- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 63,837
- Points
- 113
When livelihoods and safety are at stake everything else is irrelevant.
-
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.
Serious It's Official! Sinkies Own Their HDB Flat! Oppies, Pls Stop Spreading Lies That HDB Is A Long-term Tenancy!
- Thread starter JohnTan
- Start date
When livelihoods and safety are at stake everything else is irrelevant.
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 37,364
- Points
- 113
What lying.... I went to the Legal Dept of HDB...they explain to me, what my LEASE TITLE MEANS...you moron! I bring that piece of paper, in which I had collected from HDB after paying off what I owed, I bring that to the banks....I need a small loan to start a business & use that piece of HDB called Lease Title, my flat, which I supposedly owned...you know what the banks say, you nitwit?. Ok!, how how non-secured amount you require? or how much loan you need!..yah!...the bank, must be lying..yah!.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2014
- Messages
- 36,768
- Points
- 113
Mr Ku Swee Yong claims that Housing Board flat buyers are "merely lessees who rent the HDB flats" (Outdated ideas on home ownership and land shortage are crippling us; Aug 14).
By his logic, a 999-year private condominium lease should also be considered a rental. But no one would consider this to be so.
Leaseholds confer ownership rights for a finite term. The tenure can vary from as short as 20 years and could go up to 999 years, or longer.
It is not uncommon to find residential properties with 99-year or shorter leases around the world, including in China and Australia.
Owners of leasehold properties can sell their property and keep the profit. Likewise, HDB flat owners can sell their flats once they meet the eligibility conditions and keep the proceeds, or continue living in them while renting out a room for income.
In contrast, tenancy arrangements are usually for shorter terms during which rent is paid.
Such a tenant usually has no right to sell his tenancy.
If the landlord sells the property, the tenant may have to leave unless the agreement specifies that the sale is subject to tenancy.
The tenant also has no interest in the property's long-term value and does not get any upside.
The values of long leases can rise for many years, even as the tenure runs down. It depends on factors such as economic growth. At the end of the lease tenure, the land reverts back to the state.
By then, the owner would have derived either income from renting out the flat, or an equivalent benefit from living in it for many decades.
In the case of HDB flats, many generations of Singaporeans have benefited from the rise in the value of their flats over the years, in tandem with the nation's growth.
Indeed, public housing owners enjoy unique benefits such as generous housing grants and heavily subsidised flat upgrading, which are not available to private home owners.
The recently announced Home Improvement Programme II and Voluntary Early Redevelopment Scheme are added commitments by the Government to ensure our HDB estates remain liveable and vibrant even as they age.
Lim Lea Lea (Ms)
Director (Branch Operations)
Housing and Development Board
https://www.straitstimes.com/forum/...s-confer-ownership-rights-for-finite-term-hdb
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 37,364
- Points
- 113
Generous housing grants....you sell your flat you have to pay back that grant deduct from the sale of the flat...upgrading is from taxpayers monies & it is not free... these are not the point...don't distract.
THE POINT IS WHEN YOU RECEIVE THAT TITLE OF YOUR FLAT AFTER PAYING FOR IT...NOT MANY STINKPERPOREANS GETS TO SEE IT FOR THEY COULD NEVER PAY IT ALL...I DID! & COLLECTED THE SO-CALLED OWNERSHIP....The actual title of that TITLE IS HDB...I am in name, a Tenant.
I cannot bring this "ownership of flat" to any banks or to any commercial lenders & say... what I am holding is worth $500,000...can you lend me say $100,000 at SIBOR + ? %...repayable say...10 years...know what they will tell me..."go f$#$^ a...." there is no real value in that paper...paper value , yes! the value of the paper in which it was printed on & value in accordance to a secondary market...
That is point....we do not have the title to the flat we fully paid for.....we do not even own that sub MUKIM Lot of the flat...
THE POINT IS WHEN YOU RECEIVE THAT TITLE OF YOUR FLAT AFTER PAYING FOR IT...NOT MANY STINKPERPOREANS GETS TO SEE IT FOR THEY COULD NEVER PAY IT ALL...I DID! & COLLECTED THE SO-CALLED OWNERSHIP....The actual title of that TITLE IS HDB...I am in name, a Tenant.
