S’porean teacher refuses to move out of Bukit Timah rented landed house for 1.5 years, judge orders him to pay double rent - Mothership.SG
mothership.sg
The landlord, Amirul Akbar bin Abdul Kadir, was a Turkish Airways pilot during the trial.
He sued Lye Kok Leong, an enrichment teacher, to recover his property and the rental and penalties owed to him.
He denied the claims and made a counterclaim against Amirul Akbar for breaches of the tenancy agreement, fraudulent misrepresentation and "conspiracy by unlawful means".
Until the end of the trial in March 2023, Lye continued to stay in the house with his wife, four children, and their domestic helper.
According to a judgment made publicly available on May 4, 2023, the tenancy agreement was negotiated through a property agent, Lim Leng Koi, around the end of September 2016.
Upon Lye's request, the tenancy agreement included the term of a "guaranteed option to renew" the lease for a year at the same rent and deleted the clause that allowed the landlord to "re-enter" the house upon non-payment of rent.
He also negotiated the interest rate claimable by the landlord on default payment of rent from 10 per cent per annum to 1.5 per cent per annum.
Lye claimed he was not given Amirul Akbar's bank account number and Lim never answered his calls or email.
On Jul. 31, 2017, Lim finally contacted Lye through WhatsApp, asking for the rental payments on Amirul Akbar's behalf and providing a bank account number.
Amirul Akbar brought down workers to repair the kitchen in May 2018, and he met Lye for the first time.
Lye asked him for a physical copy of the tenancy agreement, but he told Lye to get it from Lim.
Despite all these, Amirul Akbar asked Lye if he wanted to renew his tenancy for a year or two.
Amirul Akbar agreed to a S$100 reduction and sent him a soft copy of the new contract.
However, neither of them signed the new agreement.
Lye's domestic helper, who received the letter, passed it to Lye, and he opened it to read.
The letter stated that Amirul Akbar had ceased to be a Singapore permanent resident (PR) and had not sold the property within two years as required by law.
SLA asked for an explanation and warned Amirul Akbar not to use the house for rental or any other purpose.
He also promptly notified Lim of the letter. Lim then asked Amirul Akbar about it, who claimed he "had no idea".
Lim replied to Lye a few days later, stating they could not extend the tenancy.
He asked Lye how long he needed to find a new place to stay.
Lye replied that his tenancy would end on Oct. 7, 2020, and if he decided to exercise his "guaranteed option to renew", it would end a year later instead, and he will get a replacement property by those dates.
He told Lim, "Please do not worry about it."
Lye objected to the penalty, but the commissioner dismissed his objections.
On Apr. 4 2019, SLA made Amirul Akbar pay a S$67,900 penalty for unapproved rentals between August 2011 and October 2018.
When they found out Lye was still renting the property from October 2018 to October 2019, they handed Amirul Akbar another S$5,362 fine.
However, Lye refused to move out, and Amirul Akbar hired lawyers in June 2019. He filed a suit against Lye in September 2019.
Despite receiving three lawyer's letters and being sued in court, Lye demanded on August 2020 to exercise his "guaranteed option to renew" the lease till October 2021 and asked in August 2021 for the further option to renew his lease till October 2022.
Lye refuted the allegation and argued that he had reached an agreement with Lim, who was acting for Amirul Akbar, and pointed out he paid the new rent for months without complaint from Amirul Akbar.
Lye alleged that Amirul Akbar had purposely not signed the tenancy agreement as he knew the rental was unauthorised and "simply wanted an excuse to disavow the tenancy when SLA discovered him".
The judge pointed out that Amirul Akbar had partaken in negotiations with Lye, which concluded with a counterproposal of rent from him that Lye had accepted.
He added that Amirul Akbar accepted rent and told SLA officers that the property was being rented at the new rent amount, showing he viewed that the new agreement was in place.
Hence, Lye is liable to cough up the rental payments he owed for the tenancy agreement period and have to pay double the rent for his stay after Oct. 7, 2021, up until he vacates the house, per the terms of the agreement.
He will also have to pay interest at 1.5 per cent per annum.
