Property tips, observations, and actual experiences

[kdash]

agree on the human relationship part of the deal as rental is more long term than just a sale deal. my wife actually was asked to help with some freelance by one of her ex landlords due to the good relationship

[Showster]

Today I am going to share about Rentals. Over the years, I myself had went through many rental cases and learned that a good rental experience between tenant and landlord is not something that happen by chance. Almost everyday I would get questions from fellow agents on how to settle certain dispute or issues. Most, could actually be avoided. I know everyone has their story when comes to rentals, but consider the below as suggestions from a full time professional in achieving a good rental/lease experience.

 

* Note: In my post below, I will use the word "broker" to depict the person handling the deal. This can be landlord/tenant/agents depending who is the one facilitating the tenancy deal

 

How to ensure a great tenancy experience for both landlords and tenants

 

1) The biggest issue in doing a rental deal is that most brokers treat the deal like doing another resale transaction....for.eg, mostly getting the paperwork right or negotiate price. A rental case is unlike buying/selling another property and has to be handled with far more considerations towards human relationship between all parties.

 

2) As such, the broker working on the deal not only has to manage expectations and price negotiations, but also manage the impression that the landlord and tenant feel between each other. If both parties has the right impression of each other from the start, then that tenancy has a high chance of an amicable one down the road. Managing impression is the secret sauce to ensure the tenancy gets off a good start. Unfortunately, this is often lacking.

 

3) Right from the start, the broker has to find ways to create good impression for all parties. This is often easier said than done. Good impression of a tenant comes from a tenant who is complete in his initial paperwork , reasonable request, and prompt payment of his security & booking deposit. And finally prompt payment of his first rental AFTER moving in. Good impression of a landlord comes from a prompt delivery of the requirements in the LOI and most importantly able to address quickly any genuine issues found during first 30 days after moving in.

 

4) During the tenancy negotiation, the broker must strive for a win-win for all parties. The issue here sometimes is that some overzealous brokers tend to fight for own interest only and does not care about the constraints of the other party. That can create a sour feeling. Nobody likes to feel that they have been taken advantage going into a deal.

 

5) Becareful of red flags right at the beginning. If a tenant has some non-standard request such as paying his security deposit in installments, or that he has issue transferring funds from overseas and hence cannot pay his deposit on time, PLEASE DROP THAT TENANT regardless how good his profile is. Similarly, if a landlord (or his agent) is slow at responding to some simple LOI items, or the broker has a tendency to hide owner identities then please drop the deal regardless how attractive is the rent or the house. Trust me, all these are signs of problems down the road. I am always very careful about this to protect the interest of my client.

 

6) During the first 30 days after handover, the agent (or the landlord) must be quick in following up every issue that is brought up by the tenant regardless how trivial it may be. Adaptation to a new place need effort, and having a caring agent/landlord will give lot of assurance to the anxious new tenant. From my experience, in most cases, once the agent/landlord shows that they always there, the adaptation issues will just suddenly "dissapear". There was once a new tenant called me up at 10.30pm because the inlet hose to the washing machine was leaking. There is no hardware shop that opens at 10.30pm, so I took my own inlet hose from my washing machine and brought it down to the tenant at 11pm and fix it up for him. He was totally in awe of the response time and never had an issue ever since.

 

7) Always practice give and take. Always give notices in advance. Always consider the constraints of the other party and be reasonable about it. Treat the other party like how you want to be treated. These are basic human relationship goodwill practices.

 

8) If a tenant for some reasons, suddenly shows late payment (more than 2 weeks) start sending him polite formal notifications even if he does pay up after that 2 weeks. Keep these formal notifications on record. In the event that the late payments became habitual, and getting later and later where eviction becomes inevitable, then these notifications serve as an evidence to support that eviction notice. Manage these unfortunate events professionally so that eviction notice, if any, is just an outcome and not a surprise. Eviction is always tough, I have went through it before, but as long one manage it respectfully it can be done without too much anger by all parties.

 

Ok....there you have it. There are other details that I left out in order to keep the post short, but the above are the key points. Of course, there is no gurantee that even with the above steps, the tenancy will always turn out to be great. But what I do know is that if we do not keep to the above suggestions, there is a high chance that the tenancy turns into another nightmare. What I like to achieve for my client in a tenancy is not just a good leasing deal, but one that is filled with pleasant experience in terms of human relationship for all parties.

Great post!

 

Respect and humility will go a long way between tenants and landlords.

 

I suppose that because of the requirement for certain character attributes, being a landlord may not suit everyone.

[Icedbs]

Great post!

 

Respect and humility will go a long way between tenants and landlords.