I cannot bring this "ownership of flat" to any banks or to any commercial lenders & say... what I am holding is worth $500,000...can you lend me say $100,000 at SIBOR + ? %...repayable say...10 years...know what they will tell me..."go f$#$^ a...." there is no real value in that paper...paper value , yes! the value of the paper in which it was printed on & value in accordance to a secondary market...
That is point....we do not have the title to the flat we fully paid for.....we do not even own that sub MUKIM Lot of the flat...
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
HDB was describing a lease ownership
Cheah Wenjie
PUBLISHED
JUL 21, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT
It is somewhat misleading to term HDB buyers "homeowners" rather than "lease owners".
The two terms mean very different things legally.
Homeowners own the land outright and never have to return it or pay rent on it. They are restricted only by the prevailing laws of the land.
Lease-owners, on the other hand, exclusively possess the flat for a specified time only, after which the flat returns to the state for free. During the time that they own the flat, they are in addition bound by the terms of the lease agreement they sign with the landlord.
HDB's director (Branch Operations) Lim Lea Lea states in her reply (HDB buyers are home owners, not tenants; July 19) that the name of each HDB flat owner is reflected in the Land Registry .The Land Titles Act imposes a requirement for a lease beyond seven years to be registered in the Land Registry.
Accordingly, the reasons given by Ms Lim as to why HDB-owners are homeowners in fact, fall into a standard description of a leasehold arrangement beyond seven years.
Calling HDB buyers homeowners works to perpetuate the misconception that they own the flat outright. This results in serious and damaging misunderstandings
For example, many are unaware that their flats will simply revert to the State at the end of the lease term for free and that their property value will depreciate leading up to that.
This fundamentally affects their decision-making with regard to buying or selling their flats.
This is made worse when we refer to HDB flats as "nest eggs" which will continue to appreciate.
The nature of HDB-ownership is different from standard commercial leases or tenancy agreements, and it may not be accurate to start calling HDB-owners "lessees" or "tenants".
But with the leases of some HDB flats starting to run out, the population is starting to realise the true nature of their HDB-ownership. This transition must be delicately managed - but not by continuing to perpetuate the misconception.
Cheah Wenjie
PUBLISHED
JUL 21, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT
It is somewhat misleading to term HDB buyers "homeowners" rather than "lease owners".
The two terms mean very different things legally.
Homeowners own the land outright and never have to return it or pay rent on it. They are restricted only by the prevailing laws of the land.
Lease-owners, on the other hand, exclusively possess the flat for a specified time only, after which the flat returns to the state for free. During the time that they own the flat, they are in addition bound by the terms of the lease agreement they sign with the landlord.
HDB's director (Branch Operations) Lim Lea Lea states in her reply (HDB buyers are home owners, not tenants; July 19) that the name of each HDB flat owner is reflected in the Land Registry .The Land Titles Act imposes a requirement for a lease beyond seven years to be registered in the Land Registry.
Accordingly, the reasons given by Ms Lim as to why HDB-owners are homeowners in fact, fall into a standard description of a leasehold arrangement beyond seven years.
Calling HDB buyers homeowners works to perpetuate the misconception that they own the flat outright. This results in serious and damaging misunderstandings
For example, many are unaware that their flats will simply revert to the State at the end of the lease term for free and that their property value will depreciate leading up to that.
This fundamentally affects their decision-making with regard to buying or selling their flats.
This is made worse when we refer to HDB flats as "nest eggs" which will continue to appreciate.
The nature of HDB-ownership is different from standard commercial leases or tenancy agreements, and it may not be accurate to start calling HDB-owners "lessees" or "tenants".
