Members!!!!

I have been looking to invest in a 2-3 Bhk since a couple of months now and more or less zero-ing on ireo sector 67a project ( although uptown, palm studio and victory valley are still on my radar) ... I request all knowledgable members ( especially the seniors and brokers in disguise of members) to comment upon the pros and cons of the project.

Also, I'd request other members planning to go for the project to get in touch with me, so that, we can look for a deal as a group rather than as multiple single parties .

As a start to the thread, let me list out a few pros and cons.

PROS

- New launch. Very little upfront payment.
- Specifications, better than basic, which are becoming a hallmark of ireo.
- location ( as per first information) looks to be good. Behind sector 67 or say
behind victory valley and PVSN
- other projects of the builder getting handsome appreciation and excellent
speed of all projects as of now ( cash crunch doesn't seem to be affecting the
So called FDI funded , politically funded as per grapevine, builder at all.

CONS

- yet undemarcated sector. Not in master plan 2021.
- builder, although very promising, hasn't delivered anything as yet
- specifications will be more along the lines of uptown ( which is available in
resale at 4800-4900 levels and has better location) and not very luxurious
Like grand arch,victory valley or skyon.
- although pricing is very speculative as of now but if it ends up 5k or more
Will be a disappointment ( like unitech south park).


I hope to hear from the other guys soon ....
;)





MODERATOR's NOTE - This thread was started about 18 months back, when this project was rumored to be getting launched . Due to delay in the launch this thread went into hibernation for some time and it is now alive . Newbies/First time users, please note & do not get misguided by the last year's launch price that stands mentioned . A duplicate thread { which stands closed now } has some updated information . Refer http://www.indianrealestateforum.com...7-a-46911.html .
Read more
Reply
1985 Replies
Sort by :Filter by :
  • guys i think we need to seek legal advice on this.. Developer cannot make us sign an one sided agreement.. its a sort of blackmail i.e either we sign the agreement or he will cancel our unit and forfeit earnest money!!!! this is Absurd!!! if i don't agree with some conditions in the agreement then i will not sign it.. i have every right to get it amended or withdraw if it is not amended. i am no legal expert but its simple common sense.

    By definition its a BBA (builder buyer agreement) if any of the two parties don't agree then it cannot be enforced....
    CommentQuote
  • Have sent you message to include me and will appeal all to join in as well if you think it is basic to at least question and ask on such one side and unilateral clauses which we have been asked to sign.

    I have signed the BBA yey



    Originally Posted by AKUSER
    TO YOU AND OTHER BUYERS HERE.
    ---------------------------------

    Join us ...the group has 9 people in 7 days and is growing everyday.
    Lot of us agree with your points. BUT KEEPING SILENT WILL NOT HELP ESPECIALLY WHEN WE ARE ALREADY COMING TOGETHER TO TALK TO THEM AND EVEN FILE LEGAL CASE. CAPS ARE FOR ATTENTION ONLY.OTHER CASES WERE WON TOO BASED ON BUYERS ACTIVISM.

    Here are some of the suggestions for reducing the cost.

    Get rid of escalation clause clause 3.4.I HAVE EXPLAINED THE IMPACT EARLIER IN MY POST.

    CLAUSE 10.1 SUPER AREA CAN CHANGE BY +/- 10 % ....15 TO 20 LACS.
    CLAUSE 10.3 PLC CAN ALSO CHANGE...IMAGINE CHANGE OF 10 % OR 15 TO 20 LACS.
    CLUB CHARGES WERE NOT KNOWN TO BE MANDATORY AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION.

    WE NEED TO ASK THEM what makes their project expensive than others.
    How did they charge parking and that too at such rates when it was not known at the time of application.


    IF WE HAVE NUMBERS WE CAN HAVE DISCUSSIONS ACROSS THE TABLE.

