Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 124

Thread: URA: Max 6 Tenants in Private Properties

  1. #21

    Default

    companies who own landed can continue to house their workers there since they are not "rented"?

  2. #22

    Default

    the way i see it, the introduction of the new rules/guidelines is a matter of saving face for the authorities.

    if authorities start enforcing the previous rules in 2017, questions would arise why they did not strictly enforce the rules in 2016,2015 for example. it would be uncomfortable.

    by tweaking the old rule slightly and introducing it as new, if and when they enforce the new rule in 2017, they can justify it by saying it is the new law. old rule, old fines would kind be "forgotten" as if they didnt exist.

    as kelonguni mention, 先礼后兵. who would be the "lucky one". after that life goes on.
    by the way, nowadays does taxi driver still ask rear passengers to put on seatbelt?

  3. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bargain hunter View Post
    companies who own landed can continue to house their workers there since they are not "rented"?
    interesting question, would it come under the home office scheme?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    In essence, growth of technology meant lots of new disruptive technologies emerged.

    Govt will let free market run a while, continue to collect feedback, then study in details during review.

    It's the same with HDB and private ownership and where to stay, Uber and Grab, piracy issues, short term stay, milk powder marketing costs.

    Once details are finalised and impacts are studied carefully, the finalised stands are made clear to all. Uber and Grab and private hire cars was passed, short term stays are stopped, after careful review.

    Need more evidence?

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    thank you for mentioning uber/grab.

    but instead of sidetracking, let's get back to the statement
    "With official clarity and stance, agents cannot claim ignorance and there will be clear penalties. I think this will drastically reduce vacancies by the end of the year."

    we are only at the 1st part "With official clarity and stance, agents cannot claim ignorance and there will be clear penalties."
    have not even begin to discuss the 2nd part "I think this will drastically reduce vacancies by the end of the year."

    so let's begin again:
    how were the previous rules/guidelines not clear?

    is this why you say the rules are unclear?
    http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/real...g-of-contracts

    i know you make no money by telling me or anybody else here, i can only depends on your charity to enlighten me (& the rest of us.)
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  5. #25

    Default

    thanks kelonguni. please bear with me, i am what you may called dense. (the unkind word is stupid).

    from the post above, do you mean to say the previous rules were clear (max 8 occupants, min 6 months) but for some reason or another, the rules were not strictly enforced? perhaps the reasons for not strictly enforcing were what you posted above.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    Rules could never be fully enforced as long as there are humans. Drugs are illegal, unregistered vice is illegal, but they still persist. The authorities must choose their fights - which are the worst problems to tackle?

    There may be some law conditions that need to be modified before the authorities can pick up the fight.

    For example, I remember recently they modified the authorities of the police to conduct search without warrant or something. May be related to the ultimate enforcement of tenancy rules. At present, it is more for entertainment nightspots flouting rules, but it can be further extended.

    This is more serious nowadays due to the threat of terrorism.

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    thanks kelonguni. please bear with me, i am what you may called dense. (the unkind word is stupid).

    from the post above, do you mean to say the previous rules were clear (max 8 occupants, min 6 months) but for some reason or another, the rules were not strictly enforced? perhaps the reasons for not strictly enforcing were what you posted above.
    Last edited by Kelonguni; 12th May 2017 at 06:31 PM.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  7. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anythingwhatever View Post
    Latest Cooling Measure is now out:

    https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/buy-prope...sidential.aspx

    Discuss...
    First need to read this https://www.99.co/blog/singapore/pre...tting-a-guide/

    While there are a number of strict guidelines set in place by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), these rules are largely concerned with restrictions on structural layouts, minimum length of stay, tenancy agreements and overcrowding. As such, private homeowners themselves have to ensure that tenants do not engage in illegal subletting of the premises.

    before trying to understand https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/buy-prope...sidential.aspx

    The Singapore Parliament passed a new law which makes short term rental illegal in Singapore. The amended Planning Act makes it illegal for property owners to rent out rent out entire apartments and rooms on a short-term basis unless they have permission from the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) to do so.

    http://app.mnd.gov.sg/Newsroom/News-...ntary%20Speech

    In fact, the cap of 6 persons was the original cap that used to be in place before. This cap was raised to 8 in 2008 to ease a crunch in the housing supply for workers. Since then, we have built up a good supply of alternative accommodation catering to groups other than families, such as hostels for students and dormitories for company employees and workers. So we believe it is timely to revert to the cap of 6, which was what it used to be before 2008. As for reviewing the HDB limits, I think that is a separate matter which is not within the remits of the Planning Act, because the HDB controls are regulated separately. We would be happy to do the review of the occupancy cap for HDB flats on a separate basis.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcachon View Post
    First need to read this https://www.99.co/blog/singapore/pre...tting-a-guide/

    While there are a number of strict guidelines set in place by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), these rules are largely concerned with restrictions on structural layouts, minimum length of stay, tenancy agreements and overcrowding. As such, private homeowners themselves have to ensure that tenants do not engage in illegal subletting of the premises.

    before trying to understand https://www.ura.gov.sg/uol/buy-prope...sidential.aspx

    The Singapore Parliament passed a new law which makes short term rental illegal in Singapore. The amended Planning Act makes it illegal for property owners to rent out rent out entire apartments and rooms on a short-term basis unless they have permission from the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) to do so.

    http://app.mnd.gov.sg/Newsroom/News-...ntary%20Speech

    In fact, the cap of 6 persons was the original cap that used to be in place before. This cap was raised to 8 in 2008 to ease a crunch in the housing supply for workers. Since then, we have built up a good supply of alternative accommodation catering to groups other than families, such as hostels for students and dormitories for company employees and workers. So we believe it is timely to revert to the cap of 6, which was what it used to be before 2008. As for reviewing the HDB limits, I think that is a separate matter which is not within the remits of the Planning Act, because the HDB controls are regulated separately. We would be happy to do the review of the occupancy cap for HDB flats on a separate basis.
    Interesting... Will HDB be the next target?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,751

    Default

    We just need to examine the vacancy rates for next quarter to ascertain.

    From the news reports, it appears that many private homeowners have been renting out spare bedrooms. Or renting out individual rooms to separate groups.

    It will be interesting to see how low the vacancy will trend to with this. Because some can rush to renew, I think it will only fall to 7.5%.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

    Where there is kelong, there is guni.
    No kelong no guni.
    More kelong = more guni.

  10. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by anythingwhatever View Post
    Interesting... Will HDB be the next target?
    Every rule, guideline, Act (law) are all calibrated to ensure the property market function at it best.

    2007 before I went oversea, HDB are only allowed to rent out the whole unit after fully paid or 10 years MOP. But because of the large intake of FW, HDB reduce it to 5 years MOP and HDB need not be fully paid when buying Private.

    To understand Singapore property market, one need to read the economic, MOM, trade data, MOE, etc. all are interlink and will affect the decide outcome from Ah Kong.

    The day where 535,000 become 1,550,000 in 4 years are over whether it will happen again only TIME can tell.

    The Money printing is only getting to be worst and everyone knows it, only those who know, refuse to know and don't want to know.

    If one can buy and think can wait, rule, guideline, Act (law) will change then today can buy tomorrow cannot.

    Buy where you can hold not where you can meet the minimum and you should be safe.
    Last edited by Arcachon; 13th May 2017 at 11:07 AM.

Page 3 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •