Forced evictions

Discuss about where to live, renting a property, tenancy issues, property trend and property investment in Singapore.
Post Reply
User avatar
longstebe
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 1:50 pm
Location: Netherlands

Post by longstebe » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 7:08 am

k1w1 wrote:Come on, guys, this man is not squatting! This is not some abandoned apartment we are talking about. The OP is living in it and, more imortantly, holds the lease to live there. There is no way she is required to let him stay there with her.

If it were his lease, I'd be telling her to get out, but it isn't. She absolutely has the right to say who lives with her. If he wanted rights to the house, he should've put his name on the lease.

Are you guys suggesting she moves out and stays liable for the rent?
No. The guys are just trying to make sure the OP finds out what his and her rights are.

Singapore Property Search

 

User avatar
k1w1
Reporter
Reporter
Posts: 680
Joined: Mon, 30 May 2005 8:20 pm

Post by k1w1 » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 7:08 am

x9200 wrote:Hi MS, have some deja vu feeling but cannot locate the earlier thread... Could you help me please quoting the relevant paragraphs for the rights of the tenant to remove the belongings and the occupant? I do not see the later one in p.28 and cap 7A but could be I am looking in a wrong place.
Perhaps you should be looking for a clause that allows someone to move in with the legal occupant of a house and then refuse to move out when asked to do so.

:roll:

By your reasoning, maids would be able to refuse to budge from their employer's house after they were fired. Likewise, annoying subletters (or room-mates) could call the cops if the main (legal) occupant/room-mate decided they no longer wanted them there and asked them to move out...

Just to be clear, I'm not condoning booting innocent people out onto the street with no warning, but the OP has actually asked her ex to move and he is refusing to do it. Even if he tries to say she stole from him or damaged his stuff, he'd have to prove that. He hasn't got a leg to stand on.

User avatar
JR8
Immortal
Immortal
Posts: 16516
Joined: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:43 pm
Location: K. Puki Manis

Post by JR8 » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 7:20 am

k1w1 wrote:Come on, guys, this man is not squatting! This is not some abandoned apartment we are talking about. The OP is living in it and, more imortantly, holds the lease to live there. There is no way she is required to let him stay there with her.

If it were his lease, I'd be telling her to get out, but it isn't. She absolutely has the right to say who lives with her. If he wanted rights to the house, he should've put his name on the lease.

Are you guys suggesting she moves out and stays liable for the rent?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... chool.html

A property does not have to be 'abandoned' to be squatted. Though I'd question whether a person established as residing in a property, without their name on the lease would ever fall under the terms of 'squatting'.

It sounds messy.

User avatar
Mad Scientist
Director
Director
Posts: 3506
Joined: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 6:31 am
Answers: 1
Location: TIMBUKTU

Post by Mad Scientist » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 7:55 am

x9200 wrote:Hi MS, have some deja vu feeling but cannot locate the earlier thread... Could you help me please quoting the relevant paragraphs for the rights of the tenant to remove the belongings and the occupant? I do not see the later one in p.28 and cap 7A but could be I am looking in a wrong place.
It is in Chap 43 of the civil law which only refers to LL and tenant. Hence from what I have been advised , you can remove his belonging

No person chargeable with rent bona fide paid to holder under defective title
28. —(1) No person shall be chargeable with any rents or profits of any immovable property which he has bona fide paid over to any person of whom he bona fide held the rents or profits notwithstanding it afterwards appears that the person to whom such payment was made had no right to receive the rents or profits.

Apologies it is Chap 68 not 28. Typo error

Procedure where dispute concerning land, etc., is likely to cause breach of peace.
107. —(1) Whenever a Magistrate’s Court is satisfied from a police report or other information that a dispute likely to cause a breach of the peace exists concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof it shall make an prevordernext in writing stating the grounds of its being so satisfied and requiring the parties concerned in the dispute to attend a District Court in person or by advocate within a time to be fixed by the Magistrate’s Court and to put in written statements of their respective claims regarding the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute.

(2) For the purposes of this section and of section 109, “land or water”
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible.Yahoo !!!

x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9873
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 4:06 pm
Location: Singapore

Post by x9200 » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 9:06 am

k1w1 wrote:Perhaps you should be looking for a clause that allows someone to move in with the legal occupant of a house and then refuse to move out when asked to do so.

:roll:

He moved in as his then GF allowed this so she sub-let the property to him or whatever the agreement was.

By your reasoning, maids would be able to refuse to budge from their employer's house after they were fired. Likewise, annoying subletters (or

Yes, and this is the case in (I believe) majority of EU countries. Not for the maids specifically of course but in similar situations. I realize it is hard to believe and many ppl are actually not aware of this. It kind of defies the common sense or better say the sense of justice. Whether this is the case in SG - I don't know, I will try to digest what MS has posted here.

room-mates) could call the cops if the main (legal) occupant/room-mate decided they no longer wanted them there and asked them to move out...

For asking not, for an attempt or actual removal by force - yes.

Just to be clear, I'm not condoning booting innocent people out onto the street with no warning, but the OP has actually asked her ex to move and he is refusing to do it. Even if he tries to say she stole from him or damaged his stuff, he'd have to prove that. He hasn't got a leg to stand on.
Your intentions are clear so no worry. I am also not trying to defend him but just advising to be careful as law sometimes appears strange.
This will be only about qualification (criminal or civil). If he is mean enough his belongings left outside will just disappear and then with the locks changed what kind of scenarios do we have? All disappeared from the flat - bet he will have no problems to prove (make sufficiently proven) some of his stuff was there and now everything is gone (where?) and he has no access. You really have to be careful dealing with this kind of ppl.

User avatar
Saint
Director
Director
Posts: 3535
Joined: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 5:19 pm
Location: The Juban Stand, Boat Quay
Contact:

Re: Forced evictions

Post by Saint » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 9:18 am

Joeyfishcat wrote:Just after some advice... I'm planning to kick out my now ex-bf at the end of the month, as - despite having other female interests and a replacement gf - he seems reluctant to leave the convenience of a cheap condo(excuses - can't afford it/can't find anywhere/doesn't want to pay an agent, blah, blah...).
His name's not on the tenancy agreement anywhere, but he is threatening to call the police if I remove all his things and change the locks while he is at work.
Just wondered if I would get into any legal trouble by forcibly evicting him in this way... ? :?
Tks,
Jo
As his name isn't on the TA and he's paying a rental whatever the amount might be, you are probably breaking the subletting clause of your contract. You normally have to get prior permission from your LL to sublet if the person isn't a family member. If you had previously got permission just ask the LL to write a letter stating that subletting is no longer permitted at the apartment.

x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9873
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 4:06 pm
Location: Singapore

Post by x9200 » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 9:22 am

@MS, if I understand the paragraph correctly it is by the court order not a decision of the LL but I agree the situation could be here different so again, I am not saying it is not true she can kick the bastard out of her flat, but be careful and ensure you can do this. One call or a visit to the police should solve the problem. They are very helpful.

User avatar
Mad Scientist
Director
Director
Posts: 3506
Joined: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 6:31 am
Answers: 1
Location: TIMBUKTU

Post by Mad Scientist » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 1:26 pm

x9200 wrote:@MS, if I understand the paragraph correctly it is by the court order not a decision of the LL but I agree the situation could be here different so again, I am not saying it is not true she can kick the bastard out of her flat, but be careful and ensure you can do this. One call or a visit to the police should solve the problem. They are very helpful.
I was advised that the first step is PPO then inform him that ex-bf is given notice to remove himself and possession by stipulated time. If this fails, notice of evict / trespassing on private property hence cap 68
All must be documented.
It would not go that far unless ex-bf refuse therefore get an injunction from the court notice of evict.
Your home is a private property until your main door if you are living in HDB or condo. Even the police cannot step into your house unless given permission or warrant is being issued. This is the law
If ex-bf is a guest , notice to remove trespasser can be given.
This is what I understand
The positive thinker sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible.Yahoo !!!

