Early Termination of tenancy

[Wd40]

Some need to sign a contract within a week. Supply-demand is also very much skewed in the favour of landlords.

I missed these two points. What makes you forced to sign a contract within few days? There are also cheap hotels around. If this is 7 days only why is this 7 days only? Have you been forced to enter any contract including employment? For supply-demand I guess you mean there is no enough flats that would satisfy your price/location liking. There are plenty flats around, you just need to find a proper balance including the price. It may not be always the cheapest available or what you subjectively perceive as good.
All this look like an entitlement complex and shifting responsibility to somebody else or an evil legal system.

I knew you would get to this. This is the exact attitude the LLs have, reason demand-supply. If there was a SARs like situation, automatically LLs come back pleading to the negotiation table. Unfortunately, what is a normal situation in the rest of the world, for that to happen in Singapore, you need a SARs or something similar.

In the HDB market its still the LLs that call the shots, even though there are lesser foreigners here and demand has reduced, the gahmen with its countless number of restrictions(aka cooling measures) on HDB rentals, has ensured that there wont be enough HDB flat available for rental.

Earlier, atleast there was this JTC SHIFT scheme for foreigners to rent directly, bypassing the evil landlords and their agents. But now, after the locals whining, that scheme is also stopped.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Boogeyman in every closet and under every bed, yeah Wd40.

[katbh]

Both parties to a contract should be on equal footing. But here they are not. That is fundamentally unfair and unreasonable. The fact that it is enshrined in law is sad. I have not misinformed anyone.

[x9200]

WD40, I am only into the point that this has nothing to do with the law but rather with some impotency among the tenants. Yes, I think LLs in Singapore are rather bad, many unethical but the rules are clear and the situation is manageable. But it is only manageable if you have a mind set to really be in control of what you are doing. Pushing responsibility to LLs or whoever will make likely people to fail. Also hard to blame the LLs for not being some philanthropists and trying maximize their income lifting the prices up.
Announcing that nothing can be done because the law favors LLs and gives no right to the Tenants is an awfully harmful statement. It kills in people the will to do something about their problems, stay passive and just accept what they being forced to do.

FYI, I am rather a budget expat. I live in a condo, but for the rental it is a low end. We likely both deal with the same class of the LLs (the rental gap between similar size HDB and the condo for low end is very narrow), yet I have never had any serious problems with them. I plan my time and I am very strict about what goes to the contract and when it is signed. I control the timing. If the contract is not signed within agreed time, I threaten to walk away. I am with my 6th LL in Singapore now and so far for all important stuff I always got what I wanted (being reasonable in my demands). Am I that lucky?

[x9200]

Both parties to a contract should be on equal footing. But here they are not. That is fundamentally unfair and unreasonable. The fact that it is enshrined in law is sad. I have not misinformed anyone.

Can you give some specific examples where the law favors the LLs? You just repeated the statement with no supportive arguments.

[katbh]

Ok....First, and the basis of most bugs from tenants .... no escrow for bond.

[x9200]

Escrow is a neutral tool and it is not that the LLs have it now and the tenant not. Now the tenant holds the premisses and he can damage it or run away etc. and the LL holds the deposit to lower the risk of the tenant badly behaving. I found it fair.
I would definitely want to see escrow but it is not about discrimination of any party. Actually LLs (those who are ethical) would also benefit from it as not every damage to the apartment is immediately visible.

[katbh]

Not the most sensible or reasoned response there. I am guessing you are a landlord. You may be ethical but most, and I really do say most, are not. Just read the forum here to see where the grouses are. I will respond fuller later but i am on way out so will need to do it later.

[Wd40]

Basically there are no elaborate laws protecting the interests of tenants like there are in the UK for example.

Have a look at this:
https://www.gov.uk/private-renting/rent-increases

Your landlord must give you a minimum of one month’s notice (if you pay rent weekly or monthly). If you have a yearly tenancy, they must give you 6 months’ notice.

If you think the rent increase is unfair, you can apply to a rent assessment committee who will decide the rent amount.

In Singapore instead, everything boils down to what is on the tenancy agreement and considered as a free market economy, willing buyer-willing seller etc. But the truth is like I mentioned earlier due to the demand supply economics and limited land supply and no suburbs, its not an equal footing as Katbh mentioned.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Sure there are suburbs. Chu Chu Kang!

[Wd40]

The law in the UK regarding repairs:

https://www.gov.uk/private-renting/repairs

Its says landlord is responsible for repairs to bathroom pipe, drains etc.

Here in Singapore, they conveniently have a clause that everything upto $200 should be repaired by the tenant. Inspite of sometimes giving us low quality furniture that may not last until the end of the tenancy period. No law protecting that.

I know you will just say dont rent the place, if you dont agree with the clause. But thats easier said than done when there is another tenant more than eager to take the house and can offer another $100 more in rent.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Unfortunately, you are not in the UK, US, Australia, Canada or China. You are in Singapore. So, you learn to deal with it, Singapore style or go home if you don't like it or you buy your own home. Easy.

[Wd40]

Unfortunately, you are not in the UK, US, Australia, Canada or China. You are in Singapore. So, you learn to deal with it, Singapore style or go home if you don't like it or you buy your own home. Easy.

Thanks for letting me know. I am dealing with it and will continue to deal with it as long as its profitable. The moment its not, I am outta here

[x9200]

Not the most sensible or reasoned response there. I am guessing you are a landlord. You may be ethical but most, and I really do say most, are not. Just read the forum here to see where the grouses are. I will respond fuller later but i am on way out so will need to do it later.

Oh, you are too kind. I truly hope you will manage to find some arguments for the escrow thing and the initial question too and as a bonus show examples of sensitive and reasoned responses.

[x9200]

Basically there are no elaborate laws protecting the interests of tenants like there are in the UK for example.

I already asked this between the lines, but now more open way: why do you think the tenants should have more privileges than the landlords? I am sorry to say this but so far you (together with katbh) failed miserably to prove your basic claim that the tenants have no rights comparing to the LLs. If this is so obvious where is the difficulty of proving it?