Four flats repossessed by HDB

Source : AsiaOne – 28 Jul 2010

The Housing Board took compulsory acquisition (CA) action against four flat owners for unauthorised subletting in the first five months of this year.

It had stepped up efforts against unauthorized subletting, with a total of 2,600 checks conducted on HDB flats in that period.

Another six cases of unauthorized subletting were made to pay a penalty.

Click here to find out more!
In all four of the instances when the flats were compulsorily acquired, the flat owners did not occupy the flats they bought and sublet without HDB’s approval.

One flat owner, Mr G, was locked out of his own home when he allowed a moneylender to illegally sublet his flat and use the rent collected as repayment. He asked HDB for help in regaining entry to his flat, and later divulged that he had used his flat as collateral for his loan and needed to pay back the moneylender. He then allowed the moneylender to sublet his flat to pay for his loan.

The HDB, which helped him regain entry to his flat, took CA action against him as he did not occupy his flat and did not evict the subtenants desppite reminders from HDB.

In the second case, Miss R sublet the flat without HDB’s approval a year after she purchased the flat despite not meeting the minimum occupation period.

The Housing Board informed her that she had to evict her subtenants and occupy her flat. However, while she let the tenants go, she still did not stay at her flat, which prompted the CA action.

In the third instance, Madam P jointly purchased a flat with her husband but stayed overseas all this while. She illegally sublet the flat without meeting the minimum occupation period as well. Her subtenants confirmed that the utilities bills were paid by them, and when her marriage broke down, her foreigner ex-husband divulged that the flat was never intended as their matrimonial home.

When she returned to Singapore, she chose to stay with her family instead of her own flat. In light of the fact that her flat was illegally sublet and was never meant for her occupation, HDB repossessed her flat.

In the fourth case, Mdm C illegally sublet the flat to a religious group, also without meeting the minimum occupation period, leading to the CA action.

Of the 2,600 cases the HDB, investigation is still ongoing for around 300 cases, with 59 suspected to have infringed on subletting rules.