    HOW ABOUT COMING UP WITH POINTS TO GIVE THEM WAYS TO GIVE REFUND TO THOSE INTERESTED IN THAT OPTION AND REDUCE COST FOR THOSE BUYERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN RETAINING THE UNIT.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    KEEP CLUB MEMBERSHIP , SWIMMING POOL MEMBERSHIP, YOGA, FEE FOR THOSE WHO WANT IT.

    REDUCE CHARGES ON AMENITIES LIKE CLUB, PARKING, BASKET BALL, SWIMMING POOL, ETC
    DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ARE 327 PER SQFT ...5 / 6.3/ 8 LACS DEPENDING ON SIZE. ONCE WE ASK FOR LESS EXPENSES ON SUCH AMENITIES , THESE DEVELOPMENT CHARGES ALSO COME DOWN.BY THE WAY THE DEV. CHARGES ARE 1800 X 6 LACS (ASSUMED 6 LACS) FOR THIS PROJECT.108 CRORES. THATS A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT AND WE NEED TO DECIDE WHETHER WE NEED SO MUCH DEVELOPMENT OR BETTER PRICE.JUST TAKE A LOOK AT THE CHARGES IN NOIDA FOR 'LUXURY' BUT HIGH DENSITY PROJECTS.


    ADD A TOWER/ANYWAYS THEY CAN CHANGE PLANS/LAYOUTS/FLOOR PLANS AS PER BBA.
    Go for open parking...there are other ways. Tree lined and numbered pathways around the apartments an option?


    IN A NUT SHELL FELLOW BUYERS...ASK FOR YOUR ENTITLEMENT....THINGS DONT END ONCE THE BBA IS SIGNED.IN THE COURT OF LAW IT IS THE ONE SIDED BBA THAT MATTERS AND WILL GO AGAINST THE DEVELOPER.

    PLS DONT IGNORE ....PLS QUESTION AND ADD YOUR INPUTS /IDEAS BUT DON'T IGNORE.

    Thanks.
    CommentQuote
  • Im not a buyer of this project.

    -I was only pointing out that EDC (External Development Charges) of Rs 327/sqft is the current standard rate charged by almost all builders for all Gurgaon projects.
    -Same for IDC (Infrastructure Development Charges), which is around Rs 50/sqft, again charged by HUDA and similar for all Gurgaon projects.
    -Both IDC and EDC is paid by builder to HUDA.
    -The third charge is RFMS (Replacement Fund cum Maintenance Security), around Rs 100/sqft, thats like a sinking fund for future maintenance. Its charged by the builder but its similar for all projects.

    So instead of bringing up these points which are mandated by the govt hence difficult to change, divert the focus on reducing BSP or PLC or Parking(which is anyway illegal to charge for if being done separately) or removing the escalation clause.

    Originally Posted by AKUSER
    Hi,

    Would you know the EDC/ ext dev charges as per HUDA. Are you fine with the BBA , pricing and business ethics used?

    I am talking of development charges which includes, as per bba, the external dev charges , internal dev charges and one more charge. My basis /assumption which is not confirmed yet is that the development of road, power substations, amenities like swimming pool , club house parking, schools, yoga, football and cricket fields will have bearing on super area and dev charges. So if we ask for a scale down or removal of some of the amenities then the corresponding charges should be re looked at. We are trying to figure out how to get to the goals.

    We believe that the project is over priced than its comparable ones and actually a high density project.The number of apartments are quite for it to be luxury project.

    best..
    CommentQuote
  • Unethical, one sided and arbitrary clauses in IREO BBA...

    Originally Posted by sh-saxena
    Just a point, On the Development charges, do you mean EDC ? It cant be reduced as its mandated by HUDA and is charged same amount for all projects. Its not for development inside the project but 'External Development Charges' charged by HUDA.


    Hi
    Greetings

    An audit by DTCP of EDC charged by builders for same year of license in Faridabad was conducted. No two builders were charging the same EDC.

