The reason the LL doesnt respond to his queries is because he doesnt want any kind of "out of court" amicable settlement. Isn't that obvious?x9200 wrote:The LL does not respond to his queries. How does he suppose to get the approval?revhappy wrote:Although it is reasonable, you need a reasonable LL for it. If the LL is willing to fight it out the legal way, the OP has no chance. I find your suggestion to the OP to find a tenant, without the LL's approval, shockingcarteki wrote: I think that that is unfair. Esp given this statement:
And that is entirely reasonable, which is unlike some LL's in this country.
My advice is to go ahead and get a replacement tenant and inform the landlord that you have the replacement and will sign a sub-lease (ie the deposit and rentals are paid to you) unless he refunds your deposit. If he decides to take you to court, you will then be able to show that the LL has not lost any money as a result of the transaction and therefore his damages are 0. You can decide to use the LL's agent, or another agent for this purpose (ps as I mentioned you will still be subject to the new commission).
SINGAPORE EXPATS FORUM
Singapore Expat Forum and Message Board for Expats in Singapore & Expatriates Relocating to Singapore
Leaving Singapore, breaking tenancy agreement Need Help
No, it's not. Now that I answered your question, could you get one step back and answer mine?revhappy wrote:The reason the LL doesnt respond to his queries is because he doesnt want any kind of "out of court" amicable settlement. Isn't that obvious?x9200 wrote: The LL does not respond to his queries. How does he suppose to get the approval?
The landlord has the tenant on the hook for 14 months, and is not obliged to speak, consider or agree to any short term replacement through to the end of the that term.x9200 wrote:No, it's not. Now that I answered your question, could you get one step back and answer mine?revhappy wrote:The reason the LL doesnt respond to his queries is because he doesnt want any kind of "out of court" amicable settlement. Isn't that obvious?x9200 wrote: The LL does not respond to his queries. How does he suppose to get the approval?
It might not make business sense to the onlooker, given the circumstances, but that's the facts.
Last edited by JR8 on Wed, 21 Sep 2011 7:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If the LL does not respond to him, he cannot get approval. Simple. If he cannot get approval he cannot do anything other than pay up or fight it out in the courtx9200 wrote:No, it's not. Now that I answered your question, could you get one step back and answer mine?revhappy wrote:The reason the LL doesnt respond to his queries is because he doesnt want any kind of "out of court" amicable settlement. Isn't that obvious?x9200 wrote: The LL does not respond to his queries. How does he suppose to get the approval?
The tenant does not need the LL's approval to seek for a replacement. In respect to the LL, there are no legal nor ethical objections preventing the tenant from doing it especially in the situation of the OP. Feel free to prove me wrong. He should only make the new tenant aware of the situation, namely that the LL may finally disagree to sign a new TA.revhappy wrote:If the LL does not respond to him, he cannot get approval. Simple. If he cannot get approval he cannot do anything other than pay up or fight it out in the court
Secondly, if the LL is not a complete idiot he realizes that having uncooperative tenant all he can get is his deposit. He may go to SCT (if he is aware of such thing) but he may not get any money as the tenant is going to leave SG. Knowing the average mindset of the local LLs I would say that a likely reason behind his behavior could be that he is looking for a replacement already by himself hoping to get it before the OP moves out and of course keeping the OP's deposit.
Do you really think that the SCT is going to side with the LL if the tenant can PROVE that he has made reasonable steps to ensure that the LL is not out of pocket? (even in Singapore I think this idea is far fetched)x9200 wrote:The tenant does not need the LL's approval to seek for a replacement. In respect to the LL, there are no legal nor ethical objections preventing the tenant from doing it especially in the situation of the OP. Feel free to prove me wrong. He should only make the new tenant aware of the situation, namely that the LL may finally disagree to sign a new TA.revhappy wrote:If the LL does not respond to him, he cannot get approval. Simple. If he cannot get approval he cannot do anything other than pay up or fight it out in the court
Secondly, if the LL is not a complete idiot he realizes that having uncooperative tenant all he can get is his deposit. He may go to SCT (if he is aware of such thing) but he may not get any money as the tenant is going to leave SG. Knowing the average mindset of the local LLs I would say that a likely reason behind his behavior could be that he is looking for a replacement already by himself hoping to get it before the OP moves out and of course keeping the OP's deposit.
