Andrew Loh / Leong Sze Hian / Picture from Wikimedia
‘There’s no question that our policies are designed for the good of the people. While there may be certain parts of the policies that are not favourable, overall, I think these policies are for the well-being of the people and are good for the country.’ - Minister for National Development, Mah Bow Tan, Straits Times, 31 Jan 2010. (Source)
Blogger Hazel Poa, who once worked for the Administrative Service, relates how a friend of hers (we’ll call her Ms Tan) will soon join the ranks of the homeless because of inflexible HDB policies. Apparently, the HDB has ordered Ms Tan and her ex-husband to sell the flat which they co-own. The reason for this is because with the divorce, the couple no longer forms a ‘family nucleus” which is one of the pre-requisites for buying or owning a HDB flat. Even though they agreed to retain and service the flat’s mortgage loan, so that their children would continue to have a home, the HDB insists that they sold it or that either party bought over the share of the flat from the other party.
The problem is that neither party has the means to do so.
Ms Tan, who has custody of the children, would also not qualify for a public rental flat from the HDB, as the rule states that anyone who has sold a flat would not be eligible for a rental flat for the next 30 months. So, if she cannot afford to rent a flat in the open market – and she can’t because of the high rental rates in the market at the moment - she would have nowhere else to go.
Ms Tan has decided to go and live in Malaysia and leave her children with relatives here in S’pore, until her eldest son, who is presently in National Service, completes his NS in about two years. After that he could perhaps purchase a flat together with his mother.
In short, a family is not only deprived of a home but is also being broken up by HDB’s inflexible adherence to its own rules.
[Read Hazel’s write-up here on her blog: Homeless and homeless-to-be.]
But Ms Tan’s predicament is not unique. Many of the homeless people we met tell of similar problems with HDB’s rules.
When Mdm Sharifah could no longer service the mortgage loan she had taken from the bank, she was forced to sell her three-room flat. Unfortunately for her, the sale did not bring her any profits. Instead, she lost about S$50,000 as the flat was sold for less than when she bought it, she told The Online Citizen. With her children also facing problems servicing their mortgage loans, she had no one to turn to. So, she applied for a rental flat from the HDB. Her application was denied on the grounds that she has sold her flat and thus does not qualify for a public rental flat. She has to wait 30 months before she is eligible.
Thus, she ended up at Sembawang Park.
Mdm Lee (not her real name) was formerly a housewife. She recently divorced her husband and is presently living with her five children in a room in a HDB flat which she rents for $500. Her salary is just over $1,000. She has about $160,000 in her CPF but that is not enough to buy a flat with. Because of her low income, no bank will lend her a housing loan to buy a HDB flat either. She is not eligible for a HDB loan as she had sold her previous flat because of the divorce. According to HDB rules, once you divorce, the flat must be sold or transferred to one of the divorced persons (requiring a new loan to be arranged and return of CPF used plus accrued interest) – regardless of whether you have children or not, or as in the case of Ms Tan mentioned above, even if the couple agree to continue to service the loan.
In the case of Mdm Lee, if the HDB were to give her a HDB loan of say about $50,000 (which her monthly CPF OA contribution is able to support), or give her a rental flat, her current cash-flow predicament can be eased. She would be able to have a home for her children and herself. But HDB’s policies are so rigid that no amount of commonsense seems able to change it.
These are just three of what we suspect are many stories of the effect of inflexible HDB policies on home owners.
“The number of home buyers defaulting on their home loans for three months or more has risen significantly over the last five years,” reports the Straits Times in January 2010. “From one in 20 borrowers being in arrears, the proportion is now one in 12.” (Source: Asiaone)
This constitutes 8 per cent of all HDB loans.
The number who may have defaulted on bank loans is unclear. Also, there are no statistics on HDB bank loan foreclosures or in arrears.
According to the article “Special report: Homeless wanderers – Number of homeless people doubles” (Sunday Times, Jan 31),
“About 60 flats are voluntarily surrendered to the HDB every month, the Sunday Times understands”.