But with the leases of some HDB flats starting to run out, the population is starting to realise the true nature of their HDB-ownership. This transition must be delicately managed - but not by continuing to perpetuate the misconception.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
Correction note: An earlier headline said 'Why HDB flats are owned, not leased'. This is not what the HDB said. We are sorry for the error.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
HDB IS CONFUSING OWNERSHIP WITH LEASE-HOLDERSHIP
JULY 21, 2017
BY TAY LEONG TAN
In a letter to the forums, Lim Lea Lea, Director of Branch Operations at the HDB clarified that purchasers of HDB flats are “owners of their property”. http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/hdb-buyers-are-home-owners-not-tenants
This definition is neither legally accurate, nor socially healthy.
The point of law can be corrected quite swiftly: the purchaser is a leaseholder and only enjoys exclusive possession for a period of 99 years. In fact, the bank is effectively the owner of the lease – it is a well known legal principal that they can take possession of your house “even before the ink is dry on the mortgage”.
Even the freeholder, whose title is as close to ownership as possible, is still not the owner of a land or property, though for the sake of this topic it is not necessary to discuss this.
In legal terms, exclusive possession is not the same as ownership. Unlike Mr.Lee Kuan Yew, you may not will your house to be demolished, neither individually nor collectively. This is because you do not own the property.
HDB is legally incorrect to dismiss the term “leaseholder” and call us “owners”.
The other more pressing problem is how this label affects our attitude towards HDB properties.
Many were disappointed to learn that en bloc programs will not be offered to all. This means that the HDB is not obliged to buy back your apartment at market value and your family will be left with nothing at the end of the lease.
The comments following this news was surprising. It was as if we have newly learnt the fact that HDBs would only serve them 99 years, after which there is not a single dollar to be recovered.
The announcement wasn’t a bad thing. In fact, I thought it was good – that in 2017, we finally awaken to the reality that HDBs are public properties and are not designed to make one wealthy. Preserve wealth, perhaps, but not make you rich.
There will be a lot of disappointed people around when after financing their homes for decades, find out that they won’t be receiving as much as they thought they would. Many even plan their retirement around the HDB.
Worse, if they buy at prices that are incredibly high today and find out much later that a loss has to be taken before they could sell.
Many believe that residential properties are a sure ticket to riches but realistically, it won’t be.
You must have heard about how parents and grand parents had bought HDB houses for $20k and sold it for $500k? That was only possible because our economies were expanding in phenomenal numbers, from third world to first. They have bought a piece of property when Singapore was “a fishing village” and sold it when it was a metropolis. Today we are living in a first world condition and unless we can grow from first world to diamond world, this kind of growth is a fool’s dream.
In the years leading up to 2011, property prices shot-up substantially because of government policies to combat recession (amongst other troubles), but it is very unlikely this would be allowed to happen again.
Today, you’d be happy with perhaps $200k growth over about a decade. It works out to about to over a thousand a month, not a lot of money really. Furthermore, you have to put this money back into your CPF to make up for the missed interest rates you’re getting.
It is very important to the individual to set their expectations correctly from day 1: the HDB house is not a form of investment. Don’t overspend on it. Don’t expect their prices to rocket such as those experienced by our parents and grandparents, the economic conditions are different.
There is nothing wrong in calling ourselves leaseholders, by doing so we’ll be able to better understand how to manage this very big purchase.
JULY 21, 2017
BY TAY LEONG TAN
In a letter to the forums, Lim Lea Lea, Director of Branch Operations at the HDB clarified that purchasers of HDB flats are “owners of their property”. http://www.straitstimes.com/forum/letters-in-print/hdb-buyers-are-home-owners-not-tenants
This definition is neither legally accurate, nor socially healthy.
The point of law can be corrected quite swiftly: the purchaser is a leaseholder and only enjoys exclusive possession for a period of 99 years. In fact, the bank is effectively the owner of the lease – it is a well known legal principal that they can take possession of your house “even before the ink is dry on the mortgage”.
Even the freeholder, whose title is as close to ownership as possible, is still not the owner of a land or property, though for the sake of this topic it is not necessary to discuss this.
In legal terms, exclusive possession is not the same as ownership. Unlike Mr.Lee Kuan Yew, you may not will your house to be demolished, neither individually nor collectively. This is because you do not own the property.
HDB is legally incorrect to dismiss the term “leaseholder” and call us “owners”.
The other more pressing problem is how this label affects our attitude towards HDB properties.