Lye claimed that Amirul Akbar, through Lim, had hidden the fact that he was not a Singaporean PR anymore and did not have permission to rent out the property.
The judge added that Lye is a "highly educated individual sufficiently well-versed with tenancy matters" and "clearly satisfied" with the rent he negotiated for himself.
He also said that Lye suffered no loss or damage yet made extravagant claims of at least S$161,126, which "speaks of an opportunistic streak".
Similarly, the judge dismissed Lye's allegations of a conspiracy between Amirul Akbar, Lim and Lim's agency and the claim of S$158,400 was "clearly misconceived".
The judge dismissed the claims and pointed out that the "plethora" of claims had no legal basis and "in any event not proven".
The judge, however, allowed Lye to claim S$336, which was the late stamping fee penalty he incurred.
Top image via Google Maps
mothership.sg
A Singaporean man who rented a landed property at Jalan Keria along Bukit Timah Road was ordered by a District Judge to move out of the house and pay the rent he owed the landlord — including a double rent penalty for the extra two years he stayed after the contract expired.
The landlord, Amirul Akbar bin Abdul Kadir, was a Turkish Airways pilot during the trial.
He sued Lye Kok Leong, an enrichment teacher, to recover his property and the rental and penalties owed to him.
Stayed in house with whole family since 2016
Lye, who holds an honours degree in law from the University of Nottingham, represented himself in the suit.He denied the claims and made a counterclaim against Amirul Akbar for breaches of the tenancy agreement, fraudulent misrepresentation and "conspiracy by unlawful means".
Until the end of the trial in March 2023, Lye continued to stay in the house with his wife, four children, and their domestic helper.
According to a judgment made publicly available on May 4, 2023, the tenancy agreement was negotiated through a property agent, Lim Leng Koi, around the end of September 2016.
Negotiated for a “guaranteed option to renew"
The agreement, signed on Oct. 3, 2016, stated that the monthly rent was S$3,400 for 24 months, from Oct. 8, 2016, to Oct. 7, 2018.Upon Lye's request, the tenancy agreement included the term of a "guaranteed option to renew" the lease for a year at the same rent and deleted the clause that allowed the landlord to "re-enter" the house upon non-payment of rent.
He also negotiated the interest rate claimable by the landlord on default payment of rent from 10 per cent per annum to 1.5 per cent per annum.
Rent payments delayed for almost a year
After paying the first-month rental and a two-month security deposit, Lye did not make any rental payment until Aug. 1, 2017.Lye claimed he was not given Amirul Akbar's bank account number and Lim never answered his calls or email.
On Jul. 31, 2017, Lim finally contacted Lye through WhatsApp, asking for the rental payments on Amirul Akbar's behalf and providing a bank account number.
Refuse to pay if kitchen not repaired
After paying the owed sums in two tranches, he notified Lim that he would refuse to make further payments if his requests for kitchen repairs were not carried out.Amirul Akbar brought down workers to repair the kitchen in May 2018, and he met Lye for the first time.
Lye asked him for a physical copy of the tenancy agreement, but he told Lye to get it from Lim.
Despite all these, Amirul Akbar asked Lye if he wanted to renew his tenancy for a year or two.
Asked for less rent in renewed tenancy
Lye responded by asking for two years and proposed a "token reduction" of S$200 in the rental.Amirul Akbar agreed to a S$100 reduction and sent him a soft copy of the new contract.
However, neither of them signed the new agreement.
Found out landlord was not PR anymore
On Oct. 30, 2018, a Singapore Land Authority (SLA) officer visited the house and delivered a letter to Amirul Akbar.Lye's domestic helper, who received the letter, passed it to Lye, and he opened it to read.
The letter stated that Amirul Akbar had ceased to be a Singapore permanent resident (PR) and had not sold the property within two years as required by law.
SLA asked for an explanation and warned Amirul Akbar not to use the house for rental or any other purpose.
Landlord wants to end tenancy
Lye responded to the letter by calling the SLA officer and providing her with Lim's contact details.He also promptly notified Lim of the letter. Lim then asked Amirul Akbar about it, who claimed he "had no idea".
Lim replied to Lye a few days later, stating they could not extend the tenancy.
