The Singapore Forum

Gnnnnngggggggggggggggggg

Ah, bless his deluded little merino wool socks

Australia is first world?

The tenant certainly has a lot more protection in Australia than he does in Singapore. For example, the Bond/Deposit is not kept by the landlord or agent, it's held in a special government approved account and there has to be some good justification to withhold or deduct from it when a tenant leaves.

Here some owners treat it like a local version of Japan's "key money".

baloo wrote:The tenant certainly has a lot more protection in Australia than he does in Singapore. For example, the Bond/Deposit is not kept by the landlord or agent, it's held in a special government approved account and there has to be some good justification to withhold or deduct from it when a tenant leaves.

Here some owners treat it like a local version of Japan's "key money".

not to mention the fact that apparently, when the owner sells the house the tenant could be asked to leave... I thought this was not the case, but recently when a prospective buyer viewwed the house we are renting, the agent whispered to me that 'this one won't require you to leave.'

Morrolan wrote:

baloo wrote:The tenant certainly has a lot more protection in Australia than he does in Singapore. For example, the Bond/Deposit is not kept by the landlord or agent, it's held in a special government approved account and there has to be some good justification to withhold or deduct from it when a tenant leaves.

Here some owners treat it like a local version of Japan's "key money".

not to mention the fact that apparently, when the owner sells the house the tenant could be asked to leave... I thought this was not the case, but recently when a prospective buyer viewwed the house we are renting, the agent whispered to me that 'this one won't require you to leave.'

It's not legal. You have the right to stay in the unit until your contract expires. Also, if you have a clause that you can extend the contract, that can be enforced as well.

I know some PRs that bought a landed placed that was tenanted. They needed to get URA/SLA approval that the Tenants would in fact not exercise a clause to remain in the unit after the current lease period expired. If tenants refused to sign the guarantee, they wouldn't have been allowed to buy the house. There was no way the owners could legally force them out.

The Bond thing here is very good (although we never had a problem in Sg).

The fact that landlords can sell their property and give the tenants very little notice to vacate is not. A colleague is on her 4th property in the 3 years I've know her, and 2 of those were sold for redevelopment.

I believe there's a 90 day notice period if on a month-month basis, which I think is fair (landlord hat on here) but guess it could be shorter if the lease is about to expire anyway.

On a side note, I'm sure getting rental bond back here will prove to be an experience - I'm still waiting on mine which was due last month as the landlady "is overseas and not contactable". Yeah, right!

Actually I have got to say, I observed Singapore even worse.... the terrible behaviours, gauging, and deposit keeping quite terrible there.