Joint tenancy for private property - CPF matters

[screwby]

Appreciate some clarity from the experienced people here.

Scenario:
Boyfriend & Girlfriend (considered as unrelated singles) intend to buy a private property together under joint tenants scheme.

Girlfriend already using CPF for her current HDB (a re-sale unit, stayed more than 5 yrs, not selling). Boyfriend not using CPF for any property.

For the new purchase, the CPF will only be utilised from the Boyfriend's.
But lawyer said if they buy the private property, they can't even use the Boyfriend's CPF because one of them (Girlfriend) has already used her CPF for her existing HDB.

Is that correct?

[jencrs]

Appreciate some clarity from the experienced people here.

Scenario:
Boyfriend & Girlfriend (considered as unrelated singles) intend to buy a private property together under joint tenants scheme.

Girlfriend already using CPF for her current HDB (a re-sale unit, stayed more than 5 yrs, not selling). Boyfriend not using CPF for any property.

For the new purchase, the CPF will only be utilised from the Boyfriend's.
But lawyer said if they buy the private property, they can't even use the Boyfriend's CPF because one of them (Girlfriend) has already used her CPF for her existing HDB.

Is that correct?

My Lawyer cockup this CPF thing as well before, and created a lot of confusion for me and my gf.

I feel that in matters like this, regardless of what anyone tells you here, it's best to either speak to another lawyer who's more experienced, or call CPF yourself to find out. Someone you can hold accountable.

[TS]

I think cpf cannot be used. Not because gf has used hers, but because they are not considered "family" related.

If they are married, yes.
If they are siblings, yes.
If they are bf gf, no.
If they are friends, no.

[jencrs]

I think cpf cannot be used. Not because gf has used hers, but because they are not considered "family" related.

If they are married, yes.
If they are siblings, yes.
If they are bf gf, no.
If they are friends, no.

CPF can be used la. If unrelated singles, whether friends or bf/gf, both can use CPF to buy the property. However, can only be used for 1st private property, if they remain unmarried. but screwby's case a bit different, I not sure although I don't really see why the bf cannot use, since it's his 1st private property.

but the more we talk the more confusing it will get. We're not experts.

[TS]

You sure can be used for private unit?

I was just sharing what I know after going through with CPF, lawyer and bank few yrs back. Maybe different for 1st unit, but I am quite sure for 2nd property.

[Douk]

Write in to cpf..

Appreciate some clarity from the experienced people here.

Scenario:
Boyfriend & Girlfriend (considered as unrelated singles) intend to buy a private property together under joint tenants scheme.

Girlfriend already using CPF for her current HDB (a re-sale unit, stayed more than 5 yrs, not selling). Boyfriend not using CPF for any property.

For the new purchase, the CPF will only be utilised from the Boyfriend's.
But lawyer said if they buy the private property, they can't even use the Boyfriend's CPF because one of them (Girlfriend) has already used her CPF for her existing HDB.

Is that correct?

[TS]

Write in to cpf..

Agree that it is safest to check with cpf directly. They reply quite promptly.

[TOP]

We should discourage bf/gf jointly own property, my friend recently has big headache after he decided to break up with his gf but she refuses to sell the property and wanted a big discount from my friend to transfer ownership to her.

So think about the future problem before you proceed. Ask yourself what is the reason you'll dont want to get married in the first place.......

[screwby]

Thanks all for the replies.

Just talked to some regurgitating staff from CPF and this info is for awareness.

For unrelated singles, if one party is already using CPF for existing property, the other party (not using CPF for any property at all), cannot even use his CPF for the purchase of the new private property.

We can go on debating on the rationale but that is the policy.

[proud owner]

Thanks all for the replies.

Just talked to some regurgitating staff from CPF and this info is for awareness.

For unrelated singles, if one party is already using CPF for existing property, the other party (not using CPF for any property at all), cannot even use his CPF for the purchase of the new private property.

We can go on debating on the rationale but that is the policy.

then the boyfriend buy on his own lor ..

she has her own ..he has his own ..

if fate brings them together ..then move into one of them

if not .. clean cut ... also good lah

[screwby]

Thanks all for the replies.