Uncooperative tenants do not make reasonable steps.carteki wrote:Do you really think that the SCT is going to side with the LL if the tenant can PROVE that he has made reasonable steps to ensure that the LL is not out of pocket? (even in Singapore I think this idea is far fetched)x9200 wrote:The tenant does not need the LL's approval to seek for a replacement. In respect to the LL, there are no legal nor ethical objections preventing the tenant from doing it especially in the situation of the OP. Feel free to prove me wrong. He should only make the new tenant aware of the situation, namely that the LL may finally disagree to sign a new TA.revhappy wrote:If the LL does not respond to him, he cannot get approval. Simple. If he cannot get approval he cannot do anything other than pay up or fight it out in the court
Secondly, if the LL is not a complete idiot he realizes that having uncooperative tenant all he can get is his deposit. He may go to SCT (if he is aware of such thing) but he may not get any money as the tenant is going to leave SG. Knowing the average mindset of the local LLs I would say that a likely reason behind his behavior could be that he is looking for a replacement already by himself hoping to get it before the OP moves out and of course keeping the OP's deposit.
As far as my understanding goes, if it is mentioned in "Black and White" in the contract and no room for misinterpretation(which I would imagine the case would be given that agents are involved and the contracts here heavily favors the LL) then the OP has no chance.carteki wrote:Do you really think that the SCT is going to side with the LL if the tenant can PROVE that he has made reasonable steps to ensure that the LL is not out of pocket? (even in Singapore I think this idea is far fetched)x9200 wrote:The tenant does not need the LL's approval to seek for a replacement. In respect to the LL, there are no legal nor ethical objections preventing the tenant from doing it especially in the situation of the OP. Feel free to prove me wrong. He should only make the new tenant aware of the situation, namely that the LL may finally disagree to sign a new TA.revhappy wrote:If the LL does not respond to him, he cannot get approval. Simple. If he cannot get approval he cannot do anything other than pay up or fight it out in the court
Secondly, if the LL is not a complete idiot he realizes that having uncooperative tenant all he can get is his deposit. He may go to SCT (if he is aware of such thing) but he may not get any money as the tenant is going to leave SG. Knowing the average mindset of the local LLs I would say that a likely reason behind his behavior could be that he is looking for a replacement already by himself hoping to get it before the OP moves out and of course keeping the OP's deposit.
Carteki, I am really surprised you haven't got this inspite of being here for so long.

You guys are unnecesarily giving false hopes to the OP.
@carteki, yes same thread, but I think you clearly missed something from my post you quoted. It was about weighting the chances from the LL's perspective and explaining why he may not be responding to the OP. The word "uncooperative" was there.
If the tenant will manage to find the replacement and the LL refuses to accept it (if reasonable) he stands IMHO no chances in SCT. I wrote about it earlier.
If the tenant will manage to find the replacement and the LL refuses to accept it (if reasonable) he stands IMHO no chances in SCT. I wrote about it earlier.
Yep, also myself not got it being here even longer. I understand you have here some in-court experience, care to share?revhappy wrote: Carteki, I am really surprised you haven't got this inspite of being here for so long.
You guys are unnecesarily giving false hopes to the OP.

Your view of the law and contracts is very... hmmm... mechanistic. The law is not based on the boolean logic at all.
No I dont have any in court experience.x9200 wrote:Yep, also myself not got it being here even longer. I understand you have here some in-court experience, care to share?revhappy wrote: Carteki, I am really surprised you haven't got this inspite of being here for so long.
You guys are unnecesarily giving false hopes to the OP.![]()
Your view of the law and contracts is very... hmmm... mechanistic. The law is not based on the boolean logic at all.

If they were not mechanistic why do you even need a contract in the 1st place, if everything can be resolved based on rationalism and compassion. The tenant may cry he has no place to go and no money so may even request to live there for free for the rest of the tenure

- sundaymorningstaple
- Moderator
- Posts: 40218
- Joined: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 1:26 pm
- Location: Retired on the Little Red Dot
In the UK & Aus they can. I believe they have what's called Squatter's Rights? ksl would know more about this than I would though (pip-pip! not being a Brit & all that, wot!)revhappy wrote: If they were not mechanistic why do you even need a contract in the 1st place, if everything can be resolved based on rationalism and compassion. The tenant may cry he has no place to go and no money so may even request to live there for free for the rest of the tenure
SOME PEOPLE TRY TO TURN BACK THEIR ODOMETERS. NOT ME. I WANT PEOPLE TO KNOW WHY I LOOK THIS WAY. I'VE TRAVELED A LONG WAY, AND SOME OF THE ROADS WEREN'T PAVED. ~ Will Rogers
Just opposite, they are never mechanistic. They are social justice based as for the underlying principles. If by contract you mean a written contract for the lease then I believe you don't need it even in Singapore. Verbal is legally sufficient. It is typically written because it helps to document and prove the rights of the parties. And if verbal then you don't need to pay the stamp duty in such case. Don't believe me? Read this:revhappy wrote:No I dont have any in court experience.x9200 wrote:Yep, also myself not got it being here even longer. I understand you have here some in-court experience, care to share?revhappy wrote: Carteki, I am really surprised you haven't got this inspite of being here for so long.
