TNAG-0856-FCO40-1066-Construction-of-underground-railway-system-in-Hong-Kong-1979 — Page 275

PETITION OF OUR OWNERS FOR THE PROPERTY PROTECTION OF SEVEN BUILDINGS IN SAI LAU KOK NEW TERRITORIES, HONG KONG.

Since the Mass Transit Railway laid its interesting eye at Sai Lau Kok, we knew then that misfortune would befall on us. Indeed, sooner than expected, the Hong Kong Government serve all of us a notice on 12th May, 1978 to the effect that our lands and properties would be resumed and we were given a limited period to evacuate for our buildings would be demolished in due course of time.

We fully agree that under certain town planning schemes for the development of a city, resumption of lands or properties by the govern- ment is inevitable. However, we are rather of the opinion that during the proceedings, compensation in the exchange of land for land, flat for flat and shop for shop is comparatively a reasonable and fair means. In dealing with us, the property owners of the seven buildings at Lai Lau Kok, the Hong Kong Government (referred to as HKG in following sen- tences) did not adop this method, but acted like big bully in every respect. Hegamonizm or high-handed pressure was practised to its fullest extend.

At first, the M. T. R. Office declared to the public for our compen- sation to exchange a flat for a flat by reserving 200 dweling units at Allways Garden. In other words, if a flat of 400 sq. feet of practical use area had been resumed, it should have been compensated with a new flat of 400 sq. ft. of practical area.

To our disappoinment, the M. T. R. office did not do so. Our flats of practical use area were only replaced by flats of construction area. There existed a difference of HK$100.00 per sq. ft. Also the acquisition of our properties by the HKG has been determined at a one-sided valua- tion of HK$310.00 per sq. ft.; whereas the selling price of flats at Allways Garden is HK$410.00 per sq. ft.

The HKG did not consider itself a government, but degraded so low as to behave like an estate broker. While refusing to accept all re sponsibilities in the differences of the exchange for compensation, it, however, boasted that the transaction was a fair deal. It's so doing was not only playing a cheating game with us, but with intention to win applause from the 5 million citizens under the camouflage.

- 1 -