The last time the Straits Times did a story about the homeless, it mentioned that it understands that about 60 HDB flats are also foreclosed by banks every month. So, how many of these homeowners may end up to be homeless?
Why would anyone voluntarily surrender their flat to the HDB? One possible scenario is this: HDB tells those who cannot pay that if their flats were acquired, they would be sold at 90 per cent of valuation. So, of course, these flat owners are advised to sell their flats in the open market at valuation plus Cash-over-valuation (COV). In short, the threat of having their flats sold at 90 per cent of valuation by the HDB after acquisition forces the owners to sell their flats as soon as they can in the open market.
So, every time this happens, the flat disappears from the “in arrears” category and does not fall into the “voluntarily surrendered” statistics – even though the truth may be that they were forced to sell their flats.
If so, then why are there still about 60 who “voluntarily surrendered to HDB” every month? Well, many of these may be Ethnic Quota cases which have difficulty finding a buyer or can only be sold at a much lower price than valuation. Or, they may be cases whereby the flat-owner has nowhere to go, and thus to avoid being homeless, waits until the last moment when they receive HDB’s Compulsory Acquisition notice giving them 30 days to vacate the flat.
Here are perhaps (in addition to those highlighted in the cases above) the top 10 reasons why HDB policies may be contributing to homelessness in Singapore:-
1) Banks were allowed to do HDB loans from 1 January 2003 – banks are generally less reluctant to foreclose than HDB. For banks, if there is a short-fall in the housing loan after foreclosure, the flat-owners may be sued for bankruptcy. Bank loans’ interest rates have been generally higher than the HDB Concessionary Loan’s 2.6 per cent from the fourth year onwards – this may cause more financial stress
2) HDB’s Market Subsidy Pricing policy has been pushing up flat prices which increasingly makes affordability an issue – up till the 1980s, I understand that the typical HDB loan tenure was only for 20 years, instead of the typical 30 years now
3) Rental flats policy change – rents will increase gradually for household incomes over $800 a month, depending on income and how long the flat has been rented, up to 70 per cent of market rent. Former private property owners are no longer eligible as well as those with children who have larger flats with a spare room.
4) When you take your name out from your parents’ flat to apply for your own with your spouse, you may not be eligible for your “2 times” HDB Concessionary Loan if you upgraded once with your parents.
5) Policy change to use average age of flat-owners to calculate maximum loan tenure instead of youngest age. Many are thus in a way forced to take bank loans.
6) Income Ceiling of $2,000 and $3,000 for 2-room and 3-room flats, may be forcing people to buy bigger flats than they can afford.
7) The Resale Levy may leave people with less cash to tie over bad times.
8) The Cash-over-valuation (COV) policy may also leave people with less emergency cash reserves.
9) Change in loan eligibility policy – lower-income with larger families may get a lower quantum of HDB loan granted, affecting their ability to purchase a flat to use CPF to ease their open market rental cash- flow.
10) More CPF and cash used for flats means less for retirement – when money runs out when they are old, they may become homeless.
To put it briefly, the HDB needs to update its policies, rules and regulations to better address the many different situations which home owners face. Having a one-size-fits-all set of policies may instead contribute to the growing number of homeless people – a number which has doubled over the last year. And this, even by any stretch of Mr Mah’s imagination, cannot be “good for the country.”
It certainly is not good for those who are most affected by these rigid policies. In fact, these policies may be the very reasons why some end up in our parks.
Related posts:
- A victim of bureaucratic red tape and inflexible policies
- Homeless in the parks – a symptom of flawed housing policies?
- HDB housing policies – tilting the advantage towards PRs?
- HDB: Homelessness due to policies? BTS better than BTO? 31,000 flats unsold, but nobody knows?
- Providing affordable housing – HDB should re-look policies
The best solution is to get these ministers to have a taste of the brutal execution of the rules of democracy: being voted out of their seat in the coming elections.
Let’s see if they are still as inflexible.
I agree with all the points given.
