Owner want to use facilities

[re7]

Hi all,

I wanted to get some advice.

I have an owner who I am renting my condo from and my agent has passed on a message that the owner would like the login details to book the facilities of my condo.

I wanted to know if this is strange for Singapore? It doesn't seem right that I pay rent to the owner and they want to try and use the facilities. This would not happen in other countries I have lived in.

There is a clause in my contract that is to do with quiet enjoyment. Which the basic overview is we can use our condo without interruption from the owner.

I just want to get some peoples opinions if they have ever had something like this.

Thanks in advance for any help!

[rajagainstthemachine]

What are these facilities that your landlord wants to use?
Are they located inside your apartment? Or are they general purpose things like pool barbecue etc?

[re7]

They are the general facilities. The BBQ areas, Food areas, Meeting rooms etc.

[maneo]

Shouldn't the owner be able to get his own login directly from the cоndо management?

[JR8]

I have an owner who I am renting my condo from and my agent has passed on a message that the owner would like the login details to book the facilities of my condo.
I wanted to know if this is strange for Singapore? It doesn't seem right that I pay rent to the owner and they want to try and use the facilities. This would not happen in other countries I have lived in.
There is a clause in my contract that is to do with quiet enjoyment. Which the basic overview is we can use our condo without interruption from the owner.
I just want to get some peoples opinions if they have ever had something like this.
Thanks in advance for any help!

Wow In the annals of local kiasu p-taking that's a new one and ranks pretty high!

Consider the situation:
Are you allowed to pass on *your* login details for his use? If he is entitled to use the facilities why does he not have his own login, or request one? What happens with the facilities is the liability of the person who booked it. In our previous place you paid a $250 depo for the BBQ area, and you lost it if management deemed you hadn't cleaned up properly after yourself. Will the LL be there until 1am diligently cleaning up after his BBQ, all for your sake?

How would the LL and guests get access, would they all be ringing on your doorbell? Would you have to agree to stay at home each time to let his guests in? (yes that would deffo be breach of Quiet Enjoyment, but even him posing this question *might* be breach of QE, as it unnecessarily puts you in an uncomfortable situation. It probably isn't harassment (yet), but if he were to keep asking, or make demands of you, IMVHO it would be.

How about an example that happened recently at our last place. A resident family had guests to stay, one of whom took a dump in the pool. The resident was reported to the police, as the guest was a youth deemed as in his care. Another case: A resident had guests staying, the guests allegedly had a late night triste (ie. sex) in the spa-pool. A guard caught them. That pool was emptied, 'sterilised' and refilled, costs of labour and materials $2k, and guess who was liable?
Imagine if the LLs of all rented units were all allowed to use the facilities... they're hard enough to book as it is, if that were permitted it would be almost impossible.

So no, I've never heard of this and it sounds inherently wrong. I'd approach it with a position of 'I'd love to help, but sadly XYZ other person has said that this is not permitted'. Hopefully XYZ might be the condo management.

So I'd do one of ...:
1) Reply to the agent, say you're happy to try and help, but you're unsure if it's allowed. And could the agent kindly contact condo management, and forward their written approval to you? Or could they simply point you to the clause in the facilities use agreement that says it's allowed.
2) Pop down to the management office yourself. They're usually open on Saturday mornings, and tend to be a friendly and helpful bunch. And ask them if this is permitted, then either do 1) above (you by then already knowing the answer, but not having to be the one to deliver it), or simply tell the agent that 'sadly' it is not permitted.
3) Tell the agent you're happy to try and help, but that it is your understanding that it is not permitted. Then wait for the agent to do the leg-work and try and prove your suggestion wrong.

I'd tend to go with 3), as it shows willing, but leaves all the leg-work to the agent.

-- I'm assuming you did not have your own agent, otherwise why is the LLs agent directing this question to you...?

[re7]

I have an owner who I am renting my condo from and my agent has passed on a message that the owner would like the login details to book the facilities of my condo.
I wanted to know if this is strange for Singapore? It doesn't seem right that I pay rent to the owner and they want to try and use the facilities. This would not happen in other countries I have lived in.
There is a clause in my contract that is to do with quiet enjoyment. Which the basic overview is we can use our condo without interruption from the owner.
I just want to get some peoples opinions if they have ever had something like this.
Thanks in advance for any help!

Wow In the annals of local kiasu p-taking that's a new one and ranks pretty high!

Consider the situation:
Are you allowed to pass on *your* login details for his use? If he is entitled to use the facilities why does he not have his own login, or request one? What happens with the facilities is the liability of the person who booked it. In our previous place you paid a $250 depo for the BBQ area, and you lost it if management deemed you hadn't cleaned up properly after yourself. Will the LL be there until 1am diligently cleaning up after his BBQ, all for your sake?

How would the LL and guests get access, would they all be ringing on your doorbell? Would you have to agree to stay at home each time to let his guests in? (yes that would deffo be breach of Quiet Enjoyment, but even him posing this question *might* be breach of QE, as it unnecessarily puts you in an uncomfortable situation. It probably isn't harassment (yet), but if he were to keep asking, or make demands of you, IMVHO it would be.