User avatar
longstebe
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 257
Joined: Thu, 24 Sep 2009 1:50 pm
Location: Netherlands

Post by longstebe » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 2:41 pm

x9200 wrote:@MS, if I understand the paragraph correctly it is by the court order not a decision of the LL but I agree the situation could be here different so again, I am not saying it is not true she can kick the bastard out of her flat, but be careful and ensure you can do this. One call or a visit to the police should solve the problem. They are very helpful.
Calling him a bastard is a little harsh isn't it?

x9200
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 9873
Joined: Mon, 07 Sep 2009 4:06 pm
Location: Singapore

Post by x9200 » Fri, 18 Feb 2011 3:49 pm

longstebe wrote:Calling him a bastard is a little harsh isn't it?
Yes, you are right, a bit too strong. I'm taking it back.

Eau2011
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 2:38 pm

Re: Forced evictions

Post by Eau2011 » Thu, 24 Feb 2011 6:21 pm

k1w1 wrote:
Joeyfishcat wrote:Just after some advice... I'm planning to kick out my now ex-bf at the end of the month, as - despite having other female interests and a replacement gf - he seems reluctant to leave the convenience of a cheap condo(excuses - can't afford it/can't find anywhere/doesn't want to pay an agent, blah, blah...).
His name's not on the tenancy agreement anywhere, but he is threatening to call the police if I remove all his things and change the locks while he is at work.
Just wondered if I would get into any legal trouble by forcibly evicting him in this way... ? :?
Tks,
Jo
Is this guy for real? He wants to call the cops on you for kicking him out of YOUR house?

What do you think the cops are going to do? Say, "Nope, sorry miss, you gotta live with him"?

Pack his bags and put them outside. Change the locks. Pour a glass of wine.
:mrgreen: =D> Is he out now?

FaeLLe
Chatter
Chatter
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 9:38 am
Location: London

Re: Forced evictions

Post by FaeLLe » Thu, 24 Mar 2011 1:45 pm

Saint wrote:
Joeyfishcat wrote:Just after some advice... I'm planning to kick out my now ex-bf at the end of the month, as - despite having other female interests and a replacement gf - he seems reluctant to leave the convenience of a cheap condo(excuses - can't afford it/can't find anywhere/doesn't want to pay an agent, blah, blah...).
His name's not on the tenancy agreement anywhere, but he is threatening to call the police if I remove all his things and change the locks while he is at work.
Just wondered if I would get into any legal trouble by forcibly evicting him in this way... ? :?
Tks,
Jo
As his name isn't on the TA and he's paying a rental whatever the amount might be, you are probably breaking the subletting clause of your contract. You normally have to get prior permission from your LL to sublet if the person isn't a family member. If you had previously got permission just ask the LL to write a letter stating that subletting is no longer permitted at the apartment.
Yes this is the most important point....

Also did the OP show the rental income in her Income Tax statement that she was getting from her ex-BF....... it seems to be another matter that she passed it off as rent payment to the landlord.

But technically it still is a rental income. Not to mention she was breaking the law and attempting evasion of taxes by AGREEING that she did indeed sublet her house.


IMHO she should say she let him stay as guest since he was homeless but now he refuses to leave.

The legal advice given by MS is just right in my sense, would be what I would do.

User avatar
Joeyfishcat
Regular
Regular
Posts: 76
Joined: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 9:38 pm
Location: Singapore (formerly Southampton, UK)

Update!

Post by Joeyfishcat » Thu, 26 May 2011 6:53 pm

Many thanks for all your advice :) Duly noted.
Fortunately, said 'bastard' (and yes, it is ok to use such a term IMHO) managed - after some nagging and the threat of a visit from certain of my family members from the UK - to find a place and move out without the need for a forced eviction.
In order to make an omelette, you have to break a few eggs :D

Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post

Return to “Property Talk, Housing & Rental”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests