Comments
house without roof that is what you mean to say ?
never heard of that ?
terrace is never sold and it cannot be counted in built up area under any definition of building rulings
Lets not get into hypothetical situations right now
rohit
never heard of that ?
terrace is never sold and it cannot be counted in built up area under any definition of building rulings
Lets not get into hypothetical situations right now
rohit
Dear Rohit,
You always advocates each and every act of BPTP which is harmful for the buyer. You please read the addendum agreement and try to figure out the implication of it. I am taking the example for 180 yard floor wherein it is said that basic sale price is calculated @ per sq. feet for super built up area of 876 sq. feet and you will be asked to pay if built up area exceeds 876 sq. feet. Now these people (BPTP) is saying "let us clear the definiation of Super built up area". As per addendum agreement varandha of ground floor, service area of terrace alongwith some other things. It means at the time of completion BPTP will show these into super built up which will far more then 876 sq. feet in case of 180 yard floor and you will end up paying much more then what is originally agreed by you. What is your opinion?
Manoj
You always advocates each and every act of BPTP which is harmful for the buyer. You please read the addendum agreement and try to figure out the implication of it. I am taking the example for 180 yard floor wherein it is said that basic sale price is calculated @ per sq. feet for super built up area of 876 sq. feet and you will be asked to pay if built up area exceeds 876 sq. feet. Now these people (BPTP) is saying "let us clear the definiation of Super built up area". As per addendum agreement varandha of ground floor, service area of terrace alongwith some other things. It means at the time of completion BPTP will show these into super built up which will far more then 876 sq. feet in case of 180 yard floor and you will end up paying much more then what is originally agreed by you. What is your opinion?
Manoj
hi All...Wat is this???? Bptp is really cheap.Rohit..Where are you?????? plz solve the problem
I think Rohit You will incur huge lose if the floor cost rise by half...we all need to do something we are more than five thousand ...dont sign the Addendum
Hi All,
I would say wait and watch don't try to read other's mind, don't try to put words in other's mouth, don't try to put idea's in other's mind.
Roof of any building has always been a common property of the owners of the building, Indian judicial system is slow but not dead, it does adheres to natural justice, if any developer does try to sell the roof it would like selling the road, the swear line, the park etc etc.
Have you really calculated the built up area of 180 sq yd from the plan ? it comes to 8xx sq ft - roof CANNOT be added in builtup area as it would like charging for the same stuff twice - the basic principle of indian law is that one cannot be punished twice for the same crime, likewise same thing cannot be sold twice, selling of roof means charging twice for the same area already sold, however there lies a possibility that developer may charge a small amount for common area only by adding some facility to it but I believe it would be less than 5% of the price
Please don't jump the gun as of now no reason to panic
I would say wait and watch don't try to read other's mind, don't try to put words in other's mouth, don't try to put idea's in other's mind.
Roof of any building has always been a common property of the owners of the building, Indian judicial system is slow but not dead, it does adheres to natural justice, if any developer does try to sell the roof it would like selling the road, the swear line, the park etc etc.
Have you really calculated the built up area of 180 sq yd from the plan ? it comes to 8xx sq ft - roof CANNOT be added in builtup area as it would like charging for the same stuff twice - the basic principle of indian law is that one cannot be punished twice for the same crime, likewise same thing cannot be sold twice, selling of roof means charging twice for the same area already sold, however there lies a possibility that developer may charge a small amount for common area only by adding some facility to it but I believe it would be less than 5% of the price
Please don't jump the gun as of now no reason to panic
Dear All,
After reading the comments from Vishal, I also consulted one of the leading real estate consulting company.
What they suggested is as below:
1)For ground floor owner they(BPTP) have already charged PLC.So they can not again charge there to develop that.
2)Also as per the the booking and buyer/seller agreement it is clearly mentioned it would be on total usable area which is as per plan they have attached.
3)If they digress from same there is always legal angle we can pursue againt builder.
4)As far as possession is considered it is always considered from the time of booking, in never the case it is from buyer/seller agreement, if that have been the clause BPTP should have started collecting payments from agreement signed date only, hence if they digress there again we have legal angle.
Hence lets unite and we can meet at BPTP office, there is management sitting there in there Corporate office, we can directly address our case there, and subsequently we can take further course of action.
Rohit, a humble suggestion for you, don't always try to put the matter under the carpet, if the things gets delayed and prolonged we service class people would be only sufferer, you are invester and must have already made your share!!!
Nitin Goel
After reading the comments from Vishal, I also consulted one of the leading real estate consulting company.
What they suggested is as below:
1)For ground floor owner they(BPTP) have already charged PLC.So they can not again charge there to develop that.
2)Also as per the the booking and buyer/seller agreement it is clearly mentioned it would be on total usable area which is as per plan they have attached.
3)If they digress from same there is always legal angle we can pursue againt builder.
4)As far as possession is considered it is always considered from the time of booking, in never the case it is from buyer/seller agreement, if that have been the clause BPTP should have started collecting payments from agreement signed date only, hence if they digress there again we have legal angle.
Hence lets unite and we can meet at BPTP office, there is management sitting there in there Corporate office, we can directly address our case there, and subsequently we can take further course of action.
Rohit, a humble suggestion for you, don't always try to put the matter under the carpet, if the things gets delayed and prolonged we service class people would be only sufferer, you are invester and must have already made your share!!!
Nitin Goel
Hi Nitin,
I am not brushing things under the carpet, we are still atleast 1 year away from the possession time by most of the yard sticks.
What I am trying to say is - do not assume anything, let things pan out in reality then take action otherwise things may get complicated and project may get stalled for a long time. This would lead to a very bad situation for most o[censored]s including you I believe.
There have been enough evidence of projects getting stalled because o[censored]nnecessary joint actions - I am refraining to take names but most of the projects have been of big builders.
Once again do not try to make issues out of thin air, wait till actual situation arises, if that arises at all.
Rohit
I am not brushing things under the carpet, we are still atleast 1 year away from the possession time by most of the yard sticks.
What I am trying to say is - do not assume anything, let things pan out in reality then take action otherwise things may get complicated and project may get stalled for a long time. This would lead to a very bad situation for most o[censored]s including you I believe.
There have been enough evidence of projects getting stalled because o[censored]nnecessary joint actions - I am refraining to take names but most of the projects have been of big builders.
Once again do not try to make issues out of thin air, wait till actual situation arises, if that arises at all.
Rohit
Dear All,
After reading the comments, I can only say that I am definitely not in favour of taking any drastic steps at this moment, but neither am I in favor of signing this Addendum.
Each person in this Forum has a right to put his / her thoughts forward.
There are 2 ways of responding to this development: -
1. We can be highly optimistic by closing our eyes like a pegion & wait for the actual situation to emerge.
OR
2. Let not this situation emerge at all.
One question for ALL: -
What are the possible reasons for ellaborating the definition of Super Built Up Area through this Addendum when it is already metioned in the Flat Buyer Agreement ?
The only change i could see is the inclusion of Verandah & Terrace within the definition. This is a very well planned act.
My purpose of writting the comment above was only to inform All the members about possible outcome of this Addendum within the meaning of the Legal terminology. I have nowhere mentioned that this is definitely going to happen, but surely it will empower BPTP to act in the mentioned manner. This will mean that you are empowering them to make a decision on your Property without keeping any check.
We All surely have a right to Boycott this Addendum as we have already signed the Flat Buyer Agreement & any changes to be brought have to be consulted & agreed upon before signing.
Rest I believe that we have many scholars here who could enlighten this subject further.
For any meeting to be scheduled with the Reprentatives of BPTP, I am available on a day's notice.
Thanks,
Vishal
After reading the comments, I can only say that I am definitely not in favour of taking any drastic steps at this moment, but neither am I in favor of signing this Addendum.
Each person in this Forum has a right to put his / her thoughts forward.
There are 2 ways of responding to this development: -
1. We can be highly optimistic by closing our eyes like a pegion & wait for the actual situation to emerge.
OR
2. Let not this situation emerge at all.
One question for ALL: -
What are the possible reasons for ellaborating the definition of Super Built Up Area through this Addendum when it is already metioned in the Flat Buyer Agreement ?
The only change i could see is the inclusion of Verandah & Terrace within the definition. This is a very well planned act.
