x9200 wrote:Likely on the deposit receipt there was a respective note explaining what and when.
>> But the OP makes no mention of this. OP, was this the case, and if so what was the hourly rate and time involved?
For 170 you can not really do anything practical.
>>That sounds like an arbitrary comment*. Our cleaner here in one of Europe's more expensive cities charges us the equivalent of S$15/hr. In 2 hours she cleans our apartment from top to bottom. I have to wonder what happened in this hall that would take her nigh on 12hrs on European wages to remedy.
Clean after yourself next time and you will have less problem.
>>Maybe he did, you don't know. Neither does the agent. When we hired a function room in SG condo security would unlock it the evening we needed access, and then come and lock-up when we were done (there was a deadline to finish-up of 10pm or so). If the room was not locked up at the end of the evening, there is no evidence to prove the OP made the alleged mess. Remember: Innocent until proven guilty - as far as I can see there is no proof yet.
AFAIK a fine for littering is much more than this.
>>That is irrelevant.
>>* please don't read what I say as aggression, it is not in the slightest. I am taking the position of how I would argue this matter in court, a place where I have spent more time 'seeking relief' than I would wish lol.
JR8 wrote:x9200 wrote:Likely on the deposit receipt there was a respective note explaining what and when.
>> But the OP makes no mention of this. OP, was this the case, and if so what was the hourly rate and time involved?
It is a common practice I believe they give such a note on the deposit receipt. If there was no such note there the information about this was probably in the condo regulations and if OP is a tenant he probably has a relevant clause in his TA to adhere to the regulation.
Why there should be some hourly rates? Using this logic you could argue that unclamping a vehicle parked in a forbidden spot in a mall takes 2 min so a typical "fine" of 150-200 is completely out of sky as the actual effort require is more like 50c. I see it more as a compounded fee also with the reference to the fact that somebody is doing not his or her job willingly but as a result of another person wrongdoing. In other words if you make a mess in my place I will charge you much more than this because I value my time and my everyday routine.
For 170 you can not really do anything practical.
>>That sounds like an arbitrary comment*. Our cleaner here in one of Europe's more expensive cities charges us the equivalent of S$15/hr. In 2 hours she cleans our apartment from top to bottom. I have to wonder what happened in this hall that would take her nigh on 12hrs on European wages to remedy.
Sorry, I was not clear enough. What I meant is you can not really do anything reasonable to recover such money. Not worth any legal action and your time unless you are after a revenge but in this case I doubt it will pay off any positive to OP way.
Clean after yourself next time and you will have less problem.
>>Maybe he did, you don't know. Neither does the agent. When we hired a function room in SG condo security would unlock it the evening we needed access, and then come and lock-up when we were done (there was a deadline to finish-up of 10pm or so). If the room was not locked up at the end of the evening, there is no evidence to prove the OP made the alleged mess. Remember: Innocent until proven guilty - as far as I can see there is no proof yet.
I guess if OP had cleaned the mess he would have mentioned it as this would be rather important information. Besides, in the condos they have majority of the areas under cctv so it should be rather easy to prove.
AFAIK a fine for littering is much more than this.
>>That is irrelevant.
I believe it is not. How about this perspective:
1. I am not sure if "this" law is applicable only to the public places. If you can be fined also for littering on someone else property the management simply could have called the police and likely OP would end up with a fine and still would have to cover the other expenses.
2. Not cleaned mess is simply a damage to the property. Instead of suing the culprit they imposed a sort of fine which is undoubtedly lower than the cost the culprit may incur if it gets legal.
In other words what the management did was actually very considerate and limiting the expenses of all involved parties including the police.
>>* please don't read what I say as aggression, it is not in the slightest. I am taking the position of how I would argue this matter in court, a place where I have spent more time 'seeking relief' than I would wish lol.
I would not be surprised if the OP is charged the littering fine on top of all the expenses if this case would make to the court. Especially in Singapore where the law is rather not forgiving and general line seems very strict against such common and anti-social behavior.
Cancel his deposit cheque for one (Oh - he was silly enough to pay in cash?).x9200 wrote:This would be like a ticket so I don't see any major effort from the police here. And as for getting real perhaps you could explain how OP is going to force them to pay the money back?
BTW, I am also acting here a bit as an advocatus diaboli so don't take this all so seriously. Still $170 seems nothing to whine about on a public forum especially if somebody really left the mess after him/herself. Seems fair.
Oh horseshit. The MCST will NOT be able to convince his LL or agent to revoke his tenancy for a minor infraction. For the MCST to succeed in this you normally need a serious URA style complaint such as over stuffing of tenants or having hookers operating out of the apartment or other illegal activities. Do you get off on winding up newcomers to Singapore?x9200 wrote:This may work but hard to believe the management will just leave it this way. If OP is a tenant in the worst case scenario it may end up with kicking her/him out from the condo with all the related consequences as all the TA I have seen so far had the clauses allowing this for breaching of any of the internal regulation.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest