Tenancy agreements/leases and your rights as a tenant

[x9200]

Not the full commission but its part corresponding to the remaining period of the lease so for example 2/12 for one year contract and 2 months still to go
The rest I understand the same.

[tooktheredpill]

just a warning about one bad real estate agent. We just had a bad experience where the property company OrangeTee were acting as agents to the landlord. On handover they expected us to pay for trivial items where they were functional and the defect was due to a structural issue or to the contractor who installed it. Also they got a quote to grind and polish the wooden floors (they didn't think any of it was due to wear and tear) and in the end they only polished them.

[nush]

Dear All,

perhaps you have a good advise regarding the following issue:

I have some sliding glass panels around my kitchen and one of them cracked tonight just like that without moving or even touching it. Of course the landlords tries to blame me for it - so can anybody tell me whats the law in Singapore, who has to proof evidence?

[Strong Eagle]

Dear All,

perhaps you have a good advise regarding the following issue:

I have some sliding glass panels around my kitchen and one of them cracked tonight just like that without moving or even touching it. Of course the landlords tries to blame me for it - so can anybody tell me whats the law in Singapore, who has to proof evidence?

These things are normally solved by a dollar value clause in the tenancy agreement. Tenant agrees to all repairs that are $XXX or less. In my case, it is $200, except that all plumbing, electrical, and roofing problems belong solely to that landlady.

So, a broken window... I'd pick up $200, the landlady the rest, if more.

[nush]

Yes I have this clause in my contract as well but I am afraid that they will try to blame me for it. So thats why I am wondering who has to prove the evidence. In my home country it would be the landlord...

[nush]

As suspected - the landlord now blames me and declines to take over the costs for the repair.... is there any expert out ther who knows who has to proof evidence?

[Strong Eagle]

I don't see what the issue is. You agreed to take on the costs of minor maintenance. Something breaks. You pay for it. It's in your tenancy agreement. Doesn't say anywhere HOW it got broken. Where's the blame?

It's like if the bloody ceiling fan quits working... where's the blame? God? Or the door knob breaks and you can't get out of the toilet. Who's to blame?

Quit being such a putz, talking about 'blame', and recognize you signed a contract for minor maintenance, no matter how it happened. You may have busted it, the house might have shifted, the window was defective, an overly large gecko shattered it... what is the difference? You agreed to repairs.

If your home country were my country, the USA, I as a landlord have the same clause... I'd expect you to fix it up to the dollar amount you agreed to. You will also pay for unclogging toilets and drains if you live in my house.

Got it? You don't have a hope with any kind of 'evidence'.

[nush]

I would agree but it also says in the agreement that they will not take over the costs in case of negligence or default of the tenant... and thats why I am asking if I now have to prove that it was NOT negligence or default from my side.

[x9200]

Yes I have this clause in my contract as well but I am afraid that they will try to blame me for it. So thats why I am wondering who has to prove the evidence. In my home country it would be the landlord...

Well, surely it is not that simple as you present it here. I believe in majority of modern law systems there is a basic rule which come to this: if somebody say something then this person should prove it. I do not expect in SG is any different but the proof is never of absolute nature so this would be up to the judge to decide of the quality of the evidence. In your case there is no evidence except circumstantial and this one is... against you. The flat was handled over to you so you supposed to take care of it. Something happened to it while under your care. Is it rather the landlords fault or yours? A rhetorical question. If it would be as simple as you want to have it everybody could damage anything and say - prove it was me.
Now if you follow the route of the $Sxxx clause from your tenancy agreement (TA) it would be a different story. You pay as much as the agreement says or the landlord should do this. If the landlord refuses then you can always point to this clause in your TA and the only way he can escape it would be by proving that you damage the sliding glass panel by your negligence or deliberate action. Realistically its unlikely provable on any level.
So depending on what you have in TA (who should handle the repair) fix it by yourself and claim the money from the landlord or leave it as it is (you can rise some safety concern points) and if you are not refunded or the money is claimed from your security deposit go to the SCT and claim it there.

[lisalisadc]

What if you don't have a lease? My LL wants me to pay a repair deposit of $450. I told LL that's $450 is unreasonably steep & retroactive, not in writing, and the apt is brand new, so nothing should be breaking.

[x9200]

What if you don't have a lease? My LL wants me to pay a repair deposit of $450. I told LL that's $450 is unreasonably steep & retroactive, not in writing, and the apt is brand new, so nothing should be breaking.

What do you mean by that? No written agreement?

[lisalisadc]

No written agreement. Through coworker.

No broker fee. But now LL won't fix clogged toilet.

[x9200]

Do you think you could elaborate a bit more than throwing 1 or 2 enigmatic sentences?
On a different ground, why do you think LL supposed to "fix" your clogged toilet?

[lisalisadc]

The condo is brand new - 3 mos. old. 2 plumbers (1 theirs, 1 ours) have been out to fix the clogged toilet. The plumber that I hired says needs to use machine with suction to determine if there is a bigger problem. Talks to LL on phone about problem and gives estimate. LL defers to their plumber. Their plumber comes out and temporarily fixes toilet. Toilet works for a few days after last repair, then clogs up when I get home from work. LL won't pay for either plumber now.

There is no unusual activity going on here. The fixtures are brand new.

Also, I immediately notified them of a leak when using the washer and dryer. A 6-foot puddle appears after using the laundry machine. Their plumber came out twice to fix the pipe/hose of the brand new washer and dryer that he hooked up. It still leaks after one load of laundry. I told them about it immediately and they told me to not use brand new washing machine for a few weeks.

I have nothing to do with the washer leaking. I don't think that I have anything to do with the toilet clogging. The condo is brand new. Is it my fault that the fixtures are defective and/or not installed properly?

[x9200]

Ok, this part is roughly clear - did you talk to the condo management? If the place is brand new they typically handle all this sort of problems. At least this was the situation in our case. We informed the LL but ultimately all such repairs were handled by contractors managed by the condo management and linked somehow to the developer. Free of charge of course.

Still not clear on your legal situation - through coworker, meaning he/she has a written agreement and sublet the place to you?