How about an example that happened recently at our last place. A resident family had guests to stay, one of whom took a dump in the pool. The resident was reported to the police, as the guest was a youth deemed as in his care. Another case: A resident had guests staying, the guests allegedly had a late night triste (ie. sex) in the spa-pool. A guard caught them. That pool was emptied, 'sterilised' and refilled, costs of labour and materials $2k, and guess who was liable?
Imagine if the LLs of all rented units were all allowed to use the facilities... they're hard enough to book as it is, if that were permitted it would be almost impossible.

So no, I've never heard of this and it sounds inherently wrong. I'd approach it with a position of 'I'd love to help, but sadly XYZ other person has said that this is not permitted'. Hopefully XYZ might be the condo management.

So I'd do one of ...:
1) Reply to the agent, say you're happy to try and help, but you're unsure if it's allowed. And could the agent kindly contact condo management, and forward their written approval to you? Or could they simply point you to the clause in the facilities use agreement that says it's allowed.
2) Pop down to the management office yourself. They're usually open on Saturday mornings, and tend to be a friendly and helpful bunch. And ask them if this is permitted, then either do 1) above (you by then already knowing the answer, but not having to be the one to deliver it), or simply tell the agent that 'sadly' it is not permitted.
3) Tell the agent you're happy to try and help, but that it is your understanding that it is not permitted. Then wait for the agent to do the leg-work and try and prove your suggestion wrong.

I'd tend to go with 3), as it shows willing, but leaves all the leg-work to the agent.

-- I'm assuming you did not have your own agent, otherwise why is the LLs agent directing this question to you...?

Thank you this would be violating the house rules and regulations of the condo! You were more then helpful. Great idea!

[JR8]

Hehehe, good stuff

--- Now I'd be stroking my beard and pondering what this might tell me about the LL and his agent...

[x9200]

It happened to me once ca 10y ago. The LL wanted to book a BBQ pit under the unit. I didn't object. He paid the deposit ($50). It was a single incident in 7y of renting from him and he was generally a good LL so I believe I figured this one out correctly. What I mean, this is clearly a favour but depending on the circumstances it might be entertained.

Of course I would never pass any login details and such but if he is willing to arrange it by himself including the payment of the deposit and if you feel it is not going to be abused by more frequent request of this type, then perhaps it could be considered.

[maneo]

What happens with the facilities is the liability of the person who booked it.

Condо management councils do not have legal relationships with tenants.
It is the owners, the landlords, that have the legal relationship through the tenancy agreement.

As a result, the by-laws may stipulate that it is the landlords (i.e. the "subsidiary proprietors," or SPs for short, the owners) that are liable for damage to common prоperty by anyone residing in their unit or their guests. However, where tenants are responsible for damage condо managing agents (MAs) will first try to recover directly from the tenants.

How would the LL and guests get access, would they all be ringing on your doorbell? Would you have to agree to stay at home each time to let his guests in?

Where non-resident owners are allowed to use facilities, instructions can be given to security that visiting guests be directed to the common facilities without needing to contact the unit.

Imagine if the LLs of all rented units were all allowed to use the facilities... they're hard enough to book as it is, if that were permitted it would be almost impossible.

Where this is or could be a problem, then the condо by-laws should explicitly disallow use by non-resident owners. Condоs limit parking this way. If facility utilisation is high, facility use also may be restricted to residents only. It depends on the project.

So I'd do one of ...:
1) Reply to the agent, say you're happy to try and help, but you're unsure if it's allowed. And could the agent kindly contact condo management, and forward their written approval to you? Or could they simply point you to the clause in the facilities use agreement that says it's allowed.
2) Pop down to the management office yourself. They're usually open on Saturday mornings, and tend to be a friendly and helpful bunch. And ask them if this is permitted, then either do 1) above (you by then already knowing the answer, but not having to be the one to deliver it), or simply tell the agent that 'sadly' it is not permitted.
3) Tell the agent you're happy to try and help, but that it is your understanding that it is not permitted. Then wait for the agent to do the leg-work and try and prove your suggestion wrong.


I'd tend to go with 3), as it shows willing, but leaves all the leg-work to the agent

I agree.
If the landlord is asking this, it seems like facility use by non-resident owners is not allowed.

By the way, there is usually a requirement that those booking the facility (i.e. those entitled to usage) must be present while it is being used.
Unless the landlord is including the tenant in the event, the tenant should not be put on the spot like this. The tenant could be at risk of losing his right to use facilities for several weeks for allowing unauthorised guests.

[JR8]

What happens with the facilities is the liability of the person who booked it.

Condо management councils do not have legal relationships with tenants.
It is the owners, the landlords, that have the legal relationship through the tenancy agreement.

As a result, it is the landlords (i.e. the "subsidiary proprietors," or SPs for short, the owners) that normally are liable for damage to common prоperty by anyone residing in their unit or their guests.
However, where tenants are responsible for damage condо managing agents (MAs) will first try to recover directly from the tenants.

Errr... overall I think we are in agreement
Other points seem rather moot now, since the OP has confirmed the LL cannot book the facilities.

However I disagree that the TA deals with the Landlords relationship with management; that surely is detailed in the LLs lease. To my earlier point at the top, it still sounds correct to me. Most condo TAs have a clause that explicitly incorporates the condo rules into the TA. Thus a tenant does have a (both direct and indirect) relationship with condo management. This is why it is important a new condo tenant reads the condo rules! The effect of incorporation of these rules is to transfer responsibility for use of facilities from the LL to the Tenant. Since the Tenant is resident, and the LL is not meant to be in the condo treating it like his home, that seems reasonable.

I agree that the LL likely is *ultimately* responsible for what the tenant does, but he has lines of defence incl:
- The Tenants deposit paid to condo management specifically for facility use.
- The tenancy deposit taken under the TA.
- The right to resort to legal action to enforce payment of any outstanding debts.


But all in all I would not be happy letting my LL use the facilities at a condo where I lived. It risks blurring the line between 'business and pleasure'. And given how LLs already have the upper hand within the SG legal system, and how they hold the tenants deposit I can see nil virtue in indulging the LL in such a requested arrangement; even if it were permitted by the MA. But with one exception, if LLs were allowed to book the facilities and the LL happened to be a pre-existing friend who I fully trusted to abide by all the rules etc.

[I'm just trying to take this topic to something of a conclusive end-point. As IIRC this question has been raised before and if it raised again in future maybe this topic will be searchable...]

Hence tags [ landlord condo facilities liability BBQ barbecue pool party deposit ]

[the lynx]

Interesting. I'd have never thought that owners would want to do that!

But I guess it is subjected to each MA's by-laws. I'm curious to see what OP's end has to say.

[JR8]

Interesting. I'd have never thought that owners would want to do that!
But I guess it is subjected to each MA's by-laws. I'm curious to see what OP's end has to say.

Well quite!
're7' checked and gave his reply above: condo Management don't allow it. Given the potentially complex and conflicting situations it could lead to I can understand why.

[x9200]

I don't recall condo regulations differentiating the role of the owners in the access to the facilities (except when occupying the unit). What I typically see is an unit based assignment (e.g. for parking lots). IMHO, typically the control of the LL access is done via the peaceful enjoyment clause because I don't see any other "law" that would provide the access to the facilities exclusively for the tenants for, or cessation of the rights to access the facilities for the LL just by simple fact of entering the TA with some third party.

Just consider such modification of TA that makes the LL a formal occupant of the unit. Possible? Surely it is. Reasonable? Yes, as many owners may still want to occupy a room while letting out the remaining rooms. In other words I expect the access is governed by the TA rather than by some condo regulation.

[maneo]

However I disagree that the TA deals with the Landlords relationship with management; that surely is detailed in the LLs lease.

The Tenancy Agreement (TA) doesn't deal with the Landlords relationship with management.
The TA establishes the legal relationship between the landlord and the tenant.

As you point out, since landlords are ultimately held responsible by the MCST, TAs must include the requirement that the tenant be aware of the condо by-laws and that they must obey them.
However, there is no explicit contract between the MCST and tenants, thus the comment that "Condо management councils do not have legal relationships with tenants."

Maybe it's a subtle point, but MCSTs are not party to TAs.
Only the landlords and the tenants sign it.
MCSTs just get a copy of the TA after the fact.

But all in all I would not be happy letting my LL use the facilities at a condo where I lived. It risks blurring the line between 'business and pleasure'. And given how LLs already have the upper hand within the SG legal system, and how they hold the tenants deposit I can see nil virtue in indulging the LL in such a requested arrangement; even if it were permitted by the MA. But with one exception, if LLs were allowed to book the facilities and the LL happened to be a pre-existing friend who I fully trusted to abide by all the rules etc.

Again, I agree.
If booking by non-resident owners is allowed by the by-laws, there is no need to bother the tenant.

If such booking is not allowed, then it might make sense only if, like you say, the LL and tenant were already trusted and established friends. In that case, it's not merely a business relationship.

It just doesn't sound like that's the case this time.

[maneo]

I don't recall condo regulations differentiating the role of the owners in the access to the facilities (except when occupying the unit). What I typically see is an unit based assignment (e.g. for parking lots). IMHO, typically the control of the LL access is done via the peaceful enjoyment clause because I don't see any other "law" that would provide the access to the facilities exclusively for the tenants for, or cessation of the rights to access the facilities for the LL just by simple fact of entering the TA with some third party.

Just consider such modification of TA that makes the LL a formal occupant of the unit. Possible? Surely it is. Reasonable? Yes, as many owners may still want to occupy a room while letting out the remaining rooms. In other words I expect the access is governed by the TA rather than by some condo regulation.

A quick online search ("facility usage by non-resident owners Singapore") shows by-laws for a few projects that explicitly deny non-resident owners access to common facilities (e.g. Rio Vista, Parc Oasis, Caspian).
I would expect this where owner-occupied ratios are low and facility utilisation high.