My purpose of writting the comment above was only to inform All the members about possible outcome of this Addendum within the meaning of the Legal terminology. I have nowhere mentioned that this is definitely going to happen, but surely it will empower BPTP to act in the mentioned manner. This will mean that you are empowering them to make a decision on your Property without keeping any check.
We All surely have a right to Boycott this Addendum as we have already signed the Flat Buyer Agreement & any changes to be brought have to be consulted & agreed upon before signing.
Rest I believe that we have many scholars here who could enlighten this subject further.
For any meeting to be scheduled with the Reprentatives of BPTP, I am available on a day's notice.
Thanks,
Vishal
Hi Vishal,
Everyone wants to make best of the situation, may june 09 was the bottom of the markets, be it stock market or real estate, we are fortunate lot to get things at the bottom.
Now possibility of BPTP could be trying to extract something "extra" since the sentiments and prices have improved cannot be ruled out.
No need to sign anything extra which is not in original offering.
For any big action please wait till the situation arises, just keep yourself informed, to me as of now everything is moving smoothly and may be the judgement of SC about car parking is the reason for separating everything.
Thanks
Rohit
Everyone wants to make best of the situation, may june 09 was the bottom of the markets, be it stock market or real estate, we are fortunate lot to get things at the bottom.
Now possibility of BPTP could be trying to extract something "extra" since the sentiments and prices have improved cannot be ruled out.
No need to sign anything extra which is not in original offering.
For any big action please wait till the situation arises, just keep yourself informed, to me as of now everything is moving smoothly and may be the judgement of SC about car parking is the reason for separating everything.
Thanks
Rohit
Hi Rohit & Other members .
I have alloted 300 sq yard GF, did builder buyer agreement in march 2010. At the time of signing buyer aggrement, i found that the costof flat has been calculated @ of super builtup area ie, 1418. it goes like ...bsp divided by the superbuiltup area equal to the rate persqfeet . Meas 2560000/1418 comes out around 1805 rupes per sq feet... Also in agreement it is mentioned that any increase in superbuiltarea would be payable at the time of possession @2450 sq feet... As we all know that in the Brousher the toalusable area was 2149( approx roughly remember), but in buyer they nowhere they mentioned that the area for Lawn/ Terrace is there with every floor.Now in Future, if BPTP says that the Lawn area/ Terrace area has been added as a super built area because its only brouser says the exact offering but unfortunately nowhere in the buyer agreement mentioned these areas( Lawn/Terrace), than they can charge between 10- 15 lacs ( Maximum) depending on the size of floors. In that case my unit would cost 625*[protected] roughly 15 lac).this may happen with us as land has got appreciation and would appreciate further . thus BPTP would not mind to share profit from us in that way as we will also be in profit .ofcourse we are presently..
we have eg in past prince park, grandura, resort where people regret investing bptp
. the only mistake they did that they signed the agreement with time link not const link n paid 90 %amount with no appreciation( ofcoure because of infrast..), no possession as because no pressure on builder time linked plan not const linked... Now its time for Park ellite floor customers ... as we all signed the agreement, nowhere mentioned our Lawn/Terrace areas... So when it will come to possession time, company will ask lumpsump from the customers or may be in every instalment as they are making ground for those things by getting this Addendum sign. i we donot sign this Addendum than they will not offer the possession or might move our units from good sector to remote sector, may change from gf to sf as we agreed all terms n condition in buyer agreement. I am thining the worst case scinerao.. ... this all personally feel dont to wat extent i m rite but my intusions hardly goes wrong.. i want this time to be wrong... please share ur views esp.. Rohit, Manoj, Vishal and other active members .