You guys are unnecesarily giving false hopes to the OP.![]()
Your view of the law and contracts is very... hmmm... mechanistic. The law is not based on the boolean logic at all.Laws and contracts are always mechanistic everywhere. Only question is how strong the judiciory is in that country to enforce it.
If they were not mechanistic why do you even need a contract in the 1st place, if everything can be resolved based on rationalism and compassion. The tenant may cry he has no place to go and no money so may even request to live there for free for the rest of the tenure
http://www.iras.gov.sg/irasHome/page.aspx?id=1808
As a matter of fact only a very very few areas have a legal requirement for a contract to be in a written form, i.e. transfer of the ownership of the property.
Squatters rights are roughly, the right to occupy vacant property, without force having been used. Of course most cases involve them forcing open or smashing a window and leaving it ajar, and then returning an hour later and 'conveniently' finding access and entering. The police can't prove anything, so hey presto.sundaymorningstaple wrote:In the UK & Aus they can. I believe they have what's called Squatter's Rights? ksl would know more about this than I would though (pip-pip! not being a Brit & all that, wot!)revhappy wrote: If they were not mechanistic why do you even need a contract in the 1st place, if everything can be resolved based on rationalism and compassion. The tenant may cry he has no place to go and no money so may even request to live there for free for the rest of the tenure
It used to something of a noble thing, you know, students and hippies, who would usually actually improve run down neighborhoods.
Now it seems to be various anti-globalist euro-trash scum who typically destroy the interior of the building that they are in and are a blight on the neighbourhood.
It has also now gone a step further. There has been a recent spate of Romanians squatting properties when their legal occupiers (owners or renters) are simply off on holiday!
p.s. To eject a non-paying tenant in the UK, you need a court order. It typically takes between 6-8 months from start to finish. Touch wood I've never had one.
Edited a couple of weeks later: Just in case anyone is searching on the topic of UK squatters rights. Yes I know, but I have the article from today's paper open in front of me, so what the hell.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... -rent.html
Lifestyle squatters: Vast majority of home invaders 'driven by politics or just trying to avoid rent'
Last edited by JR8 on Tue, 04 Oct 2011 7:48 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
-
Terminate Tenancy Agreement
by snehaltendulkar » Fri, 26 Apr 2019 5:04 pm » in Relocating, Moving to Singapore - 18 Replies
- 13660 Views
-
Last post by snehaltendulkar
Mon, 13 May 2019 9:04 am
-
-
-
Room Tenancy Rental agreement - IRAS estamping late submission
by DavidLee89 » Thu, 11 Jul 2019 11:08 pm » in Property Talk, Housing & Rental - 1 Replies
- 2669 Views
-
Last post by PNGMK
Fri, 12 Jul 2019 9:27 am
-
-
-
Early termination of Tenancy Agreement
by tipis » Fri, 12 Jul 2019 5:09 pm » in Property Talk, Housing & Rental - 5 Replies
- 4010 Views
-
Last post by tipis
Tue, 16 Jul 2019 11:11 am
-
-
-
Who is going to pay repair fee if not repair clause in tenancy agreement?
by 13672666608 » Tue, 13 Aug 2019 10:55 pm » in Staying, Living in Singapore - 3 Replies
- 5511 Views
-
Last post by GraceShah
Tue, 08 Aug 2023 1:03 am
-
-
-
Important clauses for rental tenancy agreement
by abbby » Mon, 14 Oct 2019 3:25 pm » in Property Talk, Housing & Rental - 2 Replies
- 2399 Views
-
Last post by sundaymorningstaple
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 3:09 pm
-
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests