, they fear that if they form a group and try to seek answers from the builder the builder would then might cancel their allotment and refund their money with postdated cheques of 9months or later, by deducting 20% of the total cost. Mainly this fear of further loosing their hard earned money and our countries slow judicial system, helps such unscrupulous builders to so blatantly plunder all rules and regulation.
It is amazing how, Era landmarks has sold four projects almost three years back and has till date not even got the building plans approved. Isn't it illegal to collect 45% or money from customers and start construction without even getting the necessary approvals. The modus operadi is to collect money by illegally starting construction (excavation and raft work) and then after 40 to 50% money is pocketed by Era it stops work and then uses this money that it has illegally generated to make profit by manipulating the market and organizing speculative activity through its broking partners. Hence it multiplies its profits and grows bigger and bigger where as the common man, who is the customer, is caught unknowingly in this vicious circle.
The group was concentrating on first reaching out to people and create awareness about the way Era Landmarks is duping all its customers, which we have been able to successfully achieve. Our next and most important step will be to pressurize Era into fulfilling all its original promises, like the land in the middle should be given to the residents of this project as the CENTRAL GREEN PARK( Era has in the last four years not even bought this piece of land that it showed in its marketing brochure as the Central park)second it has to come clean on from what date it will start giving us the penalty for not completing the project on assured time, third we will not accept its arbitrary Rs 5 persquarefeet penalty, instead we should be given the same 18% penalty that Era charges us when we default in making our installment payment, there should be equality in this matter which is very justified. Third, we want them to assure us that the club as shown in the brochure will be handed over to the residents welfare society, Era has already started construction of a new tower on the land assigned for the club and now there isn't enough land left in the complex to accommodate the original size club.
These are the issues which the group has to get Era to agree on and that will be a humongous task, considering Era's reputation and past record. Our real victory will be to get all that we were promised. With the full co-operation of all members and their total and complete support, we can definitely get the desired results. Thanking everyone who has helped us through our struggle and hope they continue to do so in the future as well.
Thanking all once again!!!!!
Since the we have not only grown in strength in terms of the number of people in our group, but have in total met about four hundred people of other projects of the same builder in NCR. Its so sad that all projects of ERa Landmarks are languishing in dust, due to malicious and callous attitude and work ethics of the developer. total families that are suffering today due to shoddy and corrupt practises of Era Landmarks would easily be more then 2000.
Such a large number of people cannot get justice and are running from pillar to post for a simple reason that they are not together and that ,they fear all the money that they have paid the builder will go down the drain, as he being powerful and the one who controls the market with his dominance will further delay(deliberately) the possession of their plot/flat/floor/shops. Also, they fear that if they form a group and try to seek answers from the builder the builder would then might cancel their allotment and refund their money with postdated cheques of 9months or later, by deducting 20% of the total cost. Mainly this fear of further loosing their hard earned money and our countries slow judicial system, helps such unscrupulous builders to so blatantly plunder all rules and regulation.
It is amazing how, Era landmarks has sold four projects almost three years back and has till date not even got the building plans approved. Isn't it illegal to collect 45% or money from customers and start construction without even getting the necessary approvals. The modus operadi is to collect money by illegally starting construction (excavation and raft work) and then after 40 to 50% money is pocketed by Era it stops work and then uses this money that it has illegally generated to make profit by manipulating the market and organizing speculative activity through its broking partners. Hence it multiplies its profits and grows bigger and bigger where as the common man, who is the customer, is caught unknowingly in this vicious circle.
The group was concentrating on first reaching out to people and create awareness about the way Era Landmarks is duping all its customers, which we have been able to successfully achieve. Our next and most important step will be to pressurize Era into fulfilling all its original promises, like the land in the middle should be given to the residents of this project as the CENTRAL GREEN PARK( Era has in the last four years not even bought this piece of land that it showed in its marketing brochure as the Central park)second it has to come clean on from what date it will start giving us the penalty for not completing the project on assured time, third we will not accept its arbitrary Rs 5 persquarefeet penalty, instead we should be given the same 18% penalty that Era charges us when we default in making our installment payment, there should be equality in this matter which is very justified. Third, we want them to assure us that the club as shown in the brochure will be handed over to the residents welfare society, Era has already started construction of a new tower on the land assigned for the club and now there isn't enough land left in the complex to accommodate the original size club.
These are the issues which the group has to get Era to agree on and that will be a humongous task, considering Era's reputation and past record. Our real victory will be to get all that we were promised. With the full co-operation of all members and their total and complete support, we can definitely get the desired results. Thanking everyone who has helped us through our struggle and hope they continue to do so in the future as well.
Thanking all once again!!!!!
Sunday, June 6, 2010
ERA LANDMARKS-REDWOOD RESIDENCY PROJECT
This is a copy of the article in Economic times(07-06-10)
NEW DELHI: In a bid to check rampant malpractices in the realty sector, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has decided to suo motu inquire if
various developers are misleading the buyers, apart from looking into specific complaints against market leader DLF.
Taking note of, the general complaint of delayed possession, change in terms and conditions of sale agreements and developers making it almost impossible for a customer to opt out, the commission has also decided to look into complaints of misleading advertisements, a source said.
On the basis of complaints from individuals who have booked flats from various developers, the CCI has referred the complaints against DLF to the director general-investigations for a probe, the source said. When contacted, DLF officials said they have not received any notice from the CCI, a market watchdog created to check abuse of market dominance.
“We have not received any letter from the CCI in this regard so far. Therefore, we would not like to comment on this matter without knowing the exact nature of the complaint,” a DLF spokesperson said. According to one such complaint, DLF had promised to complete its residential project in Gurgaon called Blair in 2009 but the buyers are yet to get possession.
Another individual has alleged that for the project Height, DLF had initially announced it as an 18-floor apartment
but later on added 10 more storeys without informing the buyers. These complaints were admitted under section4 of the Competition Act of 2002, which pertains to abuse of dominance by a player in a relevant geography. The CCI on its part is learnt to have “prima facie” found that DLF has abused its dominant market position and the agreement was “one-sided” in nature and there were “variations from the initial stipulations.”
The CCI, sources said, could also look into similar practices by other developers. The Commission, which became fully functional last July, is empowered by an Act of Parliament to penalise the guilty or ban a prevalent malpractice.
The Commission sources said it was more of an industry issue and the buyers in general were facing such problems irrespective of any specific developer. It is, therefore, appropriate to look into the general practice along with specific complaints.
NEW DELHI: In a bid to check rampant malpractices in the realty sector, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has decided to suo motu inquire if
various developers are misleading the buyers, apart from looking into specific complaints against market leader DLF.
Taking note of, the general complaint of delayed possession, change in terms and conditions of sale agreements and developers making it almost impossible for a customer to opt out, the commission has also decided to look into complaints of misleading advertisements, a source said.
On the basis of complaints from individuals who have booked flats from various developers, the CCI has referred the complaints against DLF to the director general-investigations for a probe, the source said. When contacted, DLF officials said they have not received any notice from the CCI, a market watchdog created to check abuse of market dominance.
“We have not received any letter from the CCI in this regard so far. Therefore, we would not like to comment on this matter without knowing the exact nature of the complaint,” a DLF spokesperson said. According to one such complaint, DLF had promised to complete its residential project in Gurgaon called Blair in 2009 but the buyers are yet to get possession.
Another individual has alleged that for the project Height, DLF had initially announced it as an 18-floor apartment
but later on added 10 more storeys without informing the buyers. These complaints were admitted under section4 of the Competition Act of 2002, which pertains to abuse of dominance by a player in a relevant geography. The CCI on its part is learnt to have “prima facie” found that DLF has abused its dominant market position and the agreement was “one-sided” in nature and there were “variations from the initial stipulations.”
The CCI, sources said, could also look into similar practices by other developers. The Commission, which became fully functional last July, is empowered by an Act of Parliament to penalise the guilty or ban a prevalent malpractice.
