For the most part, landlords have a strong advantage over tenants in Singapore.
We have no formal rent control measures (at least not since 2001*), there is no specific tenancy resolution body (everything goes to the Small Claims Tribunal or SCT), and nearly everything comes down to a private contract.
So I’m always surprised when I hear of tenants making a successful claim against a landlord, as it seems like a tough thing to do. But whenever I do hear of this, it usually involves the security deposit. You’ve probably heard the story before: at the end of the lease, the landlord deducts all sorts of questionable “damages” from the deposit—sometimes to the point of returning practically nothing (or literally nothing).
In cases where tenants have successfully claimed their deposit back through the SCT, I’ve noticed the following patterns:
- Their landlord attempted to make deductions for wear and tear. Tenants aren’t liable for this. Some things that landlords claim as “damages”—such as sliding doors that no longer close properly or peeling laminate on countertops—can often be argued to fall under fair wear and tear.
- If they planned to withhold the final month’s rent (suspecting the landlord was up to something unfair), they usually did so with legal advice first. Just so you know, the usual advice is not to do this, as it could allow the landlord to sue them for breach of contract. However, in some cases, the landlord may not find it worth the effort, depending on the amount involved.
- A lawyer’s letter was sent first, or very early in the process. I don’t know if there’s a direct correlation, but among the successful tenants I’ve encountered, many started by sending a legal letter. Sometimes it was their very first response. I suspect this signals to the landlord that they’re not ignorant of their rights or easily taken advantage of—though, of course, this does incur some cost.
- Photos, photos, photos. Inexperienced or first-time tenants often sleepwalk through the inventory checklist, and unless they have a good agent taking photos for them, they usually don’t document the condition of the property. I’ve seen cases where landlords have even tried to claim for items actually purchased by the tenant—such as saying they bought a replacement desk or mattress when, in fact, the tenant did.
I’d recommend emailing photos of pre-existing damages to the landlord, agent, or both. This makes them easy to retrieve later, with a timestamp as proof.
That said, landlords do have a strong advantage in Singapore, perhaps because of our high homeownership rate (around 90 per cent). In places where a larger proportion of the population rents—often for most or all of their lives—tenant protections tend to be stronger.
But as we’ve never been in that situation, the system in Singapore seems unlikely to change.
If I had to rent, though, I would lean towards unfurnished properties. They may be pricier, but at least everything in the house would be mine—and I wouldn’t have to waste weeks arguing with the landlord over whether a chipped side table is worth $1,000.
*Control of Rent (Abolition) Act 2001. So yes, Singapore did have rent control a long time ago.
Meanwhile in other property news…
- You may have heard a common bit of advice that, if you’re going to buy a one-bedder for investment, you should buy the smallest one. We tested out the theory, comparing standard one-bedders to 1+Study units. See if it checks out.
- 3-bedroom condo units above 1,100 sq. ft., but prices from just $1.08 million. Do they exist? The answer is yes, and here’s where you can find them.
- CPF is seeing some changes in 2025, and here’s how that might affect your home-buying decision.
- Is it really worth paying the ABSD, just so you can retain your old flat when you buy a condo? Here’s a look at some of the reasons.
Weekly Sales Roundup (27 January – 02 February)
Top 5 Most Expensive New Sales (By Project)
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| NAVA GROVE | $4,387,800 | 1722 | $2,548 | 99 yrs (2024) |
| THE ORIE | $4,005,000 | 1453 | $2,756 | 99 yrs (2024) |
| PINETREE HILL | $3,864,000 | 1464 | $2,640 | 99 yrs (2022) |
| BAGNALL HAUS | $3,688,000 | 1528 | $2,413 | FH |
| J’DEN | $3,626,000 | 1485 | $2,441 | 99 years |
Top 5 Cheapest New Sales (By Project)
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| GEMS VILLE | $1,198,000 | 517 | $2,319 | FH |
| BAGNALL HAUS | $1,304,000 | 495 | $2,634 | FH |
| SORA | $1,544,000 | 732 | $2,109 | 99 yrs (2023) |
| UNION SQUARE RESIDENCES | $1,631,000 | 506 | $3,224 | 99 yrs (2024) |
| ONE BERNAM | $1,765,000 | 700 | $2,523 | 99 yrs (2019) |
Top 5 Most Expensive Resale
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| ORCHARD VIEW | $7,000,000 | 2530 | $2,767 | FH |
| CAIRNHILL CREST | $4,120,000 | 1733 | $2,377 | FH |
| VIVA | $3,980,000 | 1518 | $2,622 | FH |
| 11 AMBER ROAD | $3,680,000 | 1507 | $2,442 | FH |
| DUCHESS CREST | $3,285,000 | 1711 | $1,919 | 99 yrs (1995) |
Top 5 Cheapest Resale
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE |
| RIVERSAILS | $722,000 | 506 | $1,427 | 99 yrs (2011) |
| RIVERFRONT RESIDENCES | $762,500 | 463 | $1,647 | 99 yrs (2018) |
| HILLSTA | $880,000 | 624 | $1,410 | 99 yrs (2011) |
| THE TRILINQ | $938,000 | 538 | $1,743 | 99 yrs (2012) |
| THE PARC CONDOMINIUM | $1,030,000 | 667 | $1,543 | FH |
Top 5 Biggest Winners
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD |
| RIVIERA RESIDENCES | $2,550,000 | 1216 | $2,096 | $1,711,000 | 20 Years |
| DUCHESS CREST | $3,285,000 | 1711 | $1,919 | $1,642,446 | 18 Years |
| MAPLE WOODS | $3,088,000 | 1464 | $2,109 | $1,588,000 | 14 Years |
| THE LINCOLN RESIDENCES | $3,275,000 | 1410 | $2,323 | $1,487,000 | 16 Years |
| TREVISTA | $3,068,000 | 1733 | $1,770 | $1,455,000 | 15 Years |
Top 5 Biggest Losers
| PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD |
| ORCHARD VIEW | $7,000,000 | 2530 | $2,767 | -$1,975,006 | 15 Years |
| ONE BERNAM | $1,983,000 | 829 | $2,393 | -$586,000 | 2 Years |
| THE TRILINQ | $938,000 | 538 | $1,743 | $109,000 | 8 Years |
| THE PARC CONDOMINIUM | $1,030,000 | 667 | $1,543 | $110,000 | 12 Years |
| PARC SOPHIA | $1,330,000 | 732 | $1,817 | $130,000 | 13 Years |
Transaction Breakdown
For more on the Singapore property market, follow us on Stacked!
At Stacked, we like to look beyond the headlines and surface-level numbers, and focus on how things play out in the real world.
If you’d like to discuss how this applies to your own circumstances, you can reach out for a one-to-one consultation here.
And if you simply have a question or want to share a thought, feel free to write to us at stories@stackedhomes.com — we read every message.
Frequently asked questions
Why do landlords hold most of the power in Singapore rental agreements?
What are common reasons tenants win claims against landlords in Singapore?
How can tenants protect themselves when renting in Singapore?
Are tenants in Singapore more protected if they rent furnished or unfurnished properties?
What is the impact of Singapore's high homeownership rate on tenant rights?
0 Comments