By Leong Sze Hian

I refer to the article “Slower take-up for build-to-order flats in Yishun” (ST, Feb 8).

Source: ST

The article states that “the two projects at Yishun, featuring 1,548 flats ranging from two-room to five room units, got 1.8 times as many applicants as there were flats on offer…this showing pales in comparison to a December BTO launch for Punggol Topaz that received six times more applicants than there were flats on offer”.

Well, does that mean that the flats’ take-up rate has dropped by 70 per cent?

One reason to explain why the take-up rate has slowed may be that Singaporeans are realizing that the ever increasing BTO flat prices may not be affordable.

In the last three years, whilst HDB prices sky-rocketed, the real median wage growth registered in 2008 and 2009 was negative and clocked only 0.5 per cent last year.

Rising cost of living

So, your income is not going up, and yet the cost of living continues to accelerate. For example, the average surgery bill in six of the seven public hospitals increased by at least 50 per cent to as much as double over the last four years. In addition, you also have to take into account the rising electricity tariffs, increase in public transport fares, child-care fees, university fees, etc.

In such an environment, wouldn’t you think twice before committing to a flat purchase?

The uncertain future

When your flat comes in about five years time, wouldn’t you be afraid that your circumstances may change such that you may not be able to afford the flat, not to mention the risks and uncertainties of job losses, pay cuts, illness, etc, over a 30-year mortgage loan?

Experiencing a problem getting a loan?

Another reason why less people may be applying for the flats may be also tied with the new rule on a second HDB concessionary loan.

How many people can cough up 50 per cent of the cash profits from their last HDB flat sold, regardless of how long ago, and also have their entire CPF utilized plus accrued interest from the previous flat to pay for the new flat?

No demand for two-room flats?

With reference to the statement “The two-room units were the only ones that were under subscribed, with just 138 applicants for the 192 units available,” one of the primary reasons may be the $2,000 household income ceiling eligibility which has not changed for many years, whilst the two-room price has escalated to the typical selling price of $105,000 as of date.

After the HDB announced on 3 March 2006, after it had stopped building two-room flats in the early 1980s, that it would resume the building of the flats from June 2006, the average price of a two-room flat in November 2007 in Compassvale Beacon (Sengkang), was only $78,000 for example.

I estimate that the prices of two-room BTO flats may have increased by about over 30 per cent over the last four years or so. Since two-room flats are the cheapest option for lower-income Singaporeans, why have their prices been allowed to increase by so much?

If your household income is below $2,000, you may be finding it hard to make ends meet in the first place.

So, with the lower income group’s arguably greater incidence and fear of job security, declining wages (over the last decade, it is estimated that 30 per cent of workers have had negative real wage growth), rising cost of living, etc, would you commit to a flat purchase?

Cross referencing to the article “Most two-room BTO flats taken up eventually” (ST, Feb 8) which said that “The Housing Board explained that this happens as buyers who first pass up on these one-bedroom units for their lack of size eventually buy them when they realise these units can still meet their needs”, some of these eventual buyers may be those who were forced to vacate HDB rental flats because their incomes had gone up, or those who failed to get a bigger BTO flat after applying umpteen times etc, who did not even think about applying for a two-room in the first place.

Is it really affordable?

According to the HDB’s web site, “Affordability of a Typical Flat”, Applicants’ Median Household Income for two-room is $1,400.

If half of the two-room applicants’ household income was less than $1,400, how on earth can they afford to buy anything, including a flat?

Using $260 as the typical monthly installment for a 30-year loan, after the first-timers’ $40,000 eligible additional CPF housing grant (which is the highest possible grant for those with income of not more than $1,500; applicants must also have been in continuous employment over the last 24 months at the date of the flat application), at 19 per cent installment to income ratio which then seems to suggest that flats are affordable, how then is a family struggling with $1,400 a month can afford to squeeze $260 out from their already miserably low income to buy a flat?

Down-payment problems

Finally, many lower-income households may not even be able to come up with the initial 10 per cent down-payment for the flat.

Also, if you are not eligible for a HDB concessionary loan, your down-payment will be increased to 20 per cent from 20 February 2010 for HDB bank loans.

Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

一次脸部护理4445元? 家属恐祖父被骗上门理论

广告宣传单上写脸部护理一次收38元,岂知一年长者在美容院进行面部护理后,却被征收4千445元!事件还惊动警方到场调查。 网民Ho向新闻与媒体网站《Stomp》指出,他87岁的祖父于上周四(9月17日)早上,到淡滨尼巴士转换站的E.Zone美容院,进行脸部护理。“我的祖父看到广告牌上写着,脸部护理只要38元,因此就进入店内。” “一名美容院女职员在脸部护理中途,告诉他每除去一个油包就要花费20元。” “作为一名老人,我爷爷所理解的是花费总额不会超过100元。但是在护理后,他却被要求缴付4445元!……该女职员甚至没有给他任何发票或收据。” 美容院指出,老人家去除220个油包,总计4440元,加上158元的脸部护理,所以总账单才打到4558元。而且他们澄清并没有“拉客”,更指老人家没有一次性付费,所以没有收据。 消协指涉事美容院被投诉多达四次 不过,根据消费者协会表示,有关美容院及它的分行,今年已被投诉多达四次。诉内容大多涉及该美容院使用高压推销手法,诱导顾客购买额外的美发或美容配套。 网友指出,他的祖父不想引起麻烦,所以通过星网电子付款(NETS)缴付了2000元,这也是他电子付款的顶限,因此他必须到银行提款,缴交剩余2445元。“女职员跟祖父到银行,银行出纳员在发现祖父曾进行2000元的交易后再次提款,就好言提醒他小心堕入骗局。” 网友重申,这只是一次脸部护理的费用,不是一个配套,也因此才令他们感到难以接受。 家属找上门理论 据周日(9月20日)的《新民日报》报导指出,Ho曾多次到该美容院索取收据,却都无济于事,于是周日再到美容院要求,却引起争执。 女职员表示已经向老人家分析有关的收费,且还分析给网民听,更对网民找上门的行为表示不了解。…

SingPost’s loss-making Indian subsidiary placed under liquidation

In a press release today (1 Dec), Singapore Post announced that Quantium…

Rampant job ads looking for “skilled” foreign workers paying below minimum EP/SP salary

A TOC article (‘F&B group founded by award winning entrepreneur, caught for…

The ‘great’ MDA Parliamentary debate: So what?

By Leong Sze Hian Adjournment motion on MDA in Parliament – 8 July…