DIAMOND ESTATE RESIDENTS SUE FEMAB PROPERTIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT

starconnect
starconnect
Diamond Estate

Admin l Monday, Nov. 19, 2018

LAGOS, Nigeria – Association of Property Owners and Residents of Diamond Estate (Sangotedo)Lagos, has filed a suit against Femab Properties Limited, (the estate agent that sold land and other properties in the estate to clients) before a Lagos High Court sitting in Epe. The claimants in the suit delineated LD/1559LMW/15 alleged that the first defendant (Femab limited) breached terms of contract,   and refused to provide most of the facilities in the well advertised prospectus at point of sales despite consistent entreaties adding that those provided are yet to be completed.




 

The first defendant, Femab Limited, a developer and vendor sold serviced residential properties in Diamond Estate to the claimants, transferring ownership rights to the purchaser as beneficial owners. The claimant alleged that the first defendant (Femab Ltd) without their consent hired the 2nd defendant, Diamond Estate Limited to manage the estate.  

The first claimant, Mr Faustinus Brai, President of the Property Owner and Residents of Diamond Estate, who sued on behalf of himself and others joined the incorporated trustees of Diamond estate property owners & residents association as claimant while Femab limited and Diamond Estate limited are the first and second defendants in the suit respectively.  

The claimant stated that the first defendant prior to the sale by virtue of an offer prospectus, presented to the claimant as to other subsequent property owner in the estate, a fully serviced residential estate complete with modern day living and recreational facilities. The claimant averred that most of the facilities presented by the first defendant do not exist in the estate as stated in prospectus which warrant the exorbitant purchase price of serviced plots. 

The claimants are therefore praying the court to compel the developer among others to order Diamond Estate to complete the infrastructure as promised in the Diamond Estate sales prospectus. Alternatively, for the court to appoint an independent contractor to complete the infrastructure and bill the developer.

Also, they are seeking an order of court, confirming the ownership of estate infrastructure and common areas such as roads, children’s playgrounds, recreation/ green areas whether developer can sell, seize or build on these common areas at will. 

They are praying for quality of service. And to determine if residents who pay for and receive services should not be involved in deciding the type, quality and cost of services provided . They also want the court to compel the developer to issue a more humane copy of deed of assignment that respects the rights of both the seller and the buyer. Such should have no clause as to Code of Conduct.

However, in a statement of defence filed, the defence team, said the claimants have not constituted themselves into a body where the first claimant is nominated as chairman. The defendant also claimed that it does not need the consent of the claimant or any other person to nominate a facility manager to mange it estate know as Diamond Estate, Ajah Lagos State. 

The defendant also averred that Alliance Mortgage corsortium limited is the owner of all parcel of land situated at Sangotedo, Lekki sub-region Eti Osa area of Lagos state in Nigeria known and referred to as “diamond Estate measuring aproximately 25 hectres and more particularly delineate and shown verged ‘red on government survey plan no LS/D/LA/853. 

It therefore stated that it had succintly spelled out the terms and condition for owing a property and living in diamond estate.  

“The 2nd defendant averred that it has been using the service charge paid by residents of the estate to maintain and sustain infrastructural facilities provided by the first defendant for the resident of Diamond estate.  However, when the matter was called before Justice Ganiyu Safari of Lagos High Court division sitting in Epe, the defendant was absent in court and was not represented. 

The judge therefore ordered the the claimant counsel to communicate hearing date to the defendant. He subsequently adjourned till December 5, 2018 for trial.

TAGGED:
Share this Article
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Be the first to get the news as soon as it breaks Yes!! I'm in Not Yet
Verified by MonsterInsights