Just talked to some regurgitating staff from CPF and this info is for awareness.

For unrelated singles, if one party is already using CPF for existing property, the other party (not using CPF for any property at all), cannot even use his CPF for the purchase of the new private property.

We can go on debating on the rationale but that is the policy.

As I am still not convinced, especially after talking to a staff that read out standard FAQ template, I wrote in to CPF.

Guess what, the answer is totally different. Unrelated singles, as long as the party not using CPF for any existing property, he/she can use his/her CPF for the new property. WTF....

To make sure that I did not mis-interpret their answers, I wrote in to re-confirm again in my own language. Answers are the same. Ok, then I called CPF again, and this time round, they told me cannot use....@#$&!

I quoted the name and their email reply and rebutted them, so which is which? The guy after checking, came back with a different reply...can use. I asked him wat's happening, 1st time say cannot use, then email say can use, then u said cannot use and say can use again?!

The issue here is CPF don't even know what they are doing and yet they are supposed to advise the members? Gonna write in to CPF now to highlight this credibility and consistency issue.

[devilplate]

CPF rules keep changing.

only recently i get to know tat once u hit 55yo....u can only withdraw 30% of ur combined OA+SA even though u satisfy the min sum

let say u got 1mil CPF when u hit 55yo...u can only withdraw 30% of 1mil...i always tot can withdraw 1mil minus min sum required

[spikey69]

CPF rules keep changing.

only recently i get to know tat once u hit 55yo....u can only withdraw 30% of ur combined OA+SA even though u satisfy the min sum

let say u got 1mil CPF when u hit 55yo...u can only withdraw 30% of 1mil...i always tot can withdraw 1mil minus min sum required

that's why before 55 must whack everything out less min sum and put that in PROPERTY!

[luanluanshoot]

that's why before 55 must whack everything out less min sum and put that in PROPERTY!

Not forgetting min sum also keeps changing

[Douk]

People are usually more careful when reply in writing.... It is always good to write in if not urgent..

As I am still not convinced, especially after talking to a staff that read out standard FAQ template, I wrote in to CPF.

Guess what, the answer is totally different. Unrelated singles, as long as the party not using CPF for any existing property, he/she can use his/her CPF for the new property. WTF....

To make sure that I did not mis-interpret their answers, I wrote in to re-confirm again in my own language. Answers are the same. Ok, then I called CPF again, and this time round, they told me cannot use....@#$&!

I quoted the name and their email reply and rebutted them, so which is which? The guy after checking, came back with a different reply...can use. I asked him wat's happening, 1st time say cannot use, then email say can use, then u said cannot use and say can use again?!

The issue here is CPF don't even know what they are doing and yet they are supposed to advise the members? Gonna write in to CPF now to highlight this credibility and consistency issue.

[devilplate]

that's why before 55 must whack everything out less min sum and put that in PROPERTY!

meaning once u hit 55yo...cannot use cpf for ppty? serious?

[louisebrown]

CPF rules keep changing.

only recently i get to know tat once u hit 55yo....u can only withdraw 30% of ur combined OA+SA even though u satisfy the min sum

let say u got 1mil CPF when u hit 55yo...u can only withdraw 30% of 1mil...i always tot can withdraw 1mil minus min sum required

This is absolutely wrong.
Let's read fr CPF :

From 1 January 2010, members who reach 55 can only withdraw 30% of their cash balances, and the remaining balances, if any, after they have set aside the CPF Minimum Sum (MS) in their Retirement Account. If they have the full MS but have less than the Medisave Required Amount (MRA), they are required to make a top-up to their Medisave Account with part of their CPF balances from their Ordinary and/or Special Accounts to meet the prevailing MRA. This percentage of withdrawal will go down by 10 percentage points each year until 2013.

[devilplate]

yes! my relative just checked with CPF hotline...he is so happy!

the 30% applies to those who cannot meet the min sum requirement.

and after 55, u still can use cpf to buy ppty