Page 5 of 25 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 25 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
    3,455

    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.

Page 5 of 25 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... 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
  •