Therefore, to say that MBT didn’t cause the current housing problem and homeless problem in Singapore is a big LIE.
The real reasons such rules are adopted are not because the HDB does not have the means.
The real intention of all these changes is to keep people’s CPF monies either with the government, with the flat or driving housing prices upward by buying private.
Higher property prices boast the property prices that govt and people like Ng Teng Fong owns.
Higher property prices give the banks less problems. (banks largely own by the government)
high property prices allow govt to make you put more monies into the cpf system. There is this change in CPF contribution rate changes as one gets older. I didn’t even want to mention the medisave minimum sum change that takes precedence over the CPF minimum sum.
One wonders why such optimization is necessary.
I think the pigs just want to keep your cpf monies as long as possible in the CPF for as low an interest rate as possible.
The fact that they cock up investments in GIC/TH is one major reason.
I bet that the reason why town councils were invested in shares and other product (PAP ones) is because the funds are there and PAP wanted to mobilise those monies to drive up the market, effectively transferring the monies to TH.
If the market didn’t fall, that really is a perfect plan with small investors stuck with (usually) those shares.
That’s why at that time, there was a lot of effort by TH linked brokerage talking up the market.
They are trying the same thing last month, until bank of China messing up their act, by introducing higher reserve requirement.
If one PAP GRC falls to the opposition, I bet you when the opposition audit the town council funds, the winning opposition would probably be shocked.
Therefore, now that the Geylang food poisoning incident is soon to be over, the Lehman case is over, unless LKY shows sign that he probably cannot make it for too long, LHL would probably wait until the stock market recovers to launch the elections.
MBT is absolutely responsible for the big mess.
The policies he introduced after the last election is producing the current housing outcome.
He already dragged down one minster (yeo chow tong) with the cock up before this one.
I really don’t know why LHL believes this guy’s policies are good.
Unless, LHL was partially responsible for the policies himself.
If you are earning $700 for a L-shape rental flat you pay $26.
If you earn $1000, you pay $99. I wonder what measurment this is.
An almost 300% jump. Mah Bow Tan must be mabow.(drunk)
My parents had to go thru the same hassle of selling the flat after divirce back then. 15 years ago.
However, it was so easy for my dad to get a rental flat back then. Almost Immediate.
Looks like Mah Bow Tan really stuffed it up. Best is to vote these guys out. Get people who think and work for the people. I hope in the coming elections we put some opposition up in GRC’s to question the PAP.
I keep telling my young friends, who are in the 20’s about housing and how it will be when they grow older to get a place.My my i can’t even imagine.
They like to appoint ‘people’ who are Emotionally Deaf,
so as to achieve Happiness, Prosperity, & Progress for THEMSELVES.
thank you for bringing this to our attention and uncovering the nuances and details of the entire situation. keep up the great work TOC.
I have seen a contract for a one room house,renewal every two years as follows:-
HOUSEHOLD INCOME <$800 –THE RENT PAYABLE IS $26
" $801-$1500– " 30% of market rent
$1,500-$2,000 " 50% of market rent
" Above $2,000 " 70% of market rent
The average market rent(as at 2005) 1Room=$360; 2Rm=$480; 3Rm=$680; 4Rm=$810.
This market rates will be updated at the next renewal of contract, due in 2010.
I wonder how the older singels above 55 are going to cope up in paying market rates that keep increasing. Besides coping with the payment of other bills such as medical, utility,transport and other bills. It will be a disincentive for the older occupants to be working gainfully. As a lower 'Housold Income'$801-$1,500 jacks up the rental several times higher.It' better to be unemployed at an older age and fall into the below $800 income to pay a much lower rental for the one room house.
I believe the idea of having a one room house was to house the older unmarried single Singapore citizens,who never owned a house in their life-time,cheaply with partner.
