Zia is a 42-year old divorcee with five children. Four of the younger ones are in school whilst her eldest son is due to complete his National Service this year. As a Patient Service Assistant at a health care centre, she earns a gross income of $1500 a month. After deductions, she takes home approximately $1100.
Over the last twenty years that Zia and her ex-husband were together, they bought and sold four flats. The first two bought directly from the HDB were a four-room and then a five-room. The third and fourth were four-room flats from the open market. The last one was sold because of their separation. She tells The Online Citizen (TOC) that she did not receive any proceeds from the sale of her flats from her husband.
Following the divorce, she and her five children lived with her mother for more than three years, until her mother decided to sell the three-room flat at the end of 2008.
Zia then applied for HDB’s Public Rental Scheme as the eligibility conditions seemed to apply to her. She is a Singapore Citizen. She earns less than $1500 per month. Her children are legally under her custody. Her last flat was sold more than 30 months ago. And she does not currently “own nor have an interest in any property”, as stipulated by the HDB’s rules.
However, her application was flatly rejected – because she failed to meet one condition. According to the list of criteria, applicants of the scheme face debarment if they had previously owned and sold two or more direct-purchased flats from the HDB. She is now permanently disqualified.
HDB Says Not Their Problem
The options offered to her by the HDB were to either rent from the open market or to take out a bank loan to buy a flat, both of which are obvious impossibilities. Zia made an appeal to the HDB to exercise some flexibility with regards to the regulation, reasoning that as a single mother with five children and a net salary of $1100, she could never afford to rent from the open market nor borrow from the bank. The response from the HDB officer in charge of her case was, “Your predicament is not my problem”.
Angered but undaunted, Zia made a second appeal, this time to a manager. However, she was turned down again. This was in early 2009 when the HDB’s interim rental housing measure was first announced. So the manager offered Zia a three-room flat at a monthly rent of $300 with the tenancy agreement to be reviewed bi-annually. Along with the flat, Bernard also offered Zia, a secondary school dropout, a piece of advice: seek a better paying job since, he said, she “sounds educated” – referring to her good command of English.
A year and two reviews later, Zia was recently informed that her rent will be raised to $420 in accordance with interim housing policies.
Fed up, Zia enlisted the help of The Online Citizen a month ago, which wrote to the HDB with a list of questions, among which were:
(a) Does the HDB have a long-term solution for single, low–income families like which cannot rent from the HDB, and which also cannot afford to rent from the open market?
(b) What is the rationale for the increase in rental for the interim housing when the lease is extended?
(c) What is the action that HDB would take if the person is unable to find affordable housing once the lease on the interim housing expires?
TOC has yet to receive any replies from the HDB..
Zia never expected the consequences of her divorce to last this long. “Who am I going to blame? I didn’t ask to be divorced. I am independent, I work very hard. I just need extra help. They didn’t help just because of their policies. The government only will help me when I become a destitute.”
Zia is not the only ‘victim’ of the HDB’s inflexible application of rules and regulations.
Idah’s Story
Idah is another single mother with two children. Her daughter is pursuing her Masters degree, and her youngest son, in Primary 5.
Since her divorce seven years ago, Idah has been renting a two-room flat from the HDB. Up until last month, her clerical job at the People’s Association earns her a gross salary of $2000. But Idah, who started working at a young age, has sufficient CPF to buy over her current rental flat. Her request to do so was declined as these flats are specifically for rental, the HDB told her. Her only alternative was to purchase a three-room flat from the HDB as anything from the open market was beyond her means. This, however, would require her to take out a small HDB Concessionary Loan. But she was turned down when she applied for it. Based on Condition (c) of the ‘Who Can Apply’ list of rules, Idah is ineligible as she and her ex-husband had been granted two similar loans before.
Things are coming full circle for Idah. Until recently, her rent was $250 a month. With her income, she could hardly keep up with rent payments, and ended up accumulating $1,700 in arrears. She was recently served a “Notice to Quit” and told to clear out of the flat by the end of this month. To top it off, the renewal of her latest tenancy agreement was accompanied with a $100 rental increase to $350, as her recent $65 pay rise to $2065 means that she now falls under another bracket of the rental scheme.