    The mandated EDC is definitely same for a given license year but builders appropriate based on their own whims and fancies. Not that IREO has done it but many builders include
    - finance charges,
    - Bank guarantee charges,
    - Interest on Huda payment schedule opted for by the builder, irrespective of demands from buyers in advance of actual EDC payment by builder, without any benefit
    - Charge 18% delayed payment interest while HUDA charges 12 % in case of reputed builders for delayed payment against agreed schedule.

    However, this though unfair, is still a small cost for buyer(Rs20-100 sqft).

    Larger issues raised by AKUSER http://www.indianrealestateforum.com/1159704-post1792.html which can increase cost between a Rs200-1000 psf are
    - Escalation Charges, already adjudicated as one sided and unethical by CCI in DLFvs Bellaire case
    - Super area increase beyond +/-2%, beyond which it is already adjudcated as one sided and unethical by CCI in dlf vs bellaire case
    - Change in Building Plan, Layout etc require buyer approval as per DTCP notification
    - Community amenities and facilities under the act are mandatory, beyond which they cannot be forced, even if agree in the BBA
    - Change if made in PLC is totally unethical.

    I would suggest buyers to share the complete BBA for a brief look.. some aspects are really new..

    Access to above document links in bold above are shared on request

    Cheers
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by BlessU
    Hi
    Greetings

    An audit by DTCP of EDC charged by builders for same year of license in Faridabad was conducted. No two builders were charging the same EDC.

    The mandated EDC is definitely same for a given license year but builders appropriate based on their own whims and fancies. Not that IREO has done it but many builders include
    - finance charges,
    - Bank guarantee charges,
    - Interest on Huda payment schedule opted for by the builder, irrespective of demands from buyers in advance of actual EDC payment by builder, without any benefit
    - Charge 18% delayed payment interest while HUDA charges 12 % in case of reputed builders for delayed payment against agreed schedule.

    However, this though unfair, is still a small cost for buyer(Rs20-100 sqft).

    Larger issues raised by AKUSER http://www.indianrealestateforum.com/1159704-post1792.html which can increase cost between a Rs200-1000 psf are
    - Escalation Charges, already adjudicated as one sided and unethical by CCI in DLFvs Bellaire case
    - Super area increase beyond +/-2%, beyond which it is already adjudcated as one sided and unethical by CCI in dlf vs bellaire case
    - Change in Building Plan, Layout etc require buyer approval as per DTCP notification
    - Community amenities and facilities under the act are mandatory, beyond which they cannot be forced, even if agree in the BBA
    - Change if made in PLC is totally unethical.

    I would suggest buyers to share the complete BBA for a brief look.. some aspects are really new..

    Access to above document links in bold above are shared on request

    Cheers


    well said BlessU, but the 21 page application for this project was a sort of mini agreement and contained all these absurd clauses, which we all of us have already signed. BBA is just a reinforcement for all these things. IREO i guess anticipated this scenario so they cleverly made us sign on these at the time of application itself..

    I am not sure if these conditions are legally negotiable as we have already signed application .. but we can always form a pressure group to get these corrected...
    CommentQuote
  • What was the agreement you signed called ?
    Was it on Stamp Paper ?
    Pre-launch itself is not legal, so you can try contesting it incase want to cancel the booking.

    Originally Posted by kams..
    well said BlessU, but the 21 page application for this project was a sort of mini agreement and contained all these absurd clauses, which we all of us have already signed. BBA is just a reinforcement for all these things. IREO i guess anticipated this scenario so they cleverly made us sign on these at the time of application itself..

    I am not sure if these conditions are legally negotiable as we have already signed application .. but we can always form a pressure group to get these corrected...
    CommentQuote
  • Originally Posted by kams..
    well said BlessU, but the 21 page application for this project was a sort of mini agreement and contained all these absurd clauses, which we all of us have already signed. BBA is just a reinforcement for all these things. IREO i guess anticipated this scenario so they cleverly made us sign on these at the time of application itself..

