Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 124

Thread: URA: Max 6 Tenants in Private Properties

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    495

    Default URA: Max 6 Tenants in Private Properties

    Latest Cooling Measure is now out:

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

    Discuss...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    "The only exception in which the occupancy cap does not apply is when a private residential property is entirely occupied by the same family unit."
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Many landed house will be impacted, also private apartment specialised for foreign workers like in geylang, st michael and macpherson area.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tomutomi View Post
    Many landed house will be impacted, also private apartment specialised for foreign workers like in geylang, st michael and macpherson area.
    But that would further lower the vacancy rates?
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Southbank
    Posts
    9,531

    Default

    It may be good, depending on how one look at it.

    If you spend a million dollar and your neighbor rent their unit to FW would you want to spend the million dollars?

    But that would further lower the vacancy rates?

    I don't think URA is going after vacancy rates, they get too many complaints on FW in Condo.

    It is cheaper to house FW in Condo than the dormitory.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Southbank
    Posts
    9,531

    Default


  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

    there are still 2 more years to go if u sign/renew the tenancy with more than 6 foreign workers by this sunday.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    495

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arcachon View Post
    It may be good, depending on how one look at it.

    If you spend a million dollar and your neighbor rent their unit to FW would you want to spend the million dollars?

    But that would further lower the vacancy rates?

    I don't think URA is going after vacancy rates, they get too many complaints on FW in Condo.

    It is cheaper to house FW in Condo than the dormitory.
    The record is "50" in two 2BR units:

    http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...wo-condo-units

  9. #9
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    For me, it's good. I never rent to more than two or three persons and prefer them to be related.

    But those buy to rent landed will kenna big.

    The policy is biased against those with huge units.

    No wonder landed price last quarter suddenly dropped by about 2%...
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    hmm...about 2.5 months from passing law to URA issue guideline.
    http://www.straitstimes.com/politics...-under-new-law
    it was mentioned that article
    "The new law will also limit the number of unrelated tenants in private apartments to six, down from the currently allowed eight. "

    will it have any impact ?
    no aware of any news of actions taken against AirBnb and those hosts despite new law being passed in 2017-02-26.

    those who stayed within the old guideline (8) will continue to stay in the new guideline (6).
    those who stay on the gray area will continue to stay in the gray area.
    does the above guideline forbid hot bunking? it maybe interpreted that only 6 occupants INSIDE the unit at the same time. with hotbunking, a total of 18 occupants, 6 at each 8hour time slots.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    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.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    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.
    what were unclear previously? what were unclear about max 8 occupants and min of 6 months? and penalties of fines of up to $200k and jail up to 1 year were also not clear?

    it is the enforcement part that is lacking.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    what were unclear previously? what were unclear about max 8 occupants and min of 6 months? and penalties of fines of up to $200k and jail up to 1 year were also not clear?

    it is the enforcement part that is lacking.
    The penalties are heavier now. Recently revised.

    http://www.straitstimes.com/politics...-under-new-law

    The clarity also encourages more active whistleblowing.

    Do what you want, but don't ever get caught.
    Last edited by Kelonguni; 12-05-17 at 11:46.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    so were previous penalties unclear or not heavy enough ?
    how were the officials not clear nor stanceful previously ?

    or penalties not heavy enough = law not clear enough ?

  15. #15
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    Just think Uber / Grab and Private Hire cars, and you will see how this works.



    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    so were previous penalties unclear or not heavy enough ?
    how were the officials not clear nor stanceful previously ?

    or penalties not heavy enough = law not clear enough ?
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  16. #16
    teddybear's Avatar
    teddybear is offline Global recession is coming....
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    10,800

    Default

    Airbnb are still advertising daily rentals for private properties, and they didn't bother to enforce? Otherwise why nobody get caught yet?

    They can set all kind of laws they want, but if they don't enforce, it is just that - "a piece of paper"! People then think that they can just ignore the "law" because they are just for "show", wayang...............

    Quote Originally Posted by hopeful View Post
    hmm...about 2.5 months from passing law to URA issue guideline.
    http://www.straitstimes.com/politics...-under-new-law
    it was mentioned that article
    "The new law will also limit the number of unrelated tenants in private apartments to six, down from the currently allowed eight. "

    will it have any impact ?
    no aware of any news of actions taken against AirBnb and those hosts despite new law being passed in 2017-02-26.

    those who stayed within the old guideline (8) will continue to stay in the new guideline (6).
    those who stay on the gray area will continue to stay in the gray area.
    does the above guideline forbid hot bunking? it maybe interpreted that only 6 occupants INSIDE the unit at the same time. with hotbunking, a total of 18 occupants, 6 at each 8hour time slots.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Posts
    169

    Default

    Likely to be based on neighborhood report. More tenants more noise and neighbor not happy, knowing the rule they will happily report to mgmt or police (?).

  18. #18
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    先礼后兵。

    Quote Originally Posted by teddybear View Post
    Airbnb are still advertising daily rentals for private properties, and they didn't bother to enforce? Otherwise why nobody get caught yet?

    They can set all kind of laws they want, but if they don't enforce, it is just that - "a piece of paper"! People then think that they can just ignore the "law" because they are just for "show", wayang...............
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  19. #19
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    Default

    In this case, the authorities seem to emphasise more on the number rather than the duration.

    You can sense the stance from the articles.

    Numbers and address wise, my tenants tell me the authorities check it through their employers and are quite serious about it.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelonguni View Post
    Just think Uber / Grab and Private Hire cars, and you will see how this works.
    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.)

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    9,279

    Default

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

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    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?

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    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?

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    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.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    4,739

    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.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    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; 12-05-17 at 17:31.
    The three laws of Kelonguni:

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

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Southbank
    Posts
    9,531

    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.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    495

    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?

  29. #29
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    4,035

    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.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Southbank
    Posts
    9,531

    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; 13-05-17 at 10:07.

Similar Threads

  1. Tenants call the shots in private rental market
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 1
    -: 26-01-16, 20:54
  2. Using CPF for private properties
    By auroraborealis in forum Finance and Legal
    Replies: 27
    -: 18-11-13, 13:13
  3. Cap on foreign tenants may push up private home rents
    By reporter2 in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 0
    -: 18-03-13, 17:16
  4. HDB rents soar as tenants flee private flats
    By reporter2 in forum HDB, EC, commercial and industrial property discussion
    Replies: 6
    -: 27-08-12, 15:41
  5. no D24 private properties?
    By hopeful in forum Singapore Private Condominium Property Discussion and News
    Replies: 8
    -: 19-09-11, 17:19

Posting Permissions

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