The Commission sources said it was more of an industry issue and the buyers in general were facing such problems irrespective of any specific developer. It is, therefore, appropriate to look into the general practice along with specific complaints.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Era Landmarks Redwood Residency project
We are a group of people who have come together for the sole purpose of salvaging our hard-earned investment and also to make general public aware of the perils of booking homes with unscrupulous and unprofessional developer Like ERA LANDMARKS.Four years since we booked our apartments with them(approx700 flats) there has been no clarity whatsoever on what Era will finally deliver,1) When will we get our apartments possession?2) What is the status of the central park land- by when will the developer finally get the land from the third party?3) If they had not got the land then at the time of booking why was that piece of land not marked "others land", in the brochure. Isn't it a deliberate attempt to miss-represent the facts and induce end users on materially incorrect and false documents?4) As Era is already late in construction....what will be the penalty that they will pay us?5) How have they calculated the penalty structure?6)Is the developer allowed to arbitrarily decide on the penalty clause or their is statutory guidelines that have to be followed?7) How did Era start construction work and demanded installments from customers when it did not have the building plan approvals for sector-78 from the concerned regulatory authorities?8) As all money collected prior to the sanctions is illegal, will Era give interest on the money it took in advance?These are some of the questions that we want answers on from Era Landmarks.Unfortunately it does not believe in sharing Information with its own clients hence we have been forced to get together and voice our concerns through this platform.This is also a part of my complain to the Honourable President Of India and the Department of Consumer Affairs. Would request all group members to send their complains on the link provided. Thanks.
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Era LAndmarks Irregularity one after the other!!!!
Another blot on Era Landmarks, this time its the Divine Court, low rise independent floors that will face the heat more, as it is that project was being divinely slaughtered by Era's high handed attitude. To Damage its reputation further, it has been brought to light that Era Landmarks even does not have the licence of this project in its name. God knows how they are constructing and selling floors to people without valid documents in their name. There is no clarity in Era's transactions, its a clear case of cheating at a mass level.
But does Era Landmarks stops at that.....NO....it doesn't, without even a proper licence, it sells and starts constructing the floors, that's why it quietly demolishes the park that it had shown in its earlier project brochure and sells 44 new floors. Era Landmarks had earlier admitted that it did not have till date, the necessary BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL......THE QUESTION IS HOW CAN THEY HAVE IT....NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT THEY EVEN DON'T HAVE A LICENCE....what does this all mean for a layman, who is also a consumer of this project...That to have Building plan sanction and approval, they would first have to get a valid licence for the project. If Era Landmarks has not been able to get that till date, then god forbid, they might not get it only, but will keep taking money from you for a totally illegal building, in the guise of the Buyer seller agreement.
Beware poor customer, stop paying up further, as this buyer seller agreement does not hold any legal value, under the above stated facts. No developer can start construction or marketing of apartments unless he takes proper legal and mandatory clearances from nodal agencies.
I would recommend that Divine Court Group, takes legal recourse. Takes a stay on construction activity of Era Landmarks, until it provides sufficient proofs to the court of its legal status and does not give the park back to its consumers.
But does Era Landmarks stops at that.....NO....it doesn't, without even a proper licence, it sells and starts constructing the floors, that's why it quietly demolishes the park that it had shown in its earlier project brochure and sells 44 new floors. Era Landmarks had earlier admitted that it did not have till date, the necessary BUILDING PLAN APPROVAL......THE QUESTION IS HOW CAN THEY HAVE IT....NOW THAT WE KNOW THAT THEY EVEN DON'T HAVE A LICENCE....what does this all mean for a layman, who is also a consumer of this project...That to have Building plan sanction and approval, they would first have to get a valid licence for the project. If Era Landmarks has not been able to get that till date, then god forbid, they might not get it only, but will keep taking money from you for a totally illegal building, in the guise of the Buyer seller agreement.
Beware poor customer, stop paying up further, as this buyer seller agreement does not hold any legal value, under the above stated facts. No developer can start construction or marketing of apartments unless he takes proper legal and mandatory clearances from nodal agencies.
