Monthly Archives: March 2010

Call for review of housing policies

ALTHOUGH it was not directly addressed in Budget 2010, worries about the cost of housing in Singapore were reflected in several MPs’ speeches yesterday.

There were calls to review housing policies, including current rules that allow private property owners to buy HDB flats and to sublet them.

It was also suggested that the $8,000 household income ceiling be raised to allow more Singaporeans to buy new subsidised flats (that are not executive condominiums) from the Housing Board.

The growing number of new immigrants in recent years has caused not just a squeeze on jobs, but also on transport and housing, said MPs.

Mr Inderjit Singh (Ang Mo Kio GRC) said: ‘By bringing in too many people too quickly…the cost of living has gone up rapidly. The clearest manifestation of this is the cost of HDB flats.’

He said though permanent residents (PRs) cannot buy new flats, they still indirectly inflate prices. This is because demand by PRs in the resale market can push up prices, and the price of new HDB flats is pegged to the resale market.

There are also many PRs who rent HDB flats and this contributes to the upward pressure on flat prices, he added.

HDB resale prices have risen about 40 per cent in the past three years, far outstripping Singapore’s economic growth.

The Ministry of National Development has maintained that PRs, who make up only one in five resale flat buyers, have minimal impact on resale prices.

Yesterday’s debate also saw Dr Ahmad Magad (Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC) raise concerns on the effectiveness of recent measures to curb property speculation.

Three days before the Budget statement on Feb 22, the Government announced new rules: A property buyer has to pay extra stamp duty if he sells the property within a year; and the amount buyers can borrow from lending institutions was reduced from 90 per cent to 80 per cent of the property’s value.

Despite these measures, people are still thronging showrooms and snapping up properties, said Dr Ahmad.

He was particularly concerned about the policy that allows private property owners to own HDB flats as well. While the policy says they must live in the flats, anecdotal evidence shows many do not, and are renting them out. ‘If no stern action is taken, it will encourage more dual property owners to do the same,’ he said.

Mr Sin Boon Ann (Tampines GRC) wants the Government to review the income ceiling for a group of young Singaporeans – graduates who have worked a few years before deciding to settle down – struggling to buy a new HDB flat.

He argued that not all couples whose incomes exceed the current limit can afford private housing, or have enough cash to meet the down payment for a pricier resale HDB flat from the secondary market.

National Development Minister Mah Bow Tan said recently the Government was looking into measures for the HDB market and that announcements would be made in Parliament some time this week or the next.

Source : Straits Times – 3 Mar 2010

Co-owner loses fight to stop collective sale

A MAN did not want to sell his apartment in a proposed collective sale, but his wife wanted to – and had signed on the dotted line to say yes.

The sale of the Joo Chiat property thus hung in limbo for three years while the lone dissenter, Mr Goh Teh Lee, 52, took his fight all the way to the highest court in the land.

En route, the couple divorced.

Yesterday, he lost the battle. The Court of Appeal threw out his case, paving the way for the sale.

The court, comprising Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, Andrew Phang and V. K. Rajah, were unanimous in deciding that Mr Goh, as a co-owner, did not have the right – known in legal parlance as locus standi – to be heard in court, since he and his now ex-wife had to act as one in the en bloc sale.

Despite being told this, Mr Goh, who represented himself in court, insisted he had a strong case for objecting to the sale on the basis of procedural irregularities and unfairness.

But Justice Chao remarked: ‘We are extremely doubtful that your case is strong. Most, if not all, of the points you raised are without merit.’

Justice Rajah piped in: ‘And we are being polite.’

The property in question comprised 24 apartments in a four-storey block known as Koon Seng House and nine pre-war terrace houses on one plot of land. The collective sale was mooted at a residents’ meeting in November 2006, when the Gohs were going through their divorce.

The sales proceeds, $21.12 million, were to be divided equally among the 33 units. The terrace houses were owned by a single owner, and the apartments, by different individuals.

Mr Goh asserted that there were discrepancies in the collective sale agreement, such as dodgy signatures.

He contended that the deal was not transparent as the minutes of the first meeting were not circulated to all owners and that the sale committee had acted too hastily by appointing the property agent and lawyer for the deal on the same night the panel was formed.

He also alleged that the majority owners made false declarations to the Strata Titles Board (STB).

The STB disagreed and ordered the sale in December 2008. Mr Goh appealed to the High Court to reverse the decision.

When the High Court also ruled against him, he went to the Court of Appeal.

While he was not ordered to pay legal costs, Mr Goh will have to pay $3,000 for the sales committee’s expenses for the appeal.

The appeals court also ruled that if he does not sign the sales papers, the Registrar of Supreme Court will sign them on his behalf.

Source : Straits Times – 3 Mar 2010