Her several written appeals to the HDB to reconsider her loan application were futile. Idah then decided to seek help from her Citizens’ Consultative Committee Chairman, Mr Chia Ngiang Hong. After hearing her out, Mr Chia’s first words were, “You’re rich” – in reference to her $2000 salary, Idah tells TOC He went on further to say that in Chinese culture, the older child would sacrifice for the younger siblings. So Idah’s daughter should have worked to help the family out instead of pursuing a Masters’ degree.
Since then, Idah has had to terminate her fixed phone line to cut back on expenditures. She also works as a helper at a food stall during the weekends to earn some extra cash. When I last spoke with her, she was recovering from an asthma attack brought on by stress due to her housing problems.
Zia, on the other hand, is at her wits’ end. “[For now] we may have a roof but it’s still a question mark because”, she says, “I don’t know when they can take it away from me”. She feels the government is penalising her for what happened in her marriage.
By Yong Pagit
______________________________________
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
What is this country coming too? What are the government servants thinking? They probably have been “briefed” by their superiors at dept meetings on how to handle the “new” situation now. At the end of the day , there is no technicality, they will be homeless, how will the children think when they grow up to find out, they were done in by the government policies of the day. We have no country side to go too, maybe they should!
what a gracious country.
The first story sounds typical and real but second story sounds opportunistic.
makes you wonder where the wonderful gdp growth goes to?
huge reservoir but some people are homeless because of legitimate reasons.
$2000 is the minimum a family of 3-4 can live with. after cpf deduction, it would be $1700. it would mean no frills, stay home, no parties or outings that sort of life to be able to live with such an amount.
$2000 isnt much in today’s context.
Seems to me that the homelessness issue is confined to a certain racial grp. Typically sold off their new flat, flipped along the way, big family size and usually end in seperation/divorce. I am no PAP lackey but I can’t help noticing the usual suspects. The other 2 main races do not seem to have this problem or rather negligible.
Just follow the law mentality. What else we can ask from civil servant?
I am surprised that Idah’s case is being mentioned. It sounds like her daughter is pursuing a full-time Masters. This is strange considering the predicament of the family. Won’t it make more sense for her daughter to work and pursue a part time Masters? It is a very common thing to do.
Adam> I dunno how folks tat cannot afford their flats, flipped along the way, end up in separation/divorce, is typical of just 1 race. Sad to say it happens in every race. Its not a fair conclusion to group races in this situation simply cos 1 race apparently ‘likes’ to have large families. This situation really has nothing to do with races.
$2000 isn’t much these days, agreed. but its not peanuts either.
Also, as much as I sympathize w the ‘victims’, one shouldn’t rush to villianize the stat board officers so fast. As w doctors, if these folks do not desensitize themselves from their ‘patients’, the emotional drain will destroy them within the year. of cos, the 1st victim’s “your predicament is not my problem” answer doesn’t put the stat board in a good light; maybe she deserves a more indepth hearing on her situation, maybe.
it looks like we’re brainwashed here again.
the hdb had insisted all flats are subsidized, based on market rates, so along comes lift upgrading,(we have to pay you know, its not free) and MUP, same too, our flats prices goes up and when the family splits, of course whoever pays for all the above would want it back, right, so the split laws favor the woman with the kids, (flat with them at most cases or to be sold and here split again) what about the man, meanwhile, what about the family if falt sold, meanwhile, are they allowed to rent straightaway, no, the answer is, all have to wait 2.5 years before they can rent, so they,( as hdb laws required ? laws made for whom and by thinking whom), need to go to open market to rent/buy, what is cost now with cov at such high and PR’s FT’s and FW’s cornering the market with rental ???, cheap reasonable rent ???.
NOT all who “SELL” flats have that kind of money as interest for remaining mortgage and CPF takes first bite. Interest of the gov comes first, although legally, its your money, has anyone think about this.