Many were disappointed to learn that en bloc programs will not be offered to all. This means that the HDB is not obliged to buy back your apartment at market value and your family will be left with nothing at the end of the lease.
The comments following this news was surprising. It was as if we have newly learnt the fact that HDBs would only serve them 99 years, after which there is not a single dollar to be recovered.
The announcement wasn’t a bad thing. In fact, I thought it was good – that in 2017, we finally awaken to the reality that HDBs are public properties and are not designed to make one wealthy. Preserve wealth, perhaps, but not make you rich.
There will be a lot of disappointed people around when after financing their homes for decades, find out that they won’t be receiving as much as they thought they would. Many even plan their retirement around the HDB.
Worse, if they buy at prices that are incredibly high today and find out much later that a loss has to be taken before they could sell.
Many believe that residential properties are a sure ticket to riches but realistically, it won’t be.
You must have heard about how parents and grand parents had bought HDB houses for $20k and sold it for $500k? That was only possible because our economies were expanding in phenomenal numbers, from third world to first. They have bought a piece of property when Singapore was “a fishing village” and sold it when it was a metropolis. Today we are living in a first world condition and unless we can grow from first world to diamond world, this kind of growth is a fool’s dream.
In the years leading up to 2011, property prices shot-up substantially because of government policies to combat recession (amongst other troubles), but it is very unlikely this would be allowed to happen again.
Today, you’d be happy with perhaps $200k growth over about a decade. It works out to about to over a thousand a month, not a lot of money really. Furthermore, you have to put this money back into your CPF to make up for the missed interest rates you’re getting.
It is very important to the individual to set their expectations correctly from day 1: the HDB house is not a form of investment. Don’t overspend on it. Don’t expect their prices to rocket such as those experienced by our parents and grandparents, the economic conditions are different.
There is nothing wrong in calling ourselves leaseholders, by doing so we’ll be able to better understand how to manage this very big purchase.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
Straits Times publishes fake news: HDB no longer landlord of public housing flats
Posted on April 17, 2018by Phillip Ang
I refer to ST article by Janice Heng, “Let HDB landlords enjoy their rent“.
The title of this propaganda piece is erroneous because there is only one landlord, ie HDB.
Buyers of HDB flats sign a lease agreement and are only lessees.
As owners, there are financial obligations such as contributing to a sinking fund. This helps to reduce government expenditure. But there has been only 1 owner.
Lessees also need not pay property tax and the PAP appears to have been gradually reducing this to zero since the HDB ‘owner’ has been exposed.
To confirm ST’s fake news, below is an image of the lease document stating HDB as the lessor.
ST should correct its erroneous article as HDB flats/rooms are rented out by lessees to subtenants. Although HDB has amended its website and deleted “subtenants” and “lessees”, Singaporeans should not be fooled as legally, we are still lessees.
There’s only one landlord for the 1 million flats under HDB’s management. Not ‘landlords’.
Posted on April 17, 2018by Phillip Ang
I refer to ST article by Janice Heng, “Let HDB landlords enjoy their rent“.
The title of this propaganda piece is erroneous because there is only one landlord, ie HDB.
Buyers of HDB flats sign a lease agreement and are only lessees.
As owners, there are financial obligations such as contributing to a sinking fund. This helps to reduce government expenditure. But there has been only 1 owner.
Lessees also need not pay property tax and the PAP appears to have been gradually reducing this to zero since the HDB ‘owner’ has been exposed.
To confirm ST’s fake news, below is an image of the lease document stating HDB as the lessor.
ST should correct its erroneous article as HDB flats/rooms are rented out by lessees to subtenants. Although HDB has amended its website and deleted “subtenants” and “lessees”, Singaporeans should not be fooled as legally, we are still lessees.
There’s only one landlord for the 1 million flats under HDB’s management. Not ‘landlords’.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
Why are cats banned in HDB flats?
THE Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) gave a reasoned reply to recent letters from me and other Forum Page contributors on the issue of stray cats and irresponsible cat feeders ("Collective effort needed to tackle stray cat issue"; Monday).
