CREEK MARINA YET REMAINS A DAYDREAM AS BUILDERS-DHA ARE STUCK IN A DEAD-END

This lesson was hard taught by the Creek Marina project investors – having invested about Rs.3 billion into a scheme that has been in the void for over many years past its initial deadline. The capital belonged to over 250 families who, when it was launched in 2005, had invested in the scheme.

In Karachi, real estate is a prime asset. The smaller investors typically endure the pain of missing out on what seem to be tempting opportunities, with big fish involved in the market.

Members of the Creek Marina Action Committee announced at a press conference on Thursday the challenges they have encountered in achieving their goal. Among the 250 consumers, the committee contains 100. Their goal is to compel all sides to reach an understanding so that it is possible to finalize the project. The only one who spoke on occasion was the chairman of the commission, Yousuf Mirza. The others were silenced by a Sindh High Court order against them (SHC).

2010 & Creek Marina

Construction came to a full halt in 2010. CPML officials said that the Chinese construction firm had pulled out because of threats to their employees’ lives. An Rs1 billion success pledge bound the business. The bond was eventually cashed and deposited in a bank account owing to its forfeiture from the project. The developers, DHA, and the purchasers are claiming this number.

Meanwhile, the committee was formed by some of the buyers and agreed to contact the DHA as well as the CPML for responses. Though questions at the DHA office remained unheeded, officials at the CPML continued to adjust. Finally, the committee heard that the proposal was master-minded by Meinhardt’s Singapore-based CEO, Dr. Shahzad Nasim. Dr. Nasim was the entity who, at the launch of the project, initially signed the agreement with DHA.

They got a notice from his counsel when the committee attempted to reach Dr. Nasim by email, alleging that he had no connection with the Creek Marina project. Any more efforts to communicate with him would result in a libel suit. He finally brought this case before the Sindh High Court (SHC), in which 15 members of the committee were selected.

2011 & Creek Marina

The SHC ruled in April 2011 that the Rs1 billion from the Chinese company’s bond must be allocated to developers to restart development. However, a stay order against the funds was requested and granted by DHA. Because they claimed the funds could be misused or diverted from the region. Subsequently, the SHC ruled that the funds must be allocated to the CPML in steps that would provide the DHA with monthly budgets for approval.

After this deal, some signs of construction work on the property, but it also ended soon enough. As it noticed contradictions in the budget recommendations, the DHA declined to release funds to the CPML.

2012 & Creek Marina

Subsequently, in May 2012, the committee members met Dr. Nasim in Dubai, who said the DHA officials were uncooperative. However, he promised to deliver the apartments within three years if the committee members worked with him to get the funds released.

Since then, DHA and Meinhardt have been debating the issue, but neither side has been able to step away from their stance. An FIR for theft against Dr. Nasim and his company has also been registered with DHA. It is the consumers, meanwhile, who were the ultimate sufferers. Jaffer asserted, “All we want is the product we paid for.”

He hoped that the two companies would quickly find an agreement. And also he wished that the apartments would eventually be completed, also ten years after they had paid for them.

The Fantasy Creek Marina

Launched in 2005- the Creek Marina project was marketed as collaboration between the Defence Housing Authority (DHA) and the developers, a Singapore-based consultancy company called Meinhardt. To oversee the project’s marketing and development, Meinhardt founded a local corporation, Creek Marina Private Limited (CPML).

“We have put our trust in the DHA,” Mirza said. “There was also the reassuring factor that, as the developer, a reputable foreign firm was involved.”

The advertisements explained the scheme as a six-star housing plan with eight 24-storeys towers with three and four bedrooms. It was located in phase VIII of DHA’s posh town. Moreover, a Chinese company, GOCG, and two local firms, the Principal Builders and Paragon, were awarded the building’s contracts.

The buyers were obliged in quarterly installments to pay the sum. However, the payments were not progress-related. By December 2009, the project was expected to be finished. Today, an unfinished tower of 15 storeys stands on the building site, instead of the promised 24-storeys, and another eight-storey tower.

2021 & Creek Marina

Development work halted at Creek Marina by Sindh Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA).

Presently, it is over ten years, and individuals who put their well-deserved cash in the Creek Marina project are as yet hanging tight for its finish. 

Purchasers of Creek Marina felt that one potential goal to their issue lay in getting DHA to convince Meinhardt to continue the scheme. And they expect for an early plan. 

As a lot time has already passed, we should talk for the Creek Marina Victims who are as yet looking towards developers.