So, reason we have are campers at changi, west coast, pasir ris, where else.
Are our HDB laws meant to provide and cover such issues, maybe someone should look deeply into this.
Are HDB laws inflexible, rigid, one sentence to lump all in, thereby the managers just makan and tidow, cannot think out of the box, some say, others, collect gagi sudah lah, why productivity, for who to see, ah yah, gov stat board, fix gagi, fix bonus, all reason that suits oneself.
If there’s a trend to suggest that HDB flats were being bought over & sold for profits, subsequently in line with unforeseen divorce circumstances. HDB may not be obliged to help(in the business sense) family like Zia but however, she is offered a unit for rental. I believed she should also pursue legal actions towards her ex-husband for certain amount of regular maintenance fees lest not much chance though.
I would strongly feels that Idah’s daughter should start working & contribute to the family if their financial situations are in such dire. That income may helps much to the family.
I do empathize on both families situations but although our gahmen has all obligations to help their people, we too must find our own contingency plans too just in case the gahmen’s help is not substantial enough.
Although i felt our gahmen could do more & be more PERSONAL to we, People on the grounds but unfortunately, they tends to be less flexible as far as their policies are concerned.
If we want to enjoy, we must prepare to face the consequences too.
“The government only will help me when I become a destitute”
Sorry…but the person may be wrong….does the gahmen even help the destitute?
In the past, they speak about themselves as a caring gahmen, guess it is NATO…No Action Talk Only. To be truthful, i wonder what will happen to the younger generation
1st case is due to husband irresponsibility, with the new law to chase maintenance for divorced wife, she should use the law to get money back from the sales of flats from her husband.
2nd case: nothing to pity, the grassroots leader is right to ask her daughter to start working and help her mum.
It’s not just a matter of technicality. Singapore, led by the ruling party, has evolved into a stage where people need to fit into policies rather than policies fitting the needs of the people. Who comes first? The citizen or the government?
The civil servants might as well just say,
“You die, your business!”
Well i have no pity towards Zia “Over the last twenty years that Zia and her ex-husband were together, they bought and sold four flats.” this statement alone tells a lot of things about how careless she and her idiot husband were about their future… and besides she can take her ex-husband to court to force him to pay alimony. A monthly rent of $300 is pretty generous as far as help from HDB is concerned. Besides the story doesn’t mention how old her children are by now. At least 2 of them should be quite mature to work at some F&B industry to bring home extra cash.
As for Idah’s case she was turned down HDB loan and the story doesn’t mention conventional loan from DBS or other banks.
Aiyaahh this is what sloppy decisions lead to if you’re not careful enough in planning your life.
urmmm….i do believe idah’s daughter is working part-time. can you imagine working part-time and studying full-time? moreover, she does contribute some money to Idah for her use. even paying for her youngest brother’s fees for weekend madrasah school. maybe, there is a better way to frame our questions. but I may be biased for I know Idah’s family so perhaps yes, there is no clear indication of this in the story. :)
Policies should apply equally to all citizens. Nobody should expect policies change for them.
Civil servant should therefore protect public fund(my tax monies) from opportunists, and to selfish citizens’ abuse.
i am confident of solving the homeless problem because it does not take much to solve it. singapore is tiny. relatively small number of homeless. But this is unacceptable! becos we expect better for what we give!
I hope the new elected leader solve this and i am sure it will be solved.
“The government only will help me when I become a destitute”
I guess the government still will not help – whether you become destitute or prostitute.
For Zia’s case, perhaps TOC should further investigate or let readers know (if already investigated) how much the previous 4 flats were bought for and how much net sale proceeds were received by her husband and her after the respective sales and where did the monies go. I certainly have sympathies for Zia but the above information may reveal to what extent HDB’s policy is unfair to her.
Why are we chastising the daughter of Idah for doing her master full-time and her mother for understanding her need to do so? They do these despite the difficulties they are facing. What exemplary cultural practice is it to sacrifice a child’s prospect just because she is either born a girl or born earlier than other children in the family? You may argue that a masters is a luxury – but in Singapore, we are pushed to try and diversity and be retrained and be super-trained. Is’nt this an indication that they are not lying back doing nothing but striving to get out of the current tight spot? I think this story is highlighted not because these individuals go around begging. If you are rich and you want to buy a property and some rules are in your way, you consult a lawyer to see how you can be assisted to still stick by the law but get the property – to get around it. They are looking for ways to enable them to breathe – why is that opportunistic? Opportunistic is to push and stress your children out even to the brink of suicide!
We need change badly.
I hope those women realise the need for change.
well its very easy for us to comments on this issues as to how such individual come to a stage of being homeless , no one would want to end this way not me not you at times circumstances plays apart in a person life , we might not know zia for what i can say we all should take a look at the situation if she stand to gain from the selling and buying don’t you think she will be in a better position to gain and looked at her self why did she get the custody of her 5 kids and her marriage crumble no wife or a mother would want to end this way i m a women myself who have custody of my 04 kids but i lost my roof due to the divorce and i was left with nothing my ex-hubby took what ever part he could gain and do you ever heard of negative sale where neither party stand to gain , its never been easy to start afresh a single mum like myself and zia we don’t need the negative comments what do we women need is just a helping hand to start afresh and move with our life and to contribute to the society and for the kids to grow up and to be a better person my heart goes out to zia and i know its never been easy for her taking care of hers kids and like one of the writer is saying zia should use the law to get the maintainence for her ex-hubby to all the single mum out how many of you have been successful in getting the act enforced i know and some on you know its always a setback for the ex-wife , HDB should looked into all area and avenues to assist the homeless remember all the citizens of s’pore have the right to live , a helping hand and a encourage is all we need , we are humans too who cry when we are sad or in pain , do have a heart for us the single mum who are in need of encouragement and a helping hand to start a fresh.
zia hanging there may you have the strength to move on .
I think it’s sad they are in this situation, but i don’t think it’s a fair to indict the govt based on these two cases. I see it more like personal problems that had happened and the govt is expected to take up the slack after that.
all citizens are entitled to two rounds of subsidies- including the two ladies above. Like everyone else, they were given those subsidies- just that theirs ended up with their husband after the divorce and they never managed to get it back from him.
While we may quibble whether the subsidies are enough, we can’t say that the govt is unfair to her and she should be entitled to extra rounds of subsidies because she did not manage to get it back from her husband- or any other circumstances that led to the original flat money to disappear.
I sympathize with her situation and hope her situation turn for the better. But as a principle, I don’t think the govt should play backup ‘alimony spouse’- when the real husband is holding on to the housing proceeds and refusing to help raise the kids. It’s almost like saying “My husband refuse to pay, can you pay instead?”
hmm….”Idah tells TOC He went on further to say that in Chinese culture, the older child would sacrifice for the younger siblings.” this sounds like rascism. why would the officer say such things?
Thanks TOC for bringing up these cases to our attention.
Recent years had seen the degrade of our gov, i wonder if poor leadership is to be blamed. ie, sissy dragon prince should be slayed.
this is a revelation article!
people should know that singapore is not all so glorious. many are suffering.
Singapore is a classic model of social engineering at its most extreme. The PAP treats its people like sheep, to be herded into different cages based on many criteria.
When I first started work in Singapore in the early 90s, all my friends were rushing to be registered at the ROM – the main purpose was to secure a number for a HDB flat. Looking back now, I am glad that I did not join the crowd. Instead, I chose to emigrate and am now living in a nice big house and looking at Singapore’s so called progress as a foreigner.
to err is human, and must be humane for one to give people a chance after they have fallen…..
Both individuals are gainfully employed and drawing a decent salary. Yet because of something that they had done previously, they are now forced to a corner.
It is not as if they had not paid the price for their mistakes.
One having to live with a relative for more than 30 months and the other having to put up living in a 2-room flat for 7 years although she has sufficient funds in her CPF for her to comfortably afford a 3-room flat if only a small concessionary loan was granted.
There must be some compassion for such people who have been faulted for years for the mistakes that they made earlier in life. It is necessary for the government to be flexible in such instances.
I know that HDB has been flexible in allowing many households, most of them quite well-to-do, the permission to sell the HDB flat before the minimum 5 years and move to larger HDB or private property. So they get to keep the sales proceeds by selling in the open market instead of selling it back to HDB.
I am also aware that HDB exercises a lot of flexibility in administering the $8000 household income cap and have allowed many that exceed the threshold to purchase a flat directly from HDB. This allows a lot of upper middle income families the opportunity to make a killing in the HDB resale market and move on to a private property a few years later.
HDB has also, on occasion, allowed those that are not able to secure a bank loan, a concessionary loan.
These are just some of the personal experiences that I have seen. I am sure there are many more. If exceptions can be made for the above, then surely exceptions can be made for the 2 cases highlighted.
Rules are put in place for a purpose – so that individuals don’t abuse the benefits that may accrue from renting or purchasing a flat from HDB. If an individual is clearly not abusing the benefit or has already paid a hefty price over the years for whatever folly that they may have been guilty of, then such rules need not be so strictly applied.
more good years… vote the pap.
it is bound to happen because, New PAP is a macro party. They only look at the bigger picture.Whatever, that is.
our policies tend to be written to contradict each other – housing that treat the family as a unit, but left some individuals floating helplessly if the family does not hang together, family values that try to promote families, labour policies that tend to turn family members into competitors for time and opportunities outside the home. We dont have a way to use information and knowledge or research to make sound policies yet.
Electric plug – its true a civil servant or a public officer would not get away with racist remarks like that in a decent society - if you fail you get it, if you succeed, you also get it in your face. I have been told that I must have Chinese blood for being good in maths all the time. I am sure this does not work only in one direction and Malays do that too. Singaporeans – enough is enough – can we please beat the racist devil out of our system?
blame yourself, folks , u choose these shameless money face elite to formulate such policies to kick yourself when you are down & out . Is this our country ???? PUI !!!!
wow! Asthma attack from stress from housing problems… thats a first. To everyone here, please do not believe everything they report, to reporters – pls do not believe everything they say.
Would someone tell you that “yes, I got 100k from my previous sales proceeds and spent it on the gucci bag, a new car, rented a bungalow”, or “no la, my ex-husband took it, and the rest used to pay off ‘debts’, no more left” would sound a more convincing argument?
I am a volunteer and some of these homeless said they receive no proceeds, when checked with HDB, wow.. some got up to 200k in cash after deductions from cpf.
2000 p.m. not enough? I doubt when it will be enough for them. Some are genuine cases, some are just opportunistic.
down with the PAP!
the similiar case happened to me and my mom. my mom was divorced on 2006 and had bought to new flats before. the 2nd home was sold after the divorce and my mum got nothing. 2006-2008 we lived in home by renting from the opened market. me, my brother and my mum we rented 2 rooms which cost 1000 dollars per month. we applied many times for rental of flat from hdb but invaild. we are only allowed to buy flats from opened market. at the time of 2008, open market prices of resale flat begin to raise higher. i am singing in lounge in overseas which give no cpf plus no income tax in sg. my brother graduate from poly at year of 2007, started working less than a year. my mum’s salary was only 1k a month. i was rejected by private bank for applying loans for home. after many years of pestering and applying from hdb and going to the town council, we finally got a resale flat which the gov loaned us a 100k and @ private bank interest rate. we bought a 3 room flat @ $194,000, borrowed and paid $15,000 in cash and $15,000 from my mum and my cpf. the home was under my mum and my name. i hv to pay the loan for 27 yrs… tis is the reason of why i do want and dare to get married.
Ya, we all are opportunistic when we want the best deal for ourselves and our children, dont we? I think we dont need opposition, we need a complete replacement of our population. Up with the PAP – throw these two families out of Singapore please!!!
Has DJ’s like Vernetta and the pony tailed DJ talked about the homeless in singapore? How about HDB pricing scheme and investment fiascos and transparency?
Surely they can talk a lot?
yes, we want for ourselves, but some people exploit the system at the expense of others.
Down with the PAP!
Will the moderators pls remove pro-PAP slogans.
go see your MP!?
Peppy, scratch your throat and you hear the same formulae for evaluation and the same mistrust of people – so why bring in the devil I dont know if it is going to be the same blinker we use to evaluate situations? I am disheartened by all these discussions because I had expected better from opposing voices – real alternative ways to evaluate and not the same first premise – people are evil and will abuse the system if they can. I am abandoning this site as well.
The dark and sad side of doing well on “gd governance” tests.
These things happen.
Can these ladies “prove” that they got nothing from previous sales?
Yes, can they prove they never got anything? Especially when the records show that they had. Why don’t they find their ex-husbands thru family courts! The PAP govt should give rental flats to everyone freely, including me. I tried applying but got rejected again and again. the govt should let everyone stay in rental flat if they wish! Just tax the people more!
down wif the pap!
No child in S’pore will be left without a home, says Dr Balakrishnan
BUT HE DONT RUNS HDB.
http://app.reach.gov.sg/reach/YourSay/YourDiscussionCorner/tabid/117/ptid/414/page/1/totrecs/15/threadid/3206/forumtype/posts/Default.aspx
MCYS GOT DELIVER 3 MEALS A DAY TO FEED THE POOR IN SINGAPORE?????
MCYS MINISTER SAID SO, BUT CANT FIND ANY DETAILS ON MCYS WEBSITE.
http://zh.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/394784?page=1
Poor? Government “will deliver meals to you
——————————————-
” At a forum organised by REACH, the government’s online feedback portal, Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, said:
“If you were a poor person, anywhere on this planet, Singapore is the one place where you will have a roof over your head, where you will have food on the table. Even if you can’t afford it, we will have meals delivered to you.” ”
MCYS GOT DELIVER 3 MEALS A DAY TO FEED THE POOR IN SINGAPORE?????
MCYS MINISTER SAID SO, BUT CANT FIND ANY DETAILS ON MCYS WEBSITE.
http://zh.sgforums.com/forums/10/topics/394784?page=1Poor? Government “will deliver meals to you——————————————-
” At a forum organised by REACH, the government’s online feedback portal, Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, said:
“If you were a poor person, anywhere on this planet, Singapore is the one place where you will have a roof over your head, where you will have food on the table. Even if you can’t afford it, we will have meals delivered to you.” ”
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, said:
”If you were a poor person, anywhere on this planet, Singapore is the one place where you will have a roof over your head, ………..”
BUT HDB IS NOT UNDER MCYS.
MAYBE HDB RENTAL HOMES SHOULD BE RUN BY MCYS.
The funny thing is that with 2 HDB flats bought direct and sold + public assistance rental scheme provided despite the rules, it will never be enough.
The criticism of HDB and rightly so, is not that they made it difficult for the lady but that when the flat was sold, they never cautioned the implications. The Government is now fully aware and has promised to rectify this.
$420 is a lot to some people but getting rent at that $ today. I empathise with the lady’s plight but seriously, the kids and relatives, if any, need to step up and help.
Maintenance of parents act applied. Shouldn’t the kid after getting out from NS, find a job & help out? The dangers of welfarism highlighted.
I know of some mothers whose hubby had passed away, raised 5 kids with similar plight, no inheritance or sugar daddy. ZERO help from government but there were help from relatives. Tough but that’s life.
I think its sad that when things go south, relatives aren’t the first place one goes to. One might even add that as a consequence of “2 is enough” policy. Not enough relatives either.
it would have been simpler if the lady took out an insurance policy for health using CPF medisave
and consolidate her remaining savings (CPF) to pay off a flat so that she doesn’t have to pay rent anymore then work to pay only for her livelihood.
400++ is a lot of money for rent.
in the early 90s, this is more than enough to service the loan for a 3 room flat.
what is the point of having 30K in special account when what you earn is not enough and ended up spending unnecessarily for a flat rent.