Thanks
Gaurav
I have alloted 300 sq yard GF, did builder buyer agreement in march 2010. At the time of signing buyer aggrement, i found that the costof flat has been calculated @ of super builtup area ie, 1418. it goes like ...bsp divided by the superbuiltup area equal to the rate persqfeet . Meas 2560000/1418 comes out around 1805 rupes per sq feet... Also in agreement it is mentioned that any increase in superbuiltarea would be payable at the time of possession @2450 sq feet... As we all know that in the Brousher the toalusable area was 2149( approx roughly remember), but in buyer they nowhere they mentioned that the area for Lawn/ Terrace is there with every floor.Now in Future, if BPTP says that the Lawn area/ Terrace area has been added as a super built area because its only brouser says the exact offering but unfortunately nowhere in the buyer agreement mentioned these areas( Lawn/Terrace), than they can charge between 10- 15 lacs ( Maximum) depending on the size of floors. In that case my unit would cost 625*[protected] roughly 15 lac).this may happen with us as land has got appreciation and would appreciate further . thus BPTP would not mind to share profit from us in that way as we will also be in profit .ofcourse we are presently..
we have eg in past prince park, grandura, resort where people regret investing bptp
. the only mistake they did that they signed the agreement with time link not const link n paid 90 %amount with no appreciation( ofcoure because of infrast..), no possession as because no pressure on builder time linked plan not const linked... Now its time for Park ellite floor customers ... as we all signed the agreement, nowhere mentioned our Lawn/Terrace areas... So when it will come to possession time, company will ask lumpsump from the customers or may be in every instalment as they are making ground for those things by getting this Addendum sign. i we donot sign this Addendum than they will not offer the possession or might move our units from good sector to remote sector, may change from gf to sf as we agreed all terms n condition in buyer agreement. I am thining the worst case scinerao.. ... this all personally feel dont to wat extent i m rite but my intusions hardly goes wrong.. i want this time to be wrong... please share ur views esp.. Rohit, Manoj, Vishal and other active members .
Thanks
Gaurav
Hi Gaurav,
I would still maintain, don't draw conclusions, misselling is being taken seriously by the govt now and if any industry tries to go for it will face the music.
I would advice maintain calm but keep yourself informed.
Rohit
I would still maintain, don't draw conclusions, misselling is being taken seriously by the govt now and if any industry tries to go for it will face the music.
I would advice maintain calm but keep yourself informed.
Rohit
Hi All,
I do not agree with what the peoples saying that govt will take care of any wrong doing by any person. You can see daily in news papers how well the govt is functioning. Further every one knows that one way or other peoples in govt do have share with big builders and BPTP is not an exception. I don't think it is necessary to mention the relation with BPTP with the peoples, I think every one knew that.
You can't expact any one to come forward for your help, neither govt nor any one else. It is you who have to take care of your own interest and for that one have to take the decision wisely.
Thanks
Manoj
I do not agree with what the peoples saying that govt will take care of any wrong doing by any person. You can see daily in news papers how well the govt is functioning. Further every one knows that one way or other peoples in govt do have share with big builders and BPTP is not an exception. I don't think it is necessary to mention the relation with BPTP with the peoples, I think every one knew that.
You can't expact any one to come forward for your help, neither govt nor any one else. It is you who have to take care of your own interest and for that one have to take the decision wisely.
Thanks
Manoj
Hi,
I completely agree to the fact the even if we refer to the brochure issued by builder during May 2009 and the plan which is currently available on the website of BPTP talks about B/U Area(1418), Lawn/Terrace(625) for GF in 300 Sq yd and total usuable area 2043 for ground floor.
Even after talking to legal advisor, I got to know the below facts
1)Once allotment has been done as one of our friend has raised the concern that during possession if we don't pay BPTP they will shift our alloted floor to some remote location, this is completely not possible under any circumstances
2)If we have booked 300 Sq yd and paid for that they can not charge for lawn and terrace because that is part of our property since inception
3)Third and the most important thing is we should not sign this addendum and let get another notice from BPTP, and then we can take appropriate action and even knock legal door.
4)May the group belong to Gandhi's but that doesn't mean they are the owners of our fortune, it's India my dear friends and law is for everyone, if BPTP would act smart we are group of 4000+, we will show them the lessons of their life time.
5)So don't worry at all and don't sign any addendum and let's wait for some notice from BPTP, then we will file legal suit.
Regards,
Nitin Goel
I completely agree to the fact the even if we refer to the brochure issued by builder during May 2009 and the plan which is currently available on the website of BPTP talks about B/U Area(1418), Lawn/Terrace(625) for GF in 300 Sq yd and total usuable area 2043 for ground floor.