It would be of great help to the elderly tenents if the household income of $801 to $1,500 be brought up to a higher treshold, so that the rental will be lower. This will justify the elderly tenents to be on the job market and meet the burden of paying other bills like for medical. I know of elderly tenents in one rooms who save costs on utilities by not bathing for two to three days. But just spray the Butterfly Brand Florida Water Perfume diluted with water on themselves before going to work. They even miss taking their medication because of non-affordability. If they have saved some cash then they travel to Johor Bahru to buy medication, which is cheaper.
everything MBT touches, increases the cost for the people.
The only service he provides is for LKY.
We really need to get rid of MBT.
even rented flat he wants to mobilize to drive housing price.
Sometimes I wonder, those people who bought private housing in the 70s, are they bothered by the fact that there is HDB?
If not why should a hdb person now care if some one is so poor that he had to rent.
I would not qualify the policies as inflexible.
It is not like deliberate.
If I am in this case, I will camp outside the HDB headquarter and later in front of the Istana everyday!
How about CK Tang then ariport.
If you have 30 to 50 of these brave souls and nothing-to-lose homeless people with small kids doing it every day and night then the PAP govrt will wake up their f*&king ideas.
Those who are contemplating of suicide because of high medical bill, why not protest in front of the hospital. If they arrest you , the law states that they need to take care or the medical expenses of prisoners. After all if you are NOT afraid to die, why still afraid of a 86 year old man…Lee Cunt You.
Die Die who cares! It’s already end of the road!
Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew had weighed in on the issue last week. He said at a housing conference that if Mr Mah was unable to defend his housing policy, ‘he deserves to lose’ at the next GE.
I hope MM Lee also remembers that he himself is the unabashed Oracle of Singapore, who is supposed to be mentoring ministers, and his son the PM is supposed to be the unparalleled talent in charge. Why wasn’t this foreseen years ago? If Mah’s policies are indefensible, Mah is not the only one who deserves to lose.
Home is the best asset Singaporeans have.
Very good article!
I’m impressed! Vote for Credible Opposition!
For once why can’t we give the opposition more opportunities to prove themselves that they are worthy of our support like what the majority of Potong Pasir/Hougang residents has proven to us.
It is through more continuous support for the opposition that only then our govt will become a more accountable one. Otherwise the father & son team together with the daughter-in-law will continue to pull wool over us and NOBODY knows for sure what they have hidden up their sleeves.
Incidentally, are our current PAP leaders worthy of the millions that they say they are worth ?
Very good article.. for people to learn and realize something .. what is happening around in neighbourhood. I have heard people forced to sell or give thier flats back to HDB. Sad thing.
read in MSM that one person killed himself because his flat was repossessed by HDB.
also read in MSM another case that his friend joked to him that if he died, his CPF money will be available to his wife and daughter to buy a flat which they are unable to do due to inflexible HDB policies.
Perhaps it would be interesting if the writers of the article can suggest solutions or alternatives to the questions they have raised. I am no analyst, but i would like to give my Geylang Man (read heartlander) opinion on the points raised
1)In many countries governments do not usually give housing loans directly. Housing loan rates are therefore determined by market forces. Not fair for criticing the people for not doing enough of something they need not be doing.
2)It is not wrong to allow HDB flats to appreciate gradually. It is also not wrong to make flats more accessible and affordable for Singaporeans by allowing a longer loan tenure
3) Why should public money be used to subsidise private property owners and those with children who can and should take carre of their own parents??????
4)Why should anybody enjoy more than two “bites” of the cherry? If you allow this, then the divorced can keep their no bit status while enjoying subsidies. This does not close the loop on abuse.
5) I think this is prudent cos the family may overstretch themselves if they are allowed a higher loan.
6) But many people rich people buy 2 and 3 room flats to rent out leh…..
7)People should not rely on the cash meant for the resale levy to “tide over bad times”. This is good because it teaches people to be more prudent with their money. Nothing to change here
8) COV is not a policy. There are also flats that are sold without COV. If there is a need to keep emergency cash, then dun buy a flat with COV. Nobody is forcing you to do so.
9)Dun understand your point. Does not really make sense.