I would recommend that Divine Court Group, takes legal recourse. Takes a stay on construction activity of Era Landmarks, until it provides sufficient proofs to the court of its legal status and does not give the park back to its consumers.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Era Landmarks Palwal quest also a disaster
This is to highlight the plight of The Customers of Era Landmarks, Palwal project that was started under the Name Of Carnation at sector-8. Now even after almost three years the company has only been able to give allotment of plots that were sold in pre-launch. It has been brought to our notice that there are several reasons for them delaying this project too...one of the Major one is that Era still has to get govt clearances. Era has hurriedly given allotment Three or four months back to pacify the investors and to show that Era is working on the project and has not left it in doldrums like its earlier projects in NCR.Reality is that the banks have still not okayed to finance this project. How could they when all statutory clearance and approvals are not in place. Is it not a case of fooling unaware customer, to have alloted them plots without getting the neccassary approvals. Now under the buyer-seller agreement, the customer is caught in a legal trap, illegally.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Helpline links
Here is the link of two very usefull helpline that will surely help us in creating awareness about Era Landmarks defaults on its promises plus will help us in getting justice .... http://helpline.rb.nic.in/GrievanceNew.aspx
Second link is of the Department of Consumers Affairs, after lodging your complaints please save the complaint number , as it will be important , in later getting specific queries on our registered complaints.....
http://www.india.gov.in/outerwin.php?id=http%3A%2F%2Ffcamin.nic.in%2F
Please follow this space so as you can recieve more updates on the groups efforts, also as you must have seen a Facebook badge button on the right hand side of this page, We are on FACEBOOK, pls use that link and become a fan on it, we believe it could give us better reach.
Second link is of the Department of Consumers Affairs, after lodging your complaints please save the complaint number , as it will be important , in later getting specific queries on our registered complaints.....
http://www.india.gov.in/outerwin.php?id=http%3A%2F%2Ffcamin.nic.in%2F
Please follow this space so as you can recieve more updates on the groups efforts, also as you must have seen a Facebook badge button on the right hand side of this page, We are on FACEBOOK, pls use that link and become a fan on it, we believe it could give us better reach.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Sad but true!!!
Its indeed very painful to know that there are folks who have purchased in the same project at an exorbitant rate from ERA Landmarks (INR1900 per sqft) appox 600 more then most who bought at prelaunch, in fact that means appox 6lakhs to 9lakhs more depending on the size of the apartment that they have booked. also as they have booked later with Era their agreement states the date of possession as late 2011.
On all counts this very clearly validates our view point that this project will be delayed by atleast 2 more years. Second it shows all of us the reason for slow work on the site, Era is deliberately going slow so that they can sell off their remaining flats to other ignorant buyers at a higher rate before they actually finish anykind of work, so that no one is able to find out that the park they are so aggressively marketing, is not going to be a part of the project. Once they have sold all available flats they can easily complete the project and wash their hands of any claims on the central park.
It is both cruel and sad, that in todays world and that too in Delhi, they can cheat so many people and yet stay clear from any controversy or damages. Very easily they can change their original claims and people have no recourse available to take Era to task. Seriuosly I don't think Era can get away with this fraud so easily, there are a thousand ways in we all can ensure that Era respects its original plans and gives us all that it promised. Provided we come out and make this a large group, then collectively we can be as big a force as Era is today. WE sure then can dictate Era our terms and it will have to bend, but if we let them do what they are so good in doing(cheating)then we will surely, let them eat our cake and we will also be paying for it. what can be more worse then this.
On all counts this very clearly validates our view point that this project will be delayed by atleast 2 more years. Second it shows all of us the reason for slow work on the site, Era is deliberately going slow so that they can sell off their remaining flats to other ignorant buyers at a higher rate before they actually finish anykind of work, so that no one is able to find out that the park they are so aggressively marketing, is not going to be a part of the project. Once they have sold all available flats they can easily complete the project and wash their hands of any claims on the central park.
It is both cruel and sad, that in todays world and that too in Delhi, they can cheat so many people and yet stay clear from any controversy or damages. Very easily they can change their original claims and people have no recourse available to take Era to task. Seriuosly I don't think Era can get away with this fraud so easily, there are a thousand ways in we all can ensure that Era respects its original plans and gives us all that it promised. Provided we come out and make this a large group, then collectively we can be as big a force as Era is today. WE sure then can dictate Era our terms and it will have to bend, but if we let them do what they are so good in doing(cheating)then we will surely, let them eat our cake and we will also be paying for it. what can be more worse then this.
