Setagaya “luxury condominium” residents are in big trouble with Tokyu Land Corporation in court.

A series of impossible defects were discovered, including inadequate plumbing and corroded rebar. ……
Field Report on “Voices of Anger

At 3:00 p.m. on January 19, the third oral argument of a civil lawsuit was being held in Courtroom 419 of the Tokyo District Court. The defendant was Tokyu Land Corporation, part of the Tokyu Group, which originated from Denentoshi Corporation, founded by Eiichi Shibusawa. The plaintiffs were residents of condominiums built by the Tokyu Group.

The scene of the trouble was Tokyu Dole Ars Setagaya Floresta (hereinafter referred to as “Floresta”). The eight-story condominium was completed in 1998 by Tokyu Corporation and sold by Tokyu Land Corporation. The building’s convenient location, a three-minute walk from Wakabayashi Station on the Tokyu Setagaya Line, was well received, and all 49 units were sold out. Many families lived there.

However, the dream home was transformed into a defective condominium after a certain anomaly was discovered in 2006. Taro Sanmi, chairman of the management association of “Floresta,” explains how it happened.

The residents on the first floor told the management association that they had noticed mold on the floors and walls of their rooms. We immediately asked Tokyu Land Corporation’s representative to investigate the underground pit (a space where pipes and electrical cables are placed), but he said, ‘It’s all right. However, the survey took less than five minutes, which was very short, and I felt distrustful.

The mold problem did not improve at all, and in March 2007, the management association hired an outside investigation company to re-examine the underground pit. The management association asked an outside investigation company to re-examine the underground pit in March 2007 and discovered a startling fact.

A large puddle was spreading in the underground pit. The structure had been designed to allow rainwater to enter, there were no ventilation pipes, and the water had not been drained. This puddle was the cause of mold in the first floor resident’s room.

Upon further investigation, other defects were found. The rebar supporting the building had been forcibly cut to allow the pipes to pass through, and the cross section was corroded. Of the 183 seismic slits (slits placed between walls and pillars to absorb seismic shaking) specified in the original construction drawings, none were constructed to the correct dimensions, indicating that the building was not earthquake resistant as required by the Building Standard Law.

In response to the results of the reexamination, Tokyu Land Corporation held a briefing session for residents in 2009. Tokyu Corporation admitted the defects and proposed rebuilding the condominium and relocating the residents to temporary housing (rent, etc., to be paid by Tokyu Land Corporation). However, after all the residents had temporarily moved out, another “defect” was discovered.

Tokyu Land Corporation surveyed the building before rebuilding, and found that the north direction on the building plans was 14 degrees off from the surveyed result. It turned out that if the building was rebuilt according to the drawings, the total number of units would be reduced by 23 units due to height and shade restrictions under the Building Standard Law. ……

Nevertheless, the union negotiated with Tokyu Land Corporation 120 times.’ In February 2012, a new rebuilding plan with fewer units was drawn up by Tokyu and approved at a general meeting of the management association.

Just as the residents thought they had finally reached a settlement, something unexpected happened.

Tokyu Land Corporation sent a notice to the residents stating that the rebuilding would be halted and that it would purchase the ownership of the property. This was only less than a month after we approved the rebuilding plan. The reason for this was that it was difficult to select reoccupants due to the decrease in the number of units.

The notice also stated that if we did not agree to the buyout, they would take legal action and evict us from our temporary housing. I felt that was a threat.

Tokyu Land Corporation’s Argument for Sudden Rebuilding Halt

The management association was vehemently opposed to the sudden notice. The residents, numb to the situation, finally decided to take their fight to court. In June of last year, six residents, including Mr. Mimi, filed a lawsuit against Tokyu Land Corporation, claiming that the company was obligated to rebuild the building.

Tokyu Land Corporation declared that it would unilaterally abandon the rebuilding policy that it had initiated, ignoring the wishes of the residents. Moreover, with the purchase price offered by Tokyu Land, it would be difficult to purchase a condominium of the same size in Setagaya Ward. This is an abrupt and forceful demand, and we cannot agree to it.”

At the third oral argument at the beginning of the case, the Tokyu Land side indicated its intention to confront the case in its entirety by preparing a written defense claiming that no agreement had been reached to rebuild the condominium.

Regarding the numerous defects and the abrupt cancellation of the rebuilding, Tokyu Land’s public relations office responded as follows.

We, as the owner of the property, sold “Setagaya Floresta,” which was constructed by a contractor, and the building had received official building permits and completion inspections, so we were aware that the building had been properly constructed. We are aware that the above-mentioned defects (editor’s note: inadequate piping, corrosion of rebar, etc.) have since been reported based on reports from the contractor.

(Regarding the suspension of rebuilding) If your question is to the effect that there was a consensus among the residents to rebuild in accordance with the contents of the proposed rebuilding plan at the management association’s general meeting in February 2012, this is not true.

At the time of the regular general meeting in February 2012, the reconstruction of “Setagaya Floresta” had not been finalized, and we proposed to purchase the condominium interests in March 2012, based on the understanding that there were a considerable number of residents who would prefer to purchase the property rather than reconstruct it. In March 2012, we proposed the purchase of the condominium interests in the building.

Regarding the amount of the purchase price offered to the residents, he stated, “I am aware that the amount offered far exceeded the market value of the property to be purchased.

Mr. Mimi is indignant at Tokyu Land Corporation’s response.

In April 2009, we received a letter stamped with the seal of then President Masashi Okada, which clearly stated that the property would be rebuilt. The reason some residents agreed to buy the property was because Tokyu had set a deadline and pushed hard for them to leave their temporary housing.

There were residents in their 80s at Floresta. They were informed that their final home would be demolished suddenly, and they had to give it up in tears. Those who agreed to buy the houses contacted us saying, “I don’t want to be associated with Tokyu anymore,” and “I’m sorry I can’t fight with you. All of the residents had their plans for their lives seriously disrupted.

The next date for the dragging-out legal battle is scheduled for April 14. The “dream site” remains untouched and stands alone in Setagaya Ward.

From the February 13, 2026 issue of FRIDAY