10)So you are suggesting that less CPF be used for housing (may not be popular leh) or are you advising homelessness now rather than later?
No offense to anyone but if there are going to be credible opposition to government policies, please provide more credible arguments please.
btw i think it is foolish to think that MBT will lose. People will be much more concerned over a roof over their heads than anything else. A feint by PAP.
This government can afford to spend 10 million dollars just for FTs/FWs who have become new citizens for integration with the local population. But are reluctant to look after its own desperate, poor and homeless citizens. What a pity that we are in this sorry state of affairs.
abf,
I like to reply to point 8.
To me, COV policy may not be referring to COV itself only. It can be how COV is treated as part of the valuation process. My suggestion would be to continue to have COV (to allow sellers to select best buyer), but valuation to be based upon a set of criteria (proximity of amenities, accessbility, etc) instead of recently transacted price which incorporates COV.
//7)People should not rely on the cash meant for the resale levy to “tide over bad times”. This is good because it teaches people to be more prudent with their money. Nothing to change here
There are tons (I meant tons) of supposedly good sounding rules that PAP imposed that didn’t achieve any desired social outcome.
and on further analysis, it always turned out to serve the PAP to the detriment of the citizens. If only they manage funds that were allocated to them in a sensible profitable way… which they don’t.
The marketing/parkaging of these “policies” is always: it is for the good of the society/citizens and the likes. And if the outcome is bad, the pigs will point the finger at the citizen.
Reminded me of this typical Chinese behavior told to me by a PRC friend:
She took up a UK scholarship to help fund her parents retirement so she is not the rich PRC you usually see in England.
She kind of complain that her mom loves to buy pieces and pieces of jade and after every purchase, she would show them to her telling her that it is to help her store “value”.
She knows it is not exactly that and told her mother not to do that with that objective. If she wants to buy, just buy them for herself and there is no need to store value.
She is also aware that Jade doesn’t really appreciate in value.
If I substitute her mother with PAP and she with citizens of Singapore, this story sound typical.
yeah you are right, there are too many old ghost in PAP.
//6) But many people rich people buy 2 and 3 room flats to rent out leh…..
You ask LeeHaveLied.
He suggested people to rent out their HDB rooms.
If you are not happy with this rule, ask MBT.
He changed a rule in 2005-2006 that allows people to rent out hdb flats after keeping them for a year and a rule that allows private property owners to buy HDB flats and also a rule for 10% downpayment that makes it easier for these rich owners to own these flats.
MBT is the worst curse Singapore ever had.
(maybe LKY can beat that but it is kind of controversial)
//abf
//3) Why should public money be used to subsidise private property owners and those with children who can and should take carre of their own parents??????
Then why does HDB change ownership rules such that people who own private condo/properties can buy hdb and rent them out.
These people were not allowed to buy in the past.
If you increase the pool of buyers, the only way is for the price is to go up.
As if our complaint is for HDB flat to appreciate gradually?
Almost all the complaints are over the prices going up too quickly like in hyperinflation.
Ask the Germans, they think Hyperinflation is the main reason why Germans supported hilter in the first place just before the 2nd world war.
That’s why some say inflation is an old demon for Germans and the German central bank (after the 2nd world war) is renown to fight inflation like crazy with an outstanding record.
This reminds of the German economic experience of reunification with East Germany that have failed or at least have not produce tangible results until now.
Singaporean Chinese are like the west Germans and Mainland PRC chinese are like the east Germans. On paper, we are all Chinese and it doesn’t seem problematic to integrate us.
The west Germans thought so and reunified with the east Germany (mark to mark basis).
There are no spectacular outcomes since.
our experience will not prove more fruitful.
Foolish to think that MBT will be voted out? Go ask MBT if he is not nervous.
The fact is – he is responsible for the current hyperinflation in hdb prices.
And I don’t agree that we should end up being mortgage slave because MBT cock up
This MBT is a blood sucker & a balls carrier, any ministry he goes, he will find a way to squeeze the common people blood to the last drop. Let kick out some of these useless ministers in the next general election to teach the ruling party a lesson.