Friday, May 21, 2010
andhERA down the road
All along through this blog we have been trying to tell every consumer of Era Landmarks of the fraud that has been going on since last four years. They have sold atleast eight projects in NCR (residential) in this time and there isn't a single one that is free from legal land issues, delayed construction, arbitrary clauses, restrictive and unethical trade practices.
Era landmarks is fortunate, that in India, there is no regulator for REAL ESTATE. Hence Era feels free to multiply its profit by pre-launching new project with false claims and promises to unaware and ignorant public. Then the company, utilizes this money to dupe with new schemes else where or to utter astonishment at the same site. Everytime the guy who is robbed is the common man, where as Era peacefully pockets a cool profit to keep its books bloated.
In this fashion Era has continued to grow, with no project yet near completion, the poor customers have been made to suffer , with no place to turn for justice. This capricious high handed attitude of Era has led us to believe that there is no difference between Era and other fraudsters like Triveni infrastructure, Pal Group, zion infrastructure and Nitishree developers. who have similarly sold thousands of apartments in and around NCR, and duped common people of their dream home and vanished in thin air.
To savegaurd our future and the dream home, we have but no choice then to come together and pressurize Era to fulfill its commitements. It is a proven fact that united we stand and divided we fall. Every single customer of REDWOOD RESIDENCY is welcome to join this group, so that collectively we can raise our concerns and get our promised dream home.
Era landmarks is fortunate, that in India, there is no regulator for REAL ESTATE. Hence Era feels free to multiply its profit by pre-launching new project with false claims and promises to unaware and ignorant public. Then the company, utilizes this money to dupe with new schemes else where or to utter astonishment at the same site. Everytime the guy who is robbed is the common man, where as Era peacefully pockets a cool profit to keep its books bloated.
In this fashion Era has continued to grow, with no project yet near completion, the poor customers have been made to suffer , with no place to turn for justice. This capricious high handed attitude of Era has led us to believe that there is no difference between Era and other fraudsters like Triveni infrastructure, Pal Group, zion infrastructure and Nitishree developers. who have similarly sold thousands of apartments in and around NCR, and duped common people of their dream home and vanished in thin air.
To savegaurd our future and the dream home, we have but no choice then to come together and pressurize Era to fulfill its commitements. It is a proven fact that united we stand and divided we fall. Every single customer of REDWOOD RESIDENCY is welcome to join this group, so that collectively we can raise our concerns and get our promised dream home.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Era in double trouble
Era is slowly and gradually getting into more trouble, its mask of a reputed builder is getting tarnished beyond repair, by its own undoing. There had to come a time when their lies had to come out in the open, so it has happened. It would now be really impossible for the company to face its ugly face and sell any other project in NCR. Era sold its projects in Meerut (plots and villas,possession still a far away dream even after five years), Palwal (plots , more then three years ago, possession time could be anyones guess), Redwood residency in Faridabad( flats sold four years back, possession--toss a coin, and hope it never lands to find out which side is up), Palwal ( flats on the high way sold again three years ago...same fate), Faridabad sector-76( don't know what happened to the plight of customers of luxury apartments, called Haywood) Budget Homes or Divine court in Faridabad again sector-76( about 800 independent floors sold, with malicious marketing and promise of delivery in two flat years, almost a year has gone by and the customers of this project are already thinking of gong to the courts), Gurgaon, a very brilliant plan of a high rise complex of aprox 40 acres, lying in dust with some sixty customers stuck for the last two years. Am hearing that they are going to scrape and sell divine court like independent flats, now.
The caricature is already drawn, the clown that started singing thinking people will always remain fools, will finally see its own end was being scripted all this while. Naturally with a heavy and an appropriate penalty.
The caricature is already drawn, the clown that started singing thinking people will always remain fools, will finally see its own end was being scripted all this while. Naturally with a heavy and an appropriate penalty.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
