SGHOUSING.COM 新加坡房地产网

I REFER to the article, ‘Minimum professional competence and standards must be maintained in real-estate industry’ (ST, June 9).

The report highlights that due to the rapid rising property market, buyers and sellers are encouraged to engage the services of property agents from accredited agencies.

However, in a recent incident, I was looking around to lease a condo unit and happened to meet an agent from Knight Frank.

I was told that I could rent the unit for $2,800 and I was appalled when the agent wanted me to give her commission of one month for signing a two-year tenancy agreement.

I questioned her whether it is IEA’s standard guideline to do that as, from my understanding, for any rental above $2,500 a month, I as a tenant do not need to pay any commission to the agent.

I refused to rent the unit from the agent and went on to rent another house from another agent from ERA at $2,600 a month.

This agent told me that I do not need to pay commission as the rental is above $2,500 a month and the agent will just need to collect commission from the landlord.

Why is there a difference in commission standards?

I sent a letter to IEA, and I was told that the Professional Fee Standard Guideline is a ‘Recommended’ Guideline but not mandatory,

I called Knight Frank and was told that for rentals above $2,500 a month, I as a tenant do not need to pay commission. However, when I sent a letter to its manager, I was given the impression that it does not restrict its agents in negotiating commission with clients.

My burning question is this: Can agents opt not to follow IEA’s Standard Guideline?

What kind of protection is there in place for buyers, sellers, landlords and tenants if agents do not have to follow the guidelines?

Source : Straits Times - 14 Jun 2007