Even after talking to legal advisor, I got to know the below facts
1)Once allotment has been done as one of our friend has raised the concern that during possession if we don't pay BPTP they will shift our alloted floor to some remote location, this is completely not possible under any circumstances
2)If we have booked 300 Sq yd and paid for that they can not charge for lawn and terrace because that is part of our property since inception
3)Third and the most important thing is we should not sign this addendum and let get another notice from BPTP, and then we can take appropriate action and even knock legal door.
4)May the group belong to Gandhi's but that doesn't mean they are the owners of our fortune, it's India my dear friends and law is for everyone, if BPTP would act smart we are group of 4000+, we will show them the lessons of their life time.
5)So don't worry at all and don't sign any addendum and let's wait for some notice from BPTP, then we will file legal suit.
Regards,
Nitin Goel
Hi Guys,
I am also facing same problems with BPTP Elite Floors project. We have already submitted our two installments to BPTP but still not received any allotment from there side. They have already done 1st phase allotment and every time saying we are working on second phase allotment. We are confused regarding BPTP services.
Please suggest what should we do?
Regards,
Saurabh Bajpaiee
I am also facing same problems with BPTP Elite Floors project. We have already submitted our two installments to BPTP but still not received any allotment from there side. They have already done 1st phase allotment and every time saying we are working on second phase allotment. We are confused regarding BPTP services.
Please suggest what should we do?
Regards,
Saurabh Bajpaiee
Hi Saurabh,
Seems that you have not kept yourself informed about the project. The allotments happened long back and only those who paid 3 installments were included in the draw.
Those who were not allotted or their name was not there in the draw were given option of refund, I am aware of atleast one case where she did not pay the 3rd installment and later she opted for refund. She got the full money back.
I would suggest you should get in touch with BPTP without delay with all the papers and find out what are the options available. If you like Elite Floors Project get the refund and look for something in open market.
Thanks
Rohit
Seems that you have not kept yourself informed about the project. The allotments happened long back and only those who paid 3 installments were included in the draw.
Those who were not allotted or their name was not there in the draw were given option of refund, I am aware of atleast one case where she did not pay the 3rd installment and later she opted for refund. She got the full money back.
I would suggest you should get in touch with BPTP without delay with all the papers and find out what are the options available. If you like Elite Floors Project get the refund and look for something in open market.
Thanks
Rohit
Recently I got a demand for 4th installment. BPTP has sent a affidavit to be made on a stamp paper which says that "I have been tentatively alloted a Independent Residential Floor bearing No. etc..."
and also "The super built up area can change any time and we have no objection in paying extra money"
I am worried, because even if we have been alloted the floor in park elite, then what is the meaning of "tentatively alloted" be written on the stamp paper and also how come super built up area will change ?
Amit
and also "The super built up area can change any time and we have no objection in paying extra money"
I am worried, because even if we have been alloted the floor in park elite, then what is the meaning of "tentatively alloted" be written on the stamp paper and also how come super built up area will change ?
Amit
Hello
I have been followind these post for a long-2 time..I have 180 sq yard floor in P Block and have paid 65% of the total payment till now...Earlier i didn't had any apprehension regarding the future of Elite floors..
But now this issue of Addendum which i have also recieved seems a great concern..Why not everyone talk to BPTP on this issue and ask them issue us a official letter claiming tht they will not charge anythng frm us for lawn or terrace..If there intentions are clear there shuld not be any problem for them to issue a small letter of just a few lines just to clear the confusion of the customers.
Gautam
I have been followind these post for a long-2 time..I have 180 sq yard floor in P Block and have paid 65% of the total payment till now...Earlier i didn't had any apprehension regarding the future of Elite floors..
But now this issue of Addendum which i have also recieved seems a great concern..Why not everyone talk to BPTP on this issue and ask them issue us a official letter claiming tht they will not charge anythng frm us for lawn or terrace..If there intentions are clear there shuld not be any problem for them to issue a small letter of just a few lines just to clear the confusion of the customers.
Gautam
Hi Rohit,
can we take clarity on this from the concerned representatives in BPTP together as there needs to be a collective effort ?