The AVA's reply rightly noted that the stray cat issue is complex and requires the collective efforts of animal welfare groups, caregivers and the community.
The reply was silent over the major role the HDB can play in resolving the problem.
Cats are banned in HDB flats for no good reason, but dogs are allowed.
In fact, dogs can be far more irritating to the neighbours, a view held by cat and dog experts I have met.
Repealing the HDB ban will immediately free up a pool of caregivers who can adopt and take responsibility for stray cats.
It will also separate the wheat from the chaff among the animal welfare activists.
Some are genuine in their concern for cats.
Others just want the fun of playing with them in public areas, leaving the inevitable mess and other problems that cats create for others to clear up.
It is time for the HDB to state its reasons and justify the ban on the keeping of cats.
Lee Chiu San
ST Forum, 25 Aug 2012
THE Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority (AVA) gave a reasoned reply to recent letters from me and other Forum Page contributors on the issue of stray cats and irresponsible cat feeders ("Collective effort needed to tackle stray cat issue"; Monday).
The AVA's reply rightly noted that the stray cat issue is complex and requires the collective efforts of animal welfare groups, caregivers and the community.
The reply was silent over the major role the HDB can play in resolving the problem.
Cats are banned in HDB flats for no good reason, but dogs are allowed.
In fact, dogs can be far more irritating to the neighbours, a view held by cat and dog experts I have met.
Repealing the HDB ban will immediately free up a pool of caregivers who can adopt and take responsibility for stray cats.
It will also separate the wheat from the chaff among the animal welfare activists.
Some are genuine in their concern for cats.
Others just want the fun of playing with them in public areas, leaving the inevitable mess and other problems that cats create for others to clear up.
It is time for the HDB to state its reasons and justify the ban on the keeping of cats.
Lee Chiu San
ST Forum, 25 Aug 2012
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
Flat owners should conduct regular checks on subtenants
We refer to the letter on subtenants who sublet HDB flats illegally to other tenants on 28 Oct.
Flat owners who sublet their flats or bedrooms must exercise due diligence to ensure that their subtenants do not further sublet their flat or misuse the flat. HDB takes a very serious view of unauthorised subletting and will not hesitate to take stern action against flat owners who flout the subletting rules. This includes imposing a financial penalty, or compulsorily acquiring the flat for unauthorised subletting. Errant subtenants who further sublet the flat will also be debarred from renting an HDB flat under the Subletting of Flat scheme for 5 years.
Regarding the case mentioned by the writer, we wish to clarify that a maximum of 9 persons is allowed in 4-room and bigger flats. Only the latest set of subtenants registered with HDB would be allowed to stay in the flat. Subtenants whose names have been removed would be deemed as unauthorised occupants if they continue to stay in the flat.
HDB has launched a new e-Service (www.hdb.gov.sg/subtenant-enquiry) in June this year, to allow persons renting HDB flats or bedrooms to enquire if the flat owners have registered them as authorised subtenants. Subtenants are advised to make use of the new e-Service to confirm their registration with HDB, so as to avoid becoming unauthorised occupants and victims of unauthorised subletting.
HDB carries out inspections to ensure that our subletting rules are adhered to. Members of the public who come across suspected cases of unauthorised subletting or misuse of flat may contact us at 1800-555 6370. All feedback will be kept strictly confidential.
Lim Lea Lea
Director (Branch Operations)
Housing & Development Board
We refer to the letter on subtenants who sublet HDB flats illegally to other tenants on 28 Oct.
Flat owners who sublet their flats or bedrooms must exercise due diligence to ensure that their subtenants do not further sublet their flat or misuse the flat. HDB takes a very serious view of unauthorised subletting and will not hesitate to take stern action against flat owners who flout the subletting rules. This includes imposing a financial penalty, or compulsorily acquiring the flat for unauthorised subletting. Errant subtenants who further sublet the flat will also be debarred from renting an HDB flat under the Subletting of Flat scheme for 5 years.
Regarding the case mentioned by the writer, we wish to clarify that a maximum of 9 persons is allowed in 4-room and bigger flats. Only the latest set of subtenants registered with HDB would be allowed to stay in the flat. Subtenants whose names have been removed would be deemed as unauthorised occupants if they continue to stay in the flat.