I think its a no brainer that with ever more costly flats, more and more of the lowest and lower income families can be living on void decks and east coast parks and one of the many nparks.
There is no way to argue on this.
i don’t believe MBT can do this without LKY support….
abf,
1. By the government’s act of imposing an interest rate of 2.6% on those taking loans from HDB, an artifical minimum interest rate has been determined under the disguise of “free market forces”. Furthermore, you might want to note that instead of being paid an interest of 2.5% for the funds in their CPF, citizens are charged 2.6% additional for taking up a housing loan with HDB. The costs in interest of citizens is essentially 5.1% (2.5% + 2.6%). One man’s loss is another man’s gain. I do not need to tell you who actually gains from this transaction.
2. Generally, I agree with your stand that prices of public housing should be allowed to appreciate gradually, may it be due to market forces, inflation whatsoever. However, by digging a hole and then offering help to people who had fallen into the hole isn’t exactly a samaritan’s act.
3. There might be genuine reasons for former private property owners to downgrade. Why should their entitlement as citizens be deprived just because they were well-to-do previously? Citizens, including the elderly who had made much contribution to the country (and perhaps voted for PAP faithfully in the past elections), should have a choice, and most importantly dignity, to decide if they want to stay on their own, or live with their children. Why should the elders be penalised for unable to rent a flat when their children are unwilling or financially incapable to accomodate them?
4. The financial capabilities of the co-owners during the tenure should determine their eligiblity of the concessionary rate.
5. A long term apprach should be adopted to assess if the finances are indeed overstretched. Using, say 20% or even lesser, of the current monthly income amount to pay off the housing loan in 30 years may sound like a great idea. Now, abf, can tell me, are you able to guarantee you are able rake in as much as what you are currently earning 30 years from now? All it takes is just another financial crisis (which happens in roughly 10 odd years or so) to disrupt (or put an end) to this plan almost immediately.
6. As much as you would like to see more credible arguments, I have failed to see any crediblity in your claim that “many people rich people buy 2 and 3 room flats to rent out leh”.
7. Have you had any idea how much is the resale levy? Assuming a man supporting a family of four spends $1,500 per month on basic necessities, and he has become jobless all of a sudden. Are you aware how many months of basic necessities does he not have to worry if he does not have to pay the resale levy?
The basis of the resale levy, as stated on http://www.hdb.gov.sg/fi10/fi10004p.nsf/ECitizen/SELLING/$file/Selling_HDBEnq_FAQG.htm is “The resale levy is meant to reduce the subsidy on the 2nd subsidised flat so as to maintain a fair allocation of public housing subsidies between 1st and 2nd-timer citizen families. This is also to give priority to 1st-timers who have more urgent housing needs.”
Now tell me, abf. If you firmly believe there should be crediblity under this open debate – just HOW applicable and convincing the above arguments are to you?
8. Finally there is something which I can agree squarely with you. To add on, even if the cash-over-valuation policy is stamped out, buyers and sellers can still find ways to get around it.
9. I also do not understand what the author was saying, and thus hope he can enlighten all of us for further discussion. On the other hand, I think it makes no sense either to comment on the argument brought forward by the author as “does not really make sense” when you do not understand what the author is trying to bring forward.
10. The author is suggesting that less CPF AND cash should be spent on housing, not lesser of the either as you have incorrectly interpretated. The agenda is that public housing be made real affordable every household. But of course, HDB, or even perhaps you, obviously have another definition of what constitutes “affordability”.
I welcome all challenges or alternative views to the above.
MBT is a ccb, you failed in HDB mission to provide public affordable, quality homes. You are not fit to be a minister,
MBt, SMC lah. Show the readers here you can lah. I think you can win hands down. You are so popular and credible and given Public Housing a new meaning. Moreover, you sacrificed so much for the 85% and 15% who may be investing in resale of HDB flats thanks to the record high prices.
You, the man. SMC lah!
there are two kinds of poor in the world. there are the undeserving poor and there are the systematic poor.
policies i believe are designed to stem out abusers of the system so in that sense, it is good. but in the process some maybe unfairly treated, these should turn to CDC for help.
CDC or social services are in the best position to sieve out abusers/fakes/opportunists/bums etc etc. or determine their state of plight and address their individual or collective cases accordingly.
and critics who want to remain credible should sit in with CDC and conduct an indepth scrutiny of these cases before slamming the MBT from a superficial perspective.
[i]these should turn to CDC for help.
CDC or social services are in the best position to sieve out abusers/fakes/opportunists/bums etc etc. or determine their state of plight and address their individual or collective cases accordingly.
and critics who want to remain credible should sit in with CDC and conduct an indepth scrutiny of these cases before slamming the MBT from a superficial perspective.
[/i]
you sink songs in cdc karoaki or what?
right in front of my hdb castle is the new cdc affliated high class centre…
what does it actualLEE do? beside havin arrogant senoir staff who honked their carhorns just to have the automatic gates open for this so called cdc agents to park for free..
you think CDC crew will make you @ home offer you a listenin ears and a cup of tea?
dream on…
unless you want to bet your last finger with me i am all EAR/yours…
cdc? my blommin FOOT.. i, 1 kick they all scrammed liked hell….
all thatloose talk, you sit in with CDC or not? never rite? what talk you?sit inside, write report and publish publicly. never get sued or publicly shamed by them, i say you smart lor you win lor.
With more jobs even from government agencies being offered directly to foreigners, there will certainly be more families going homeless in due course. :(
Position of Asst Director / Associate, Insurance offered to foreigners by Monetary Authority of Singapore
http://job-search.jobstreet.com.sg/singapore/job-opening.php?location=70000&nationality=170&job-source=1&src=22
Fellow Singaporeans, is this the kind of life you want to go through ? The decision is yours. :(
now why would toc removed a legitimate post?( moderators are provoking the people)
people who have ithcing ears and talk about listening to the ground have constantly shown themselves to be hypocrites but wait, not only hypocrites but shameless hypocrites who present themselves for the cause of the…people???? which i am one of the people?
please TOC, start to REALLY listen to the ground and BE REAL before you write all your garbage!!!
**Moderating Editor: Apologies, there is an auto-filter which places some comments under pending status, which is why innocent comments sometimes get stopped unnecessarily.**
aiyoyo,
can the elites try out the policies that they endorsed?
then ask them speak out their experience?
alamak, make policy must be able to work for all people ma,
rather than policy affect others but not the policy makers themself, blur leh
aiyoyo
Yes I am one of the homeless family. I sold my flat 5 years ago, due to financial difficulty to repay housing loan, presently I am renting a 3 room flat with EM serv rental $1,400/month. I seek for MP and Hdb help and the answer is to wait. I had waited for 3 years already. I think I will be going to Sembawang beach soon.
Wondering why tear down all rental flats, built new flats(force to buy).
Why so many rental 3 room flat, handle by EM serv collect high rental for FT and singaporeans.
Waiting for miracle to arrive. I am loss to my ends. (Parents of two children).
I truly empathize and sympathize with Homeless 1 in your predicament. Let’s all unite and make our presence felt thru wise voting. How many of us earn millions thru politics and not thru enterprises? Let’s hope that opposition parties will reveal their manifesto or agendas for us to consider voting them against the incumbent establishment.
Homeless 1,
Do you want to email us at nohappycampers@gmail.com?
you can come to our facebook group also http://www.facebook.com/joshuafly?v=feed&story_fbid=384312223144#!/group.php?gid=243022663629&ref=ts
Homeless 1, the rental of $1,400 for a 3 room flat is not cheap. I’m sure you are able to get the same or even lower rate from the open market than from EM service if location is not a must.
Btw, EM service just had their Dinner and Dinner few weeks ago at Swissotel, The Stamford. Is rare to see company having D&D nowadays, they must be doing very well.
After reading this article, really feel sad as I am also facing the above problems. I think only the rich one can buy a resale flats as the COV are so high…. who can afford ?
Not able to afford a resale flat, not able to apply a new flat, not able to get a rental flat from HDB….. is it left with an answer… rent a home from the open market? After paying the expensive rental and what saving we have to buy a flat?
If an ordinary person have an average income of $1800 after deduction of CPF contribution, expensive rental & daily expenses… how much we have in our pocket…
I believe the Gov can do better … I do not have good faith about MBT … when he was Transport Minister many years ago?? did he not created a mess? .. my view is SG is still running like a Corp with no heart for the ciitzen … without heart there is no loyalty.
Can the authority in -charge understand the miserable and worries from the lower income earners.
Base on the current economics, average earning of a Singaporeans $1800-$2500. For a yearly pay increment is usually $50 – $200. For the current purchase of resale flat is so expensive and cases like dirvorced people might not able to afford for a resale flat.
My personal case – I wanted to get a resale 3 room flat and apply for a loan from HDB. The resale market of 3 room is $240-$280 (valuation only) + COV (min $40K)
I apply for a HLE and approve amount only $123,000. My CPF is around $70K . It mean I need to top up $40-$80K to own a flat.
If I start to save for 3 years , it mean I need to save $2222 every month. However my income is only around $2500. How to save that sum of $? It really sound absurb…..
I am currently 38 yrs old and divorced . I transfer my share to my ex as a condition to get the divorce settled and only took back my CPF. During that period didn’t expect that I am not allow to apply for a new flat and have to get a resale flat . For so many years , I am still unable to buy a flat. Even if I apply a new flat, the hassel waiting like balloting, etc…this will also take 3-4 years.
It is so tough to stay under other’s people roof. You don’t know when you will get chase out of the house. Even now if I rent a place and I won’t be able to bring along my children unless I am renting the whole unit. However the rental had gone up to $1400-$1900 monthly even for a 3-rm flat.
Really don’t know how to pull this thru….
after reading all these i can’t wait to cast my vote ! ! !
As I read thru various politically-linked websites I realized that in actual fact, many PAP ministers bungled, some very major but most surprisingly, none was forced to quit immediately. Tharman the OSA breach, WKS of Mas Selamat saga, MBT of MND, George Yeo, the infamous Yeo Cheow Tong, the Holy Goh, etc. Ripping off multi-million bucks thru politics in today’s age is certainly not commendable. They may be able to abstain from corruption, but it’s their lower ranked subordinates that succumbed to corruption cos their pay is lower than these bunch of wild animals. LKY already had premonition of PAP can hold power in this 2 GE, we shall see greater wayang when new MPs who originated from the Philippines, PRC, Myanmar, etc cos some are real “fighters” whilst some may be bold and daring. Hahaha. I’m waiting for it to happen! All thanks to PAP themselves who coined the term “foreign talents” when it should be foreign workers.
hi thank you very much for the articles and your great work at reporting and discussing the many issues.
i am also a victim of the poor housing policies of the government.
single above 36 but still not able to afford my own place.
this causes a vicious cycle.
i dont live well and sleep in the living room. no proper place for things.
this affects my work life as i work very hard at work trying to get more money but because of the anxiety in life, i dont do well in the office politics. i am just seen as the go-to guy for fixing things, ever helpful and easy to take advantage of.
i am tired of not being able to dig myself out of poverty. and cant even convince ex gf i like to marry me because i am still not able to afford my own flat.
My good friend with housing predicament told me that HDB offered her a “final offer” to downsize to a smaller flat but subjected to availabilty and ethnic quota. Fine with her except that her desired flat & locations are no longer available so she and her family has no choice but to buy a 2 room balanced HDB BTO flat at double its selling price during which earlier successful applicants got theirs at 1/2 price cheaper and worst of all made to sign agreement can’t sell flat before 5 yrs compared to others 3 yrs. Double standards by HDB so those who has suffered pls make a vote for a change!