I do not find any problem in signing the Addendum in case we can get a written confirmation stating that there will be no addition made to the Super-built Up Area (Chargable Area) due to the inclusion of Terrace or Varandah Or else request for the expulsion of Terrrace / Varandah from the Definition.
In the meanwhile I am visiting BPTP's Office tomorrow & will keep All the members posted on my dicussion.
Thanks,
Vishal
can we take clarity on this from the concerned representatives in BPTP together as there needs to be a collective effort ?
I do not find any problem in signing the Addendum in case we can get a written confirmation stating that there will be no addition made to the Super-built Up Area (Chargable Area) due to the inclusion of Terrace or Varandah Or else request for the expulsion of Terrrace / Varandah from the Definition.
In the meanwhile I am visiting BPTP's Office tomorrow & will keep All the members posted on my dicussion.
Thanks,
Vishal
Customer satisfaction rating Customer satisfaction rating is a complex algorithm that helps our users determine how good
a company is at responding and resolving complaints by granting from 1 to 5 stars for each
complaint and then ultimately combining them all for an overall score.
Read more
Read more
34%
Complaints
322
Pending
0
Resolved
108
BPTP Crest, Plot #15, Udyog Vihar Phase-IV, Gurgaon, Haryana, India - 122015
This is to bring to the notice of all through this Forum not to sign the Addendum being forwarded to be signed by BPTP.
I own a 250yrd IInd Floor @ BPTP Park Elite Floors & signed my Flat Buyer Agreemnt in the month of May.
I am surprised to come to know while browsing through all the Forums that nobody has read between the lines & understood the actual objective of this Addendum.
While Clause 2 under the Changes mentioned is very much clear, whereby it has been mentioned that the period of 24 months shall be counted from the day of Approval of Plan or the day of signing the Agreement whichever is later ; which clearly means that it is to be counted from the day of signing the Agreement as Agreement with all the buyers was signed after the Approval & many buyers are still to sign the Agreement.
The major catch is in the clause 1, which states the detailed definition of Super Area. While it seems to be very normal & simple in the first look, but there is a bigger Game being played by BPTP.
I trust we all remember the product beeing presented ot us since starting & lets revisit the same: -
1. In the initial Offer the Area mentoned through the Brochure was presented as a) Built UP Area b) Terrace Area & c) Total Usable Area. The Basic Sale Price was quoted in Lumpsum for the Total Usable Area.
2. In the Flat Buyer Agreement the Built - Up Area was mentioned as Super Area & within the defination it was mentioned that it will be inclusive of Balconies & Stair Cases (Of which the Floor Plan had been enclosed within the Agreement).
For the notice of All there was no reference made of the terrace area in the Flat Buyer Agreement & thereby the Per sq ft. Basic Sale Price was calculated by using the formula - Lumpsum BSP / Built Up Area whcih should have been - Lumpsum BSP / Total Usable Area.
When it was brought to the notice of the Representatives at BPTP at the time of signing the Agreement they very smartly mentioned verbally that the terrace area is free of cost as mentioned in the brochure & therefore not mentioned in the Agreement & thanks to my foolishness I got convinced.
3. Now please read the Addedndum carefully whereby the Terrace Area has been very smartly induced within the definition of the Super Area. This will mean that your Super Area will be = Built-up Area + Terrace Area which is going to increase the Super Area by 30% - 55% dependent on the Floor.
This is going to Empower BPTP to proclaim the charges on artificially depicted Addtional Area (Terrace Area) @ Rs.2450/- per sq ft as mentioned in the Flat Buyer Agreement at the time of Completion certificate.
I have reached this assessment after consulting 2 Senior Legal Personnels (VP Level) in the Real Estate Industry.
I hereby request All the Buyers not to sign this Addendum without legal consultation. This could be withdrawn by BPTP only when we as Buyers do not sign this & boycott this together.
What they are threatening is to withdraw 5% timely payment discount which they can withdraw any time as per the Agreement & is very meager when you compare it with 10-15 Lacs they could charge on the basis of this Addendum.
I have also got small response letter to be forwarded to BPTP through the Legal Expert. Anyone looking for the same can write to me at [protected]@yahoo.com or else anyways I will share the same here on Tuesday & could be downloaded from here.
God May safeguard us from these Fraudulent acts .
Thanks,
Vishal