• 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.

K1976 refuses to sell HDB flat co-owned with 90yo mother

rocket

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Oct 5, 2012
Messages
18,360
Points
113

69yo son refuses to sell HDB flat co-owned with 90yo mother​

The sale of a Housing Board flat that has almost doubled in value would normally be a happy affair for its owners, but not so for an elderly woman and her son, who got embroiled in a dispute over it.

They were equal owners of the $700,000 flat in Toa Payoh, but the 90-year-old woman had been living elsewhere with her eldest daughter for the past two decades.

So her son, a 69-year-old retired artist, lived in the flat and had rented out two bedrooms for a total of $1,500 a month, which he used for his living expenses.

All was well until 2023 when the daughter asked the High Court for an order to sell the flat because her mother, who has dementia, needed money for medical and nursing care as her condition was worsening.

The daughter, 71, and also a retiree, had insufficient savings and so told the court that the proceeds from the sale of the flat would come in handy for her mother’s long-term care.

But the son objected to the sale, as it would render him homeless. He argued that he was no longer working, had suffered a stroke, and had no means to move out as he would lose his rental income.

High Court Judge Choo Han Teck noted that the son’s main point was that he would not have sufficient resources for his upkeep if the property were to be sold.

“This, however, must be balanced against the best interests of his ailing and aged mother. She cannot be kept out of the property and have the (son) taking over the benefits of ownership entirely. Nothing can be more inequitable,” the judge said.

So Justice Choo approved the application to sell the flat, noting that it would be the equitable solution in the circumstances.

As the flat was estimated to be worth over $700,000, mother and son would receive lump sums of at least $350,000 each as they were equal owners.

While the son would need to look for a new home, the judge noted that his share of the sale proceeds would allow him to find a suitable new home.

When the mother and son bought the flat in 2001, they were listed as joint owners. But the joint ownership was severed in December 2022 and they became equal owners holding 50 per cent each.

This was likely done because the mother probably did not want the son to automatically own the whole flat upon her death, and she wanted to leave her half-share to her beneficiaries.

But such legal ownership tells only half the story in some family disputes, especially if one of the owners claims a bigger share for contributing more to the purchase of the flat.

Despite holding the unit as equal owners, the son claimed he was entitled to about 60 per cent of the sale proceeds because he had contributed more to the purchase, which was funded by the sale of another flat owned by the pair.

However, the loan records showed that in both instances, it was the mother who had repaid the bulk of the mortgage. Moreover, the son did not share the rental proceeds with his mother, an amount that exceeded $400,000 since 2003.

So, instead of nitpicking over who paid more over the last 20 years, a task that would be impossible without proper records, Justice Choo found that it would be appropriate to divide the sale proceeds equally in this case, based on their shares.

https://www.straitstimes.com/business/invest/when-co-owners-refuse-to-sell-their-hdb-flats
 
The son didn't paid a single cent for the unit.
 
The daughter could be the one stirring up shit and insisting on the sale as she is likely to benefit from the mother's half share in the flat.
 
Sad , for this case,all come down is money


all PAP's fault for creating housing bubble...................if HDB prices drop as lease runs out in a linear fashion..................then no quarrel liao


The daughter could be the one stirring up shit and insisting on the sale as she is likely to benefit from the mother's half share in the flat.


no lah..................the son-in-law is the instigator lah............. :biggrin: :laugh:
 
live long life in Singapore is becoming a curse rather than happiness
 
The son will most likely ended up homeless.

$350,000 of which most will be locked up in CPF if the son has not met the full CPF retirement sum. The remaining amount is unlikely to secure another HDB at the current market price. The daughter will benefit, but the son became homeless. How can the judge not see the serious implication?
 
The daughter could be the one stirring up shit and insisting on the sale as she is likely to benefit from the mother's half share in the flat.
You think it's fair for the daughter to care for her mother for 20+ years when her brother has a free ride?
 
The son will most likely ended up homeless.

$350,000 of which most will be locked up in CPF if the son has not met the full CPF retirement sum. The remaining amount is unlikely to secure another HDB at the current market price. The daughter will benefit, but the son became homeless. How can the judge not see the serious implication?
Yes ,homeless with no income. Have to rent from hdb.
 
It seems quite obvious to the sister that he will be left homeless after the HDB has been liquidated. Despite the fact, the sister insist to follow through meaning she doesn't gives a shit and using the soon to uplorry mother as an excuse to squeeze out as much as possible.

Perhaps the better solution will be to get together as a family, have a talk, eat something nice together regularly.... try to get along and rebuild back the relationship. Oh yes for their health sake, don't forget to bring them for their covid booster shots and always remind them to keep up to date with all the covid vaccines too.

Do your part as a brother too mah.... arrange comfortable transportation for them to the vaccination centers lah. Aiyo as family no need to fight until like that lah.... tsk...tsk... tsk.... love one another ok....
 
1. As the mother owns 50% share of the flat, the daughter would become the beneficiary of the mother's share SHOULD a Will be written. Thus it is not automatic that the son would own the mother's share.


2. With the flat sold & shares split, that $350,000 each is a lot of money, & the son can buy a 2 or 3rm flat unit at around $250k to $300k+ with cash & some money left over. He would not be homeless, although this option is not advisable as he would be left with a roof over his head but there would be little income, & renting out a spare room or shared at his cranky age would lead to a lot of strife if the wrong tenant is found.


3.He would need a financial planner.


4. As he is 69yrs old, he need not return the $350k to his CPF, but he can :-

i)place it under the various CPF schemes to earn higher interests for monthly payouts.

ii) With his still-living mother, apply to rent a HDB under the PRS scheme, which rents at mere $75/mth.

iii)As he is old & have no jobs, he can apply for ComCare LTA that will give him $640/mth as living expenses, & when combined with his CPF fix deposits monthly payouts, he would live a sustainable retirement life. We Singaporeans will leave no one behind.

iv) So too is ComCare available for his aged mother as well, if her daughter has little funds left, as it is well known that medical, hospitalization & treatment costs are high in Singapore, even when subsidized.....
 
Back
Top