 

I suppose that because of the requirement for certain character attributes, being a landlord may not suit everyone.

 

You are right. I have a lot of respect for landlords who could do tenancy for years and years. Most of them are wealthy, have quite a few  properties, but extremely humble in attitude. And their agents love working for them.

[Little_prince]

i just sold my place. should have looked for you.

 

met quite a few agents who are damm slimy.

 

a lot just want to close a quick deal without your interest at heart. e.g keep harassing me to accept the first offer that comes it. 

[Banz86]

When my family sold our maisonette many years back, we had an awesome agent that did a lot of what was written. We received many offers with in 1 month of posting and managed to sell it at a very good price.

 

The only issue was, we sold our place so fast, we had trouble looking for a new one. My mum walked into a house that is cluttered, walls were stained with incense but still decided to purchase the house as the location was good. Of cuz, she pushed the price down an secured the deal just after 30 mins of viewing.

[Icedbs]

i just sold my place. should have looked for you.

 

met quite a few agents who are damm slimy.

 

a lot just want to close a quick deal without your interest at heart. e.g keep harassing me to accept the first offer that comes it. 

 

Good to hear that you have eventually sold and hopefully at a price you like.

 

If you have a few agents, typically they will harass you to close asap because that's the nature of the model.  The buyer will just call each one of them and test to see who will bring you the low price. 

 

Anyway, if you need other advises, just PM me anytime. 

[Acemundo]

Allow me to address point #3 brought up by member TheoldJaffa in post #22

 

For most of the cases I had seen, selling is indeed mainly for upgrade. So using the "upgrade" reason is quite safe most of the time.

 

However, if the sale happens to be one of those bad reasons for e.g divorce, financial difficulties, death, etc. my suggestion is to be honest about it. Never, never lie to the buyer especially from an agent. 

 

But guess what....if a seller has prepare the house well, and able to drive the emotion of the buyer, then being honest about the bad reasons doesn't quite matter.  Remember that in a buyer psychology, emotions drive logic.  If his emotion is high, even a bad selling reason will not deter him from offering the seller a good price. Infact, he could possibly justify that it is ok to pay more knowing that he is dealing with honest people.

 

You may think it is hard to believe, but it is true. I give you guys an example.

 

Recently the "haunted" house at Jalan Batai was auctioned off at $2.23m when the auctioneer was only hoping $1.7m-1.9m. Why did the buyer pay almost 500k above valuation when the whole Singapore knows that house has an infamous reputation? It is again Emotion. Because of the history of that house, that auction attracted an overwhelming crowd so emotion, pride, ego all runs high during bidding.  Those emotions defies all logic despite the  reputation.  Adding the fact that 90% of auction property does not really sell during  an auction, this Jalan Batai sale is an amazing demonstration in the power of emotion.

 

So to cut the story short, prepare the house well first (using what I mention in post #1). Then get a trusted exclusive agent who will do every viewing for you. Drive the emotion of the buyer and if the selling reason is upgrade which is mostly the case, then great, if not, just be honest about it. 

 

i have encountered paranoid or spooked buyers before.  they mind if the flat has occupants that divorced before, died before, contracted major illnesses before.....besides spooked buyers, there are also bargain hunters or low ballers.  they look for such reasons to drive a hard bargain on the prices.  hence for me, i will never be completely upfront although i wont be dishonest.  what this means is that if i am selling because of a divorce case, i won't offer it as the first reason to put forward.  like another brother says, people sell houses for variety of reasons.  i have 3 reasons to sell, i just quote 1 it will suffice.  however, i won't be dishonest as it will come down to state of misrepresentation.  so if the buyer ask for delcaration that none of those bad incidents happened in the house during my ownership, i will truthfully declare it.

 

anyway the paranoid or spooked buyers are always those that believes in fengshui but understand very little about it and so they become paranoid.  for an unfortunate incident to take place in the houe, it entails the confluence of 天,地,人 factors.  a house by itself is seldom so bad and powerful as to drive an unfortunate outcome on its own.  so sometimes we are doing them a service by not being entirely upfront.

 

I want to highlight the above point that it is against CEA guideline if an agent refuse to co-broke. Because by refusing to co-broke, he/she is limiting the closing opportunity for his/her client. That is against client's interest.

 

So far, based on my experience, agents from larger agencies do not have an issue on co-broke whether with the same agency or not.

 

i have encountered agents who refused to co-broke.  and most times they are likely to be plying their trade in the ccr condos.

Edited April 17, 2018 by Acemundo

[Acemundo]

Good to hear that you have eventually sold and hopefully at a price you like.