    I am not sure if these conditions are legally negotiable as we have already signed application .. but we can always form a pressure group to get these corrected...


    Hi
    Greetings

    on the apprehension
    I am not sure if these conditions are legally negotiable as we have already signed application ..

    Bellaire guys got escalation, super area, parking etc proved illegal through CCI ( a constitutional civil court) on the basis of facts, AFTER signing, possession and registry.

    Farmers in manesar got PHHC order for compensation at current circle rate from builders YEARS AFTER builders acquired land, while section 4, 6 notification by HSIIDC were in force. AFTER they signed legally binding conveyance deeds, duly mutated in favour of builders with stamp duty paid to government registration authorities as solemn party in proof and having satisfyingly received agreed compensation from builders!!!

    Guess all depends on mindset and right legal aspects. Signing a document is viewed accordingly in the eyes of law. Negotiation may not even be the right word.

    Cheers
    CommentQuote
  • 'A Replacement cum sinking fund for the future maintenance for the project' - thats how RFMS was defined to me a couple years back by IREO when I first asked about it. I think its mandated by the Govt to maintain such a fund though Ive seen the amount varying from Rs 50 to Rs 100 with different builders.

    My point is that its somewhat futile to focus on these 3 charges (EDC,IDC,RFMS) as IREO will simply throw up their hands saying its mandated by HUDA and they cant do anything.
    So better to focus on things which are totally in IREO's hand like BSP, Parking, PLC, escalation clause.

    Cutpasting the details for RFMS from IREO site for Victory Valley : maintenance security along with a sinking fund to be used in due course for the replacement of capital equipment installed in IREO-Victory Valley. The initial corpus of such RFMS shall be contributed by the Applicant Rs. 100/- (Rupees One Hundred only) per sq. ft. of the Super Area of the said Apartment to be paid in accordance with the Payment Plan.


    Originally Posted by AKUSER
    Appreciate your inputs.
    Why do you call it sinking fund?

    Thank you.

    ****
    FELLOW BUYERS - 1.5 lacs plus 40 % for interest in 4 odd years = 2.1 lacs per apartment = 3600 lacs. Why should we pay 36 odd crores to a sinking fund...assuming there is a better way.

    I will find out about dev. charges and that = 1800 x 6.3(327 rs per sqft x 1920 sqft) = 11340 lacs (average taken for 3+s, actual will be lesser by some percentage points).

    ****
    CommentQuote
  • Pricing for amenities and Club etc is same for all owners, one cant really pick and choose.

    Dont want to dishearten you but it will take years of sustained battle for a builder to reduce the pricing for such a massive project. If you are ready for that, all the best to you.
    Else, if a set of users create enough noise and threaten media & legal exposure, IREO may just quietly refund them without forfeiting anything, have heard of builders doing that in rare cases.

    Originally Posted by AKUSER
    Also , what are your suggestions to bring down the bsp. Please add to the points I mentioned about reducing bsp , no parking charges (open parking), no club charges and also reducing plc . Please see my post on this earlier. Rather amenities keeping club, membership, swimming, yoga centre, school primary and high school etc etc only for those who would like to avail that.

    I have some ideas but checking how effective and possible they are.

    thanks.
    CommentQuote
  • Great going guys and thanx for efforts and in puts. Would urge all to join in. Do bear in mind this is all about apposing malpractices and highly wrong practices mad provisions which have been kept and detrimental to allotees
    CommentQuote
  • Download this app called Cam scanner on your fone and it will act as a scanner for the interim
    CommentQuote
  • Hi I would suggest the following steps which will result into some concrete benefit for you all.

    1. Might is right, get the numbers and you will have won half the battle. some of the ways of getting it is using social media forum like iref. You shud make it easy for users to become members. so create a FB group or google group if not done already. If you have good relations in broker community then some of them invariably have the list of email of all major projects. If you are lucky you wud have got a email with from some less knowledgable broker not knowing the difference between cc and bcc.

