• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Yaw Shin Leong: Who is he representing?

brocoli

Alfrescian
Loyal
The party that takes on the cause of the workers and stands against the hegemonic might of the MIW is somehow getting its priorities wrong; or at least one of its MP. Workers’ Party’s Yaw Shin Leong has put up on his blog a series of informal dialogues which he is leading with a group of about 30 real estate agents who are unhappy with the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA).

http://yawshinleong.blogspot.com/2011/11/comprehensive-review-of-estate-agents.html

The CEA was established in Oct 2010 to regulate the real estate industry (especially rogue real estate agents) and protect the consumer from unfair business practices as property transactions are often very expensive and can be complicated. Before the CEA, there was no licensing of real estate agents and the industry had very low barriers of entry leading to many agents who are not only uncommitted to their trade but also devised various means to extract unfair commission and fees from unsuspecting consumers, property owners and even banks.

I bought my first house, a re-sale HDB directly from a seller and we did not engage any agents on both sides. It was pretty neat and clean as we decided on an agreeable price rather quickly although we have not met previously. HDB assisted in us completing the transaction and while it was complicated at first, it was not rocket science, you just needed some effort. Most of all, it saved buyer and seller a combined agent commission fees of $10K on a $350K apartment that is leasehold in the first place!

NOW Mr Yaw and his group of real estate agents is proposing that the CEA ban individual seller and buyer from any property transaction.

On Yaw’s blog: The Council should not permit sellers, buyers, landlord and tenants to transact any property deals themselves, as they are not trained; they do not attend classes; they do not sit the examinations such as Common Examination for Housing Agents(CEHA), Common Examination for Salespersons(CES) etc, and they are not registered with the Council. Therefore, the seller, buyers, landlord and tenants are not licenced to transact any deal with regards to property transactions. If a seller who is not licenced, sells his property to a buyer, essentially, the buyer is not protected, he is not being served by a licence agent.

IMHO, this is the most ridiculous of suggestions, it is anti-consumer and gives an unfair unending meal ticket to real estate agents. If seller and buyer are known to one another, relatives etc, they can just settle the deal at HDB or engage a conveyance lawyer in the case of a private property. Buyers, like me, who approached the seller directly can currently settle the transactions ourselves. If the seller is hard on cash, such a rule would force him to part with more cash and worsen his financial position. Why should a fee be paid to the property agent when he/she had made no introductory at all?? This also increases the cost of business as the property agent would get a cut of every rental property deals. Ultimately, such a suggestion is most damaging to consumer interest, dampens business environment, and basically creates a monopoly for very very small segment of interested persons.

Another ridiculous suggestion found in Mr Yaw’s blog states that real estate agent must be compensated half of the deposit forfeited by the seller if the deal is aborted. Currently, compensation to agents for aborted deals are non-obligatory.

On Yaw’s blog: As stated in Form 1-Estate Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property and Form 3-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord. Sellers and landlords are not obligated to pay commission to the real estate agents if the sale and the leasing of the property fall through. The real estate agents must be compensated half of the deposit that is forfeited by the sellers and the landlords when deals are aborted, as the real estate agents have successfully secured the deals, and cost spent in marketing the property.

The question of compensation should be a private arrangement open for negotiation between interested parties. If the agent did not perform his role adequately and cause the deal to fall through, why should he/she be compensated half the deposit?? The agent should stipulate in his contract with the seller that any marketing costs should be borne by the seller if the deal does not eventually succeed. Stipulating that real estate agents must be compensated half the deposit of any fallen through deal again grants them an unfair meal ticket.

Mr Yaw together with his group of real estate agents also proposed that the annual license fee for real estate agents imposed by the CEA be amended to a one-off payment.

On Yaw’s blog: The Council imposes an annual licence fee of $246.10 including GST should be amended to a one-off license fee, as agents are paying fees for courses, examination as well as the yearly Continuing Professional Development (CPD). The fees of these courses, examination and CPD amount to more than $500. Currently, if a new agent obtains the relevant certification, say in October 2011, upon registration with CEA, he has to fulfill the full amount of $246.10 for the entire year of 2011. Come January 2012, which is just 3 months after his registration on October 2011, the same agent has to fulfill another payment of $246.10 for the entire 2012. The new agent should only make a full payment of $246.10 as a one-off licence fee regardless the date of registration.

Next thing we know, Yaw would be joining pubs, karaoke and coffeeshops owners asking the government to make their entertainment and liquor licenses one-time payment also. This is part of their business costs and real estate agents should acknowledge it. Real estate agents should bear part of the costs of licensing, enforcement and administration of CEA as they are the ones that benefit from a well-regulated industry. If the CEA license fee is only one-time payment then the long-term buget of the CEA would be borne by taxpayers!!

Is Mr Yaw telling us that real estate agents who earned ten of thousands a year cannot afford a few hundred in licensing fees. If these real estate agents don’t earn a decent salary annually then perhaps they can consider changing jobs. The government can consider waiving the annual license fee if the economy is really bad and there is a drastic drop in volume of property transacted.

There are many other points worth countering in Mr Yaw’s suggestions but I won’t do them here (maybe he would be write to me if he is interested…haha). Is Mr Yaw still in the GE mode where he is opposing zheng hu for the sake of opposing?? Consumers now have more protection with the CEA established as it provides a platform for aggrieved consumers to lodge a complain, meditations to be carried out and rogue real estate agents turfed out. Workers’ Party and Mr Yaw should concentrate on fighting for everyday Singaporeans and the interest of normal consumers rather than the 30-odd real estate agents. And maybe one way of really helping the 30-odd real estate agents would be keeping the dialogue out of blogosphere and addressing it directly with the relevant interested parties together with perhaps the Institute of Estate Agents, a professional body of real estate agents. 30-odd agents out of the tens of thousands in Singapore is really a tiny tiny dot in the little red dot.

http://unbrandedbreadnbutter.wordpress.com/2011/12/27/yaw-shin-leong-who-is-he-representing/
 
Last edited:

brocoli

Alfrescian
Loyal
I cant say i know shit bout real estate....

so is ah yaw @ fault here ??? was he used and manipulated...?

Oldies please give comment?
 

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
I cant say i know shit bout real estate....

so is ah yaw @ fault here ??? was he used and manipulated...?

Oldies please give comment?


The blog post is spot on.

Yaw Shin Leong appears to have his priorities mixed up. Might be due to the fact that many of his pals are property agents who would benefit greatly from such lop-sided rules. Case of pandering to his own internal supporters.

The suggestion that ordinary folk like you and I be disallowed from transacting property ourselves really takes the cake. Ridiculous!

Like you said, if you want to sell your house to someone you already know, why do you need a bloody agent?

The term for this kind of mentality is "economic rent seeking" -- the forceful extraction of economic benefit when you yourself are not in a position to add value or increase productivity or contribute in any meaningful way.

Agents are just middle men. They come in very useful, but sometimes they are not necessary. When they are not necessary in some special circumstances, and yet you create a law saying that you must use agents in ALL circumstances, then that is tyranny and creation of a very unfair business climate that punishes consumers.
 
Last edited:

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
There're some circumstances in which services of property agents are not engaged, e.g. buy new flat, private transfer, inheritance change of names etc. In a buy-sell transaction, the only way to avoid agents to save commission costs is both buyer and seller don't have agents. However, agents do provide relevant and useful services to many who don't know how to go through the process or don't want to do it themselves because their time is valued more than the commission.

There's no need to make agent services compulsory. Even at law, it's not compulsory to hire a lawyer. You can always defend yourself in court if you think you know enough of the law in the case. The difference being, you can only represent yourself, not anyone else. A lawyer can represent anyone in court. And as the saying goes, a man who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for client. Even lawyers in trouble always hire other lawyers and never represent themselves.

Same goes for the property market. There'd be upturns, there'd be downturns, but there'd always be a market there if you're competent. There's already professional protection enough in place like exclusive agreement that guarantees you won't waste your time, overhead and effort ending up without commission. If you're incompetent at the job, no amount of professional protection, exclusive agreement, compulsory agency etc. will help you get or complete the job.
 

brocoli

Alfrescian
Loyal
There're some circumstances in which services of property agents are not engaged, e.g. buy new flat, private transfer, inheritance change of names etc. In a buy-sell transaction, the only way to avoid agents to save commission costs is both buyer and seller don't have agents. However, agents do provide relevant and useful services to many who don't know how to go through the process or don't want to do it themselves because their time is valued more than the commission.

There's no need to make agent services compulsory. Even at law, it's not compulsory to hire a lawyer. You can always defend yourself in court if you think you know enough of the law in the case. The difference being, you can only represent yourself, not anyone else. A lawyer can represent anyone in court. And as the saying goes, a man who acts as his own lawyer has a fool for client. Even lawyers in trouble always hire other lawyers and never represent themselves.

Same goes for the property market. There'd be upturns, there'd be downturns, but there'd always be a market there if you're competent. There's already professional protection enough in place like exclusive agreement that guarantees you won't waste your time, overhead and effort ending up without commission. If you're incompetent at the job, no amount of professional protection, exclusive agreement, compulsory agency etc. will help you get or complete the job.

are WP members allow to contradict the Party position and leadership???
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
are WP members allow to contradict the Party position and leadership???

Yes, provided that it's well reasoned out. Even a small fry like me has managed to change the minds of LTK and Sylvia on several issues. Many other WP members from small fries to big shots have too. Only then could our MPs form an informed opinion when speaking in Parliament. There's no such thing as total agreement, we're all humans with our own minds. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we agree to disagree. Even PAP members and MPs are allowed to contradict each other.

The only binding agreement is the written party manisfesto. No party member should contradict it. Anything not covered in it is open to discussion and difference.
 
Last edited:

brocoli

Alfrescian
Loyal
Yes, provided that it's well reasoned out. Even a small fry like me has managed to change the minds of LTK and Sylvia on several issues. Many other WP members from small fries to big shots have too. Only then could our MPs form an informed opinion when speaking in Parliament. There's no such thing as total agreement, we're all humans with our own minds. Sometimes we agree, sometimes we agree to disagree. Even PAP members and MPs are allowed to contradict each other.

The only binding agreement is the written party manisfesto. No party member should contradict it. Anything not covered in it is open to discussion and difference.

you guys should write less in it then.... more room to maneuver.... ... are you small fry ? arent you king of beach road or something like dat... ???
 

Ramseth

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
you guys should write less in it then.... more room to maneuver.... ... are you small fry ? arent you king of beach road or something like dat... ???

Streetsmartness and politics are two aspects of live, out of many other aspects. Life is a many-aspected thing. :wink:

In fact, some aspects contradict each other and need management. I love the freedom on the streets, therefore I can't be too involved in politics. 生命诚可贵,自由价更高。
 
Last edited:

Unrepented

Alfrescian
Loyal
Scanned his blog post, it seems thats is not his recommendation, rather is a current ruling.:confused:

The write-up that TS posted' omitted the words "current ruling".:biggrin:

................

The suggestion that ordinary folk like you and I be disallowed from transacting property ourselves really takes the cake. Ridiculous!

............
 
Last edited:

CannonFairy

Alfrescian
Loyal
It has occurred to me that Yaw is either thirsty for media attention for political gains, that is, no difference from sarong party girls doing what they could to hook a piece of white meat,

or Yaw is simply daft and naive or manipulated by his money-minded property agent friends.

It does not matter whether Yaw succeeded in helping, because he is the ultimate winner by giving the impression he is helping. He wins.
 

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Scanned his blog post, it seems thats is not his recommendation, rather is a current ruling.:confused:

The write-up that TS posted' omitted the words "current ruling".:biggrin:


How can it be a current ruling that no one is allowed to transact property without first engaging a property agent?
 

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
It has occurred to me that Yaw is either thirsty for media attention for political gains, that is, no difference from sarong party girls doing what they could to hook a piece of white meat,

or Yaw is simply daft and naive or manipulated by his money-minded property agent friends.

It does not matter whether Yaw succeeded in helping, because he is the ultimate winner by giving the impression he is helping. He wins.


Its like saying that no one is allowed to buy unit trusts without first engaging a financial planner.
 

Fook Seng

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Thick Face Black Heart said:
How can it be a current ruling that no one is allowed to transact property without first engaging a property agent?

Seem to remember hearing mentioned over radio recently. Could be a new ruling. Did not pay much attention to it then. Worth checking.
 

Thick Face Black Heart

Alfrescian (InfP)
Generous Asset
Seem to remember hearing mentioned over radio recently. Could be a new ruling. Did not pay much attention to it then. Worth checking.

So one day, I walk up to my good neighbour and offer to sell him my flat as I'm going away for good. He hangs up his arms in dismay, saying we both have to browse the classified ads and ring up some property agents first. I tell him, no need, I know the procedure and all the paperwork as I've purchased and sold properties on a few occasions already. He says no use, it does not matter if I am an expert, I do not have a real estate agent license, it is against the rules to sell my own house on my own.
 
Last edited:

Conqueror

Alfrescian
Loyal
Asshole Party

funny-government-dumb-politicians.jpg



Seem to remember hearing mentioned over radio recently. Could be a new ruling. Did not pay much attention to it then. Worth checking.

This kind of fascist idea can only come from an asshole party for the sake of raising GDP growth. Your freedom and rights are not important to them.
 
Top