HDB has launched a new e-Service (www.hdb.gov.sg/subtenant-enquiry) in June this year, to allow persons renting HDB flats or bedrooms to enquire if the flat owners have registered them as authorised subtenants. Subtenants are advised to make use of the new e-Service to confirm their registration with HDB, so as to avoid becoming unauthorised occupants and victims of unauthorised subletting.
HDB carries out inspections to ensure that our subletting rules are adhered to. Members of the public who come across suspected cases of unauthorised subletting or misuse of flat may contact us at 1800-555 6370. All feedback will be kept strictly confidential.
Lim Lea Lea
Director (Branch Operations)
Housing & Development Board
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
Change in Manner of Holding/ Ownership Proportion
Application Procedure
If there are 2 or more flat owners, you are allowed to change the holding type of your flat from joint tenancy to tenancy-in-common (in equal or unequal shares), and vice versa.
If you are already holding the flat under tenancy-in-common, you can also change the proportion of shares held by each owner. The change of holding type or proportion of shares is without monetary consideration. For tenancy-in-common, the shares of ownership of the flat must be in fractions of the same denominator and must add up to one.
You can either appoint your own solicitors to act for you or you can engage HDB to handle the transaction.
Other than the legal status of ownership of the flat, there is no difference in the housing policies governing the lease administration of HDB flats.
Application Procedure
If there are 2 or more flat owners, you are allowed to change the holding type of your flat from joint tenancy to tenancy-in-common (in equal or unequal shares), and vice versa.
If you are already holding the flat under tenancy-in-common, you can also change the proportion of shares held by each owner. The change of holding type or proportion of shares is without monetary consideration. For tenancy-in-common, the shares of ownership of the flat must be in fractions of the same denominator and must add up to one.
You can either appoint your own solicitors to act for you or you can engage HDB to handle the transaction.
Other than the legal status of ownership of the flat, there is no difference in the housing policies governing the lease administration of HDB flats.
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2014
- Messages
- 251
- Points
- 43
crazy rich ministers staying in freehold landed trying to wayang the voters that 99 years hdb is not a tenancy before next GE.
the bunch of nitwit 70 percent obviously haven't tried getting a secured overdraft on their hdb shitholes. One can imagine the look on their banker's face. Anyway, cannot expect any of them to know because they never finish paying off their loans to their hdb landlord.
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
...and quite a few are staying in freehold landed GOOD CLASS BUNGALOWS. GCB can be sold to FOREIGNERS!!!!!
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2018
- Messages
- 1,731
- Points
- 113
Be careful. PAP has AIDS!
Safer to EXPOSE to let the people know clearLEE
DEPOSE to unseat and count out LEEcisiveLEE;
DISPOSE to weed out completeLEE.
斩草不除根，春风吹又生
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 35,570
- Points
- 113
I've been fucking them at the polls! Est .1988 and proud of it!
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2008
- Messages
- 63,837
- Points
- 113
I do not understand where your vitriol is coming from and what precipitated it.
I can assure everyone that regardless of the shortcomings of the HDB scheme there is no other country in the world where individuals can make money out of public housing.
In NZ, OZ, UK etc the lower income are provided with public housing at a subsidised RENTAL rate. Occupiers of public housing have no chance whatsoever of making a cent... EVER!
There is no option to buy a state house but if they do go on the market for redevelopment the tenant is simply offered another state house in a different location.
NZ is now TRYING to come up with low cost housing for sale but the scheme is doomed to failure because there is no proper organisation behind the scheme. It is a one off effort to try to alleviate the current housing shortage.
A young couple in Auckland who want to buy a home are now looking at prices way beyond their reach in the region of $600,000 for the most basic of homes. They need to front up with 20% before they qualify for a bank loan. That's $120,000. How many kiwis in their 20s or early 30s have this sort of money lying around? The answer is very very few. Most are therefore doomed to be renters for the rest of their lives.
Singaporeans really have to count their blessings. They just don't know how lucky they are.
Similar threads