 

If you have a few agents, typically they will harass you to close asap because that's the nature of the model.  The buyer will just call each one of them and test to see who will bring you the low price. 

 

Anyway, if you need other advises, just PM me anytime. 

 

bro, just checking on one practice.  

 

in the past, i always thought the caveats to property are lodged by the lending bank and buyer doesn't have a say as to whether the caveat can be lodged.  recently i came across a case, caveat not lodged and according to brother's friend who did it, he instructed the lawyer not to lodge a caveat.  don't the lending bank have to agree to this request?  why would any lender bank agree to such a request?  does the bank secure their collateral in the property using the caveat or otherwise?

[Mrmilktooth]

if i have the fortune of renting out or upgrading in future, will pm u @icedbs

 

thanks for sharing your knowledge..

[Icedbs]

bro, just checking on one practice.  

 

in the past, i always thought the caveats to property are lodged by the lending bank and buyer doesn't have a say as to whether the caveat can be lodged.  recently i came across a case, caveat not lodged and according to brother's friend who did it, he instructed the lawyer not to lodge a caveat.  don't the lending bank have to agree to this request?  why would any lender bank agree to such a request?  does the bank secure their collateral in the property using the caveat or otherwise?

 

Did that deal took a loan in the first place?  If a bank is involve, it is unlikely they will not lodge the caveat during the S&P period.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2018 by Icedbs

[Acemundo]

Did that deal took a loan in the first place?  If a bank is involve, it is unlikely they will not lodge the caveat during the S&P period.

 

yes, my brother insisted it did involved a loan.

[Icedbs]

if i have the fortune of renting out or upgrading in future, will pm u @icedbs

 

thanks for sharing your knowledge..

 

Thanks bro...even if there is no renting or upgrading,  feel free to PM me anytme if you have queries.

[Icedbs]

yes, my brother insisted it did involved a loan.

 

Then that's very strange. I suggest you find out the full details why the bank did not caveat the property.

 

Caveat has nothing to do about using the property as a collateral.  Caveating is a way for the bank to "chope" the property before completion just to prevent another buyer from having the right to buy the same property while the S&P and the loan disbursement is in process.

[Acemundo]

Then that's very strange. I suggest you find out the full details why the bank did not caveat the property.

 

Caveat has nothing to do about using the property as a collateral.  Caveating is a way for the bank to "chope" the property before completion just to prevent another buyer from having the right to buy the same property while the S&P and the loan disbursement is in process.

thanks for the clarificaiton.  if it s meant for choping property i would think the bank may relent on having to lodge a caveat.  afterall, the window of exposure is much shorter and they can hold the buyer with penalty clauses should the loan eventualy be not drawn down in the event it went to another buyer's bank, isn't it?

 

yes i am asking my brother to check with his friend.

[Icedbs]

thanks for the clarificaiton.  if it s meant for choping property i would think the bank may relent on having to lodge a caveat.  afterall, the window of exposure is much shorter and they can hold the buyer with penalty clauses should the loan eventualy be not drawn down in the event it went to another buyer's bank, isn't it?

 

yes i am asking my brother to check with his friend.

 

Preventing the buyer from going to another bank is one thing, but also to prevent another new buyer from claiming interest in that same property.

[Acemundo]

Preventing the buyer from going to another bank is one thing, but also to prevent another new buyer from claiming interest in that same property.

but practically, would it be possible this thing can happen?

 

i mean if the buyer submits all the valid and executed purchase documents, how can it possible for another buyer to claim interest in the same property?

[Icedbs]

but practically, would it be possible this thing can happen?

 

i mean if the buyer submits all the valid and executed purchase documents, how can it possible for another buyer to claim interest in the same property?

 

The chances of happening may be remote, but not impossible.

 

Real estate transaction remains complex and can be prone to error, oversight, mistakes, lack of understanding, miscommunication etc.  So the process of caveating may circumvent unwanted circumstances that may arise from these mistakes.

[Icedbs]

I got a question today from a buyer where he notice that a lot of new mass condo launches have about 50%-60% consist of 1 and 2 bedders. These units are mostly from 400-600++ sqft.

 

I think a lot of forumers here also complaining about units getting smaller.

 

But we know that developers build based on demand and not just about managing the quantum.  So I do a bit of research on households in Singapore, and I am not sure how many of you know about the chart below

 

Notice that only half of the resident  households are couple with children. The other half of all resident households are either alone, couple without kids or lone parent.

 

So if you are wondering why units are getting smaller, it is really because households with couple and children are shrinking. Even in 2016, about half of the existing households are very small household. And if the developer cater some small units for investment purposes, the unit mix of 50-60% for 1-2 bedders  (mass condo) seem to be right.