Follow us on Telegram for the latest updates: https://t.me/mothershipsg

With the housing market heated and rent for residences having risen 15 to 20 per cent, and even 50 per cent, it is now officially a landlord's market.

And if demand for rentals is going up, it appears there could be a rise in new scams or questionable practices in town.

Shin Min Daily News has since reported on one such incident.

What was supposed to be a straightforward room rental transaction between landlord and tenants soon became a convoluted sequence of events that has resulted in thousands of dollars being transferred and not returned.

This is the case of the "rentception".

Tenants lose money after handing over deposits

According to Shin Min, three couples who wanted to rent a room each in a residential unit in Serangoon Avenue 1 paid some S$4,000 in total as downpayment, but did not even get to finalise their tenancy agreement contract and have since been left high and dry.

One of the victim's account

One potential tenant, 27, told the Chinese media that she browsed rental listings online and found the vacant room on offer.

After contacting the person who put up the listing, known as Man A, she proceeded to view the unit with her boyfriend on Nov. 11.

When she arrived at the house, there were three other people there, as well as a housing agent.

Man A was apparently not present, based on what the article in Chinese mentioned.

However, Man A apparently told the potential tenant that the other people there were relatives and friends, who have decided to put down a deposit.

When the potential tenant got home, she transferred S$1,300 to Man A on impulse to secure the rental as quickly as possible, and without thinking it through clearly.

She said: "He said he was in charge of collecting the deposit and would contact the housing agent and we'll sign the contract. We'll just have to wait to get the keys."

Another victim's account

Another victim, a 45-year-old woman, said the same thing happened to her.

She contacted Man A who put up the listing, who then told her that the other people present at the house were all friends.

Man A then asked her to pay the deposit.

In total, there were three couples who paid the rental deposits, and all of them gave Man A a deposit each, which came up to close to S$4,000 altogether.

But the keys to the unit and rooms never arrived.

Grew suspicious

The tenants grew suspicious after a while, contacted one another, and found the housing agent who was present that day.

The 44-year-old housing agent claimed that he knew nothing about what happened with the money transferred to Man A, and said he had not received any deposits from him.

In fact, he claimed that the house had already been rented out to others.

Police informed

Given this sudden turn of events, the six tenants called the police on Nov. 25, in the hopes of recovering their money as soon as possible.

"The plan was to move in at the end of November. Now I am homeless and can't find a place to stay in," said the 27-year-old victim.

The agent involved in the incident told Shin Min that Man A only told him that the people at the unit viewing were relatives and friends, and the deposit could be paid on the same day.

The agent said: "He kept putting pressure on me, wanting me to issue the contracts first, but fortunately, I was more cautious."

As the housing agent did not do up any contracts, there were none to sign off or even pass around.

But the 27-year-old victim pointed out that Man A had sent her several screenshots of transfers and contracts, but none of them were originals

She added: "Afterwards, we zoomed in on the screenshots and found that the two pictures were fake, and the address and amount in the contract appeared to have been doctored."

In the picture showing the deposit transfer, the date was wrong, and "SGD" was changed to "SGB".

Man A questioned

One victim then called Man A to question him, but he claimed to be innocent and burst into tears.

The victim said: "He cried and said that he had encountered a liar, and he was also miserable. He cried while talking, and wanted us to sympathise with him."

The tenants banded together and took Man A to the police station, but he claimed to be a victim as well.

One of the would-be tenants who transferred the money said Man A claimed he would pay back the money at night after he came out of the police station, as he said he wanted to close the case.

"But he didn't pay back the money in the end," the victim claimed.

Man A's side of story

When reached for comment, Man A told Shin Min he had contacted another housing agent online.

After the three couples sent Man A the money, he sent S$8,000, which was two months' worth of rent, to the online housing agent.

Afterwards, he revealed that he was unable to reach the housing agent, and reported the incident to the police.

He claimed he has become the victim of a scam run by another housing agent.

Which explains the term, "rentception".

As to why Man A did not transfer the money to the agent present at the house when the other would-be tenants showed up, Man A explained that he thought the online agent he was in contact with would be handling things moving forward.

So, he did not transfer the money to agent present.

Is it subletting gone wrong?

Based on the details revealed in the Shin Min report, even though it was not mentioned outright, there are hints that this could be a case of subletting gone awry.

In cases of subletting, a landlord can rent out an entire apartment to one tenant for a lower rent over a fixed tenure, of say, up to two years, only for the sole tenant to sublet the individual rooms to multiple tenants to cover the costs, plus earn a monthly profit, especially if the lease tenure is short.

This practice is questionable and likely illegal when applied to public housing units in Singapore.

Many questions remain as to how this situation even came to be, as it was not clear from the report how Man A listed the rooms of the unit for rental when he might not have been renting or owning it in the first place.

Moreover, if Man A is the owner of the apartment, his claim that he handed over two months' worth of rent to another agent would not make sense.

All photos via Shin Min Daily News