    2. Once you have a quorum, say 7 members form a association and register it under societies act. ask members to pay a nominal amount of Rs 2k to 5k , depending on number of people.

    3. Hire a good lawyer and ask him to work out different ways to address the agreement . collect all evidences and create a record and ask other members to do so. Get all responses on email atleast.

    4. Try your best to negotiate with senior executives of Ireo, go beyond CRM team. As part of negotiation talk to media to highlight your genuine concerns and articulate it well. I have a strong belief in the power of negotiation and accommodation and I am sure one can attempt to reason with Ireo.

    5. If all fails you always have the legal option, but that should not be a starting point.

    This is my POV, and hope some of it will be helpful. Maximum time will take in the first 2 steps where you have to motivate people to do something other than their daily jobs. I am amazed that people have so much time to complain/ advice when they face some problems with the builder, but when it comes to taking action on those complaints / advices you will find it very difficult to motivate people to do something, standard response is I am so busy. Luckily in the project people have lot to loose if they do not act and hope that will spur them.

    If one has invested crores of rupees with the builders and they take you for a ride then one needs to take out some time to protect your investment.

    It is wonderfull to see some of you taking the initiative to get justice for yourself, and with so many well meaning individuals to offer suggestions, hope things will work out. wish you all the best.
    CommentQuote
  • In 2012 or maybe earlier, Haryana Govt had banned pre-launch but builders still kept on doing it.

    If you google can find many articles on net and on this forum itself.
    From this forum :
    https://www.indianrealestateforum.com/forum/city-forums/ncr-real-estate/gurgaon-real-estate/14058-are-pre-launches-legal-in-haryana/page2?t=16354&page=2


    Originally Posted by AKUSER
    Hi sh-saxena, Would you please throw some light on the last line about pre-launch being illegal and cancellation.
    thanks.
    CommentQuote
  • Akuser, thank you for drawing our attention to this ridiculous BBA.

    I too have read it in details now and agree it's the most one-sided Agmt. In fact, on page 4 itself, the tone is set with IREO stating that any changes, alterations, modifications etc., to the BBA will allow them to cancel the allotment. In essence, this means that the buyers (allottees) need to blindly accept the entire Agmt and by that logic all the clauses on :-

    1. PLC becoming applicable to a Non-PLC purchase
    2. 60 month terms for delivery (42+6+12)
    3. Escalation
    4. Transfer only at the sole discretion of IREO
    5. Change of size at their discretion (addl. cost to the allottee)
    6. Limited ability of allottee to withdraw (heavily skewed in favor of IREO)
    Etc., etc.,

    As suggested, we should form a Group and ask IREO to either correct all the issues or allow the investors to withdraw.

    This needs urgent attention.
    CommentQuote
  • Do fellow member agree with this. Do not turn a blind eye the Real estate equation have changed and for sure few of these will materialize in some form or other

    Originally Posted by sabans05
    Akuser, thank you for drawing our attention to this ridiculous BBA.

    I too have read it in details now and agree it's the most one-sided Agmt. In fact, on page 4 itself, the tone is set with IREO stating that any changes, alterations, modifications etc., to the BBA will allow them to cancel the allotment. In essence, this means that the buyers (allottees) need to blindly accept the entire Agmt and by that logic all the clauses on :-

    1. PLC becoming applicable to a Non-PLC purchase
    2. 60 month terms for delivery (42+6+12)
    3. Escalation
    4. Transfer only at the sole discretion of IREO
    5. Change of size at their discretion (addl. cost to the allottee)
    6. Limited ability of allottee to withdraw (heavily skewed in favor of IREO)
    Etc., etc.,

    As suggested, we should form a Group and ask IREO to either correct all the issues or allow the investors to withdraw.

    This needs urgent attention.
    CommentQuote