More owners renting out homes illegally

[princess_morbucks]

https://sg.news.yahoo.com/more-owners-renting-homes-illegally-024420905--sector.html?utm_content=buffer6db4c&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer


Despite being illegal, more people have opened their homes for short-term rentals, as HDB investigated 184 such cases last year, compared to 106 cases from 2012, media reports said.

Those who flout the rule may be fined or lose their flats if proven guilty of renting out their flats for less than six months.

The six-month rule also applies to private homeowners, who can be jailed up to 12 months and fined up to $200,000.

Last year, URA investigated around 2,100 unauthorised uses of private residences, an increase from 2011's 1,300 cases.

These cases include short-term leases, as well as those who illegally convert private homes into boarding houses or dormitories.

Authorities explained that short-term rentals are prohibited because most neighbours prefer not live among "transient strangers" and it may cause a disturbance.

However, this has not deterred others from advertising their homes for short-term rentals online.

Teo Jia En, co-founder of Roomorama, revealed that her home rental portal recorded over 500 listings for Singapore properties, up 30 percent from last year.

Other similar sites such as travelmob has more than 500 local listings, while Airbnb features more than 1,000 listings.

Most of the listings appear to be condo units and rooms for short-term rentals.

Since they are cheaper and come with access to additional amenities such as a kitchen, tourists and visitors opt to rent these spaces instead of staying at hotels.

Teo shared that the most popular rentals are in Bukit Timah and East Coast, while Turochas Fuad, travelmob's chief executive and co-founder noted that most of their guests like to stay in the central area.

"The onus is on the homeowners to make sure they are in compliance," Teo said when asked if Roomorama enforces the short-term rental policy.

Fuad added: "We do state in our terms and conditions for our hosts to understand their local laws before they list on our site."

[Arcachon]

"The onus is on the homeowners to make sure they are in compliance," Teo said when asked if Roomorama enforces the short-term rental policy.

Fuad added: "We do state in our terms and conditions for our hosts to understand their local laws before they list on our site."

I like this, maybe they can start selling drug and say take drug at your own risk.

Hello COW what are you going to do.

[Allthepies]

Mandatory jail sentence and seizure of property should work...

[teddybear]

Ha ha, you are so right!

Let their online advertising website sell drugs, but say "We do state in our terms and conditions for our hosts to understand their local laws before they list on our site."? Or say "The onus is on the sellers to make sure they are in compliance,"? Like that also can be legal to advertise? :tsk-tsk:

Given that the main source of facilitating the illegal trade is because online website is allowing these people to advertise illegal short-term rentals, URA/HDB should just clamp down on these websites from advertising such illegal short-term rentals! Let the onus be on the "illegal" facilitators as well so that they cannot twist and bend as though they have no liability! :rolleyes:


"The onus is on the homeowners to make sure they are in compliance," Teo said when asked if Roomorama enforces the short-term rental policy.

Fuad added: "We do state in our terms and conditions for our hosts to understand their local laws before they list on our site."

I like this, maybe they can start selling drug and say take drug at your own risk.

Hello COW what are you going to do.

[irisng]

Authorities explained that short-term rentals are prohibited because most neighbours prefer not live among "transient strangers" and it may cause a disturbance

So do they think that Geylang residents like to live among the vice meh, some more with different races of crowd everyday, is this not considered as disturbances meh?

Another thing is they encourage 2 old stranger people to stay under the same roof, isn't they not afraid they might cause nuisance also because old people tend to be fussy and naggy at times.

So if HDB flats are not supposed to have shorter lease, that maybe we can understand because HDB flats are under the control of Housing Board with subsidize rate but how about private, no subsidize rate, no HDB rebates, no conservancy subsidize, higher ppty tax also, so why pte ppty cannot have shorter lease to cover some of the expenses if the owner really cannot get a longer term lease?

[teddybear]

Geylang residents living there knowing the vices are already there anyway, they know what they are getting.
People buy residential houses for living, not to live next to tourists.
Investors who want to do short-term rents can buy hotel rooms and service apartments which are also readily available for them to buy. If they don't know where to buy, try Castlewood. :tsk-tsk:



So do they think that Geylang residents like to live among the vice meh, some more with different races of crowd everyday, is this not considered as disturbances meh?

Another thing is they encourage 2 old stranger people to stay under the same roof, isn't they not afraid they might cause nuisance also because old people tend to be fussy and naggy at times.

So if HDB flats are not supposed to have shorter lease, that maybe we can understand because HDB flats are under the control of Housing Board with subsidize rate but how about private, no subsidize rate, no HDB rebates, no conservancy subsidize, higher ppty tax also, so why pte ppty cannot have shorter lease to cover some of the expenses if the owner really cannot get a longer term lease?

[irisng]

Geylang residents living there knowing the vices are already there anyway, they know what they are getting.
People buy residential houses for living, not to live next to tourists.
Investors who want to do short-term rents can buy hotel rooms and service apartments which are also readily available for them to buy. If they don't know where to buy, try Castlewood. :tsk-tsk:

Is Geylang a red-light area from Day 1 the authority named the road or vice are being relocated from somewhere else to here? I'm not referring to the current investors, but referring to those who stay there during their earlier time where there are no or very little vice at all. They have no choice, one word from gahment only and everything is settled.

How about Little India, in the 1st place, those people who stay there will never know that it becomes so complicated with so many Indians, do they have the choice? It is due to the "accidents" that causes the crowd to "calm" down recently.

And then, now they start to worry about Geylang might be another 2nd Little India, in fact, they are right, precautions is better than cure. Solve it before things get out of control.

Maybe you are right, residential housing are for living and not for staying next to the tourists but as a landload ourselves, do we ever wonder actually some of our tenants are also "partial tourists", if not they would have bought their own houses, why need to rent?

Will you as a landlord think for your neighbors first before selecting your tenants? Get a good tenants to please your neighbors and not because you worry that they might damage your house?