He asked Lye how long he needed to find a new place to stay.
Lye replied that his tenancy would end on Oct. 7, 2020, and if he decided to exercise his "guaranteed option to renew", it would end a year later instead, and he will get a replacement property by those dates.
He told Lim, "Please do not worry about it."
First tenancy agreement not stamped
A few months later, on Jan. 9, 2019, Lye received a notice from the Commissioner of Stamp Duties informing him that he had not stamped the tenancy agreement and asked him to pay the S$326 stamp duty another S$326 in penalties.Lye objected to the penalty, but the commissioner dismissed his objections.
On Apr. 4 2019, SLA made Amirul Akbar pay a S$67,900 penalty for unapproved rentals between August 2011 and October 2018.
When they found out Lye was still renting the property from October 2018 to October 2019, they handed Amirul Akbar another S$5,362 fine.
Lawyers get involved
Amirul Akbar demanded Lye leave the house on May 2019 and hired another property agent to handle the house sale.However, Lye refused to move out, and Amirul Akbar hired lawyers in June 2019. He filed a suit against Lye in September 2019.
Despite receiving three lawyer's letters and being sued in court, Lye demanded on August 2020 to exercise his "guaranteed option to renew" the lease till October 2021 and asked in August 2021 for the further option to renew his lease till October 2022.
Landlord say teacher was "tenant at will"
During the trial, Amirul Akbar's lawyers argued that Lye was a "tenant at will" after October 2018, as the second tenancy agreement was never affirmed nor acknowledged.Lye refuted the allegation and argued that he had reached an agreement with Lim, who was acting for Amirul Akbar, and pointed out he paid the new rent for months without complaint from Amirul Akbar.
Lye alleged that Amirul Akbar had purposely not signed the tenancy agreement as he knew the rental was unauthorised and "simply wanted an excuse to disavow the tenancy when SLA discovered him".
Judge ruled second tenancy agreement in force even though unsigned
The district judge agreed with Lye that the tenancy agreement that commenced between October 2018 to October 2020 was in force.The judge pointed out that Amirul Akbar had partaken in negotiations with Lye, which concluded with a counterproposal of rent from him that Lye had accepted.
He added that Amirul Akbar accepted rent and told SLA officers that the property was being rented at the new rent amount, showing he viewed that the new agreement was in place.
Teacher to pay double rent after lease expiry as per agreement
However, the judge said that even though the second tenancy agreement was in force, it expired on Oct. 7 2021, after Lye exercised his" guaranteed option to renew" for a year.Hence, Lye is liable to cough up the rental payments he owed for the tenancy agreement period and have to pay double the rent for his stay after Oct. 7, 2021, up until he vacates the house, per the terms of the agreement.
He will also have to pay interest at 1.5 per cent per annum.
Judge found no "fraudulent misrepresentation"
On whether there was "fraudulent misrepresentation" by Amirul Akbar, the judge ruled that the claim was of no merit and explained that Lye had to prove that he was induced into renting the house by "false statements".Lye claimed that Amirul Akbar, through Lim, had hidden the fact that he was not a Singaporean PR anymore and did not have permission to rent out the property.
The judge added that Lye is a "highly educated individual sufficiently well-versed with tenancy matters" and "clearly satisfied" with the rent he negotiated for himself.
He also said that Lye suffered no loss or damage yet made extravagant claims of at least S$161,126, which "speaks of an opportunistic streak".
Similarly, the judge dismissed Lye's allegations of a conspiracy between Amirul Akbar, Lim and Lim's agency and the claim of S$158,400 was "clearly misconceived".
Dismissed teacher's claims of "mental distress"
Lye also filed counterclaims for damages against Amirul Akbar for "mental distress" and various breaches of contract such as, amongst others, "failure to sign" agreements, "peaceful enjoyment" of the house, "wrongful threat to re-enter" the house and "wrongful termination" of the agreements.The judge dismissed the claims and pointed out that the "plethora" of claims had no legal basis and "in any event not proven".
The judge, however, allowed Lye to claim S$336, which was the late stamping fee penalty he incurred.
Top image via Google Maps
