https://sg.news.yahoo.com/govt-improve-neighbour-disputes-handled-101500826.html
Tue, 14 October 2025 at 6:15 pm SGT
5 min read
Sixteen MPs had asked questions relating to neighbour disputes in Parliament on Oct 14.
SINGAPORE – Some Singaporeans are “understandably concerned” after a recent confrontation between neighbours in Yishun turned deadly, and the Government will continue its efforts to strengthen processes to manage neighbour disputes, said Senior Minister of State for Law Murali Pillai.
A woman died after a violent attack over a noise dispute between neighbours in Yishun Central on Sept 24.
“However, no framework will be able to address all manner of neighbour disputes or curb specific individual behaviour, especially violence. No one should resort to violence to deal with a neighbour dispute. That’s a personal responsibility,” Mr Murali added.
He was responding to questions in Parliament relating to neighbour disputes on Oct 14.
He said the top three types of disputes handled by the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRTs) over the past five years related to excessive noise, excessive vibration and littering.
CDRTs are specialised courts that handle persistent disputes between neighbours after other resolution attempts, such as mediation, fail.
A total of 1,031 CDRT claims were filed between 2020 and 2024, and about 65 per cent of these involved excessive noise.
The CDRTs issued 233 orders and dismissed 145 cases, while another 651 claims were withdrawn or discontinued, Mr Murali added, in response to Ms Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC).
The tribunal also made 26 enforcement orders, comprising 24 special directions – which are issued when the initial order was not complied with – and two exclusion orders to evict residents from their flat.
Mr Murali said government agencies will expand the application of the enhanced Community Disputes Management Framework “as soon as practicable”, so that more cases can benefit from mediation and direct intervention from the Community Relations Unit (CRU).
The enhancements to the framework, which came into effect after amendments to the Community Disputes Resolution Act were passed in November 2024, include granting the CDRTs enhanced powers to resolve cases brought before them more quickly and effectively.
Officers from the CRU, which began its one-year pilot with HDB estates in Tampines in April, were given a range of powers, including issuing directions to compel parties to go for mediation at the Community Mediation Centre (CMC).
Minister of State for National Development Alvin Tan said the CRU has taken on five cases that had been escalated by the Housing Board and the police.
Although the CRU can deploy sensors to determine the source of a noise nuisance, none have been used in its cases so far. This is because the noise-makers confirmed they were the source of noise, or the source was clear and unambiguous, Mr Tan added.
Of the five cases, three involved people with mental health issues, he said. The CRU facilitated inpatient admission and treatment in one case, and is following up with the residents in the other two.
Another case, which involved the deliberate use of noise to disturb neighbours, has abated after intervention by officers from different agencies.
The last case saw both neighbours directed to attend mediation.
As a last resort, the CRU can refer the most severe nuisance-makers to HDB to consider the compulsory acquisition of their flats, Mr Tan said.
Mr Murali added that the CRU has issued one mediation direction since the pilot started. HDB has not issued such directions, while the CMC has not issued any remediation directions for cases in which a dispute resurfaced after being resolved previously.
Mr Tan said other efforts by HDB include increasing the thickness of floor slabs to 200mm for new BTO projects from February 2023, which has reduced noise transmission between floors by up to five decibels.
The average monthly number of neighbour noise feedback in HDB estates over the past five years has held steady at about 2,500, he added. In Tampines, there have been 160 reports per month since April.
Mr Tan said it is neither desirable nor sustainable for Singapore’s community spirit for the authorities to step in as a first response for all neighbour disputes.
The CRU’s framework is not a substitute for a strong foundation of good neighbourly relations and community dispute resolution options, he added. Instead, it strikes a balance between intervention by the authorities and allowing neighbours to settle disputes themselves.
In response to a question by Dr Choo Pei Ling (Chua Chu Kang GRC) on whether the authorities could consider setting maximum permissible decibel levels, Mr Tan said the severity of noise disturbances can vary depending on ambient noise.
“Rather than just across-the-board decibel thresholds, CRU measures noise levels above the ambient,” he said.
Mr Gerald Giam (Aljunied GRC) asked about the rate of referrals to the CRU that can be expected when it is expanded to other towns, given that the unit took on “only five cases in the six months since it started”.
Mr Tan said: “I think the member would agree with me that we would ideally have fewer cases.”
He added that the cases were “very complicated”, and the CRU pilot has demonstrated how to handle severe cases with the enhanced framework.
Mr Kenneth Tiong (Aljunied GRC) asked about perceptions that the CDRTs are “quite toothless”, as some have faced difficulty in getting an enforcement order.
Responding, Mr Murali said that current legislation allows for a person who receives a special direction to be prosecuted and convicted, “and that must mean that there’s some tooth to the action”.
He noted that HDB has powers to evict a person from the flat, and there have been instances where home owners were ordered to leave their homes for between 10 and 14 days.
Govt to improve how neighbour disputes are handled, but no framework can address all cases: Murali
Isabelle LiewTue, 14 October 2025 at 6:15 pm SGT
5 min read
Sixteen MPs had asked questions relating to neighbour disputes in Parliament on Oct 14.
SINGAPORE – Some Singaporeans are “understandably concerned” after a recent confrontation between neighbours in Yishun turned deadly, and the Government will continue its efforts to strengthen processes to manage neighbour disputes, said Senior Minister of State for Law Murali Pillai.
A woman died after a violent attack over a noise dispute between neighbours in Yishun Central on Sept 24.
“However, no framework will be able to address all manner of neighbour disputes or curb specific individual behaviour, especially violence. No one should resort to violence to deal with a neighbour dispute. That’s a personal responsibility,” Mr Murali added.
He was responding to questions in Parliament relating to neighbour disputes on Oct 14.
He said the top three types of disputes handled by the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRTs) over the past five years related to excessive noise, excessive vibration and littering.
CDRTs are specialised courts that handle persistent disputes between neighbours after other resolution attempts, such as mediation, fail.
A total of 1,031 CDRT claims were filed between 2020 and 2024, and about 65 per cent of these involved excessive noise.
The CDRTs issued 233 orders and dismissed 145 cases, while another 651 claims were withdrawn or discontinued, Mr Murali added, in response to Ms Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh GRC).
The tribunal also made 26 enforcement orders, comprising 24 special directions – which are issued when the initial order was not complied with – and two exclusion orders to evict residents from their flat.
Mr Murali said government agencies will expand the application of the enhanced Community Disputes Management Framework “as soon as practicable”, so that more cases can benefit from mediation and direct intervention from the Community Relations Unit (CRU).
The enhancements to the framework, which came into effect after amendments to the Community Disputes Resolution Act were passed in November 2024, include granting the CDRTs enhanced powers to resolve cases brought before them more quickly and effectively.
Officers from the CRU, which began its one-year pilot with HDB estates in Tampines in April, were given a range of powers, including issuing directions to compel parties to go for mediation at the Community Mediation Centre (CMC).
Minister of State for National Development Alvin Tan said the CRU has taken on five cases that had been escalated by the Housing Board and the police.
Although the CRU can deploy sensors to determine the source of a noise nuisance, none have been used in its cases so far. This is because the noise-makers confirmed they were the source of noise, or the source was clear and unambiguous, Mr Tan added.
Of the five cases, three involved people with mental health issues, he said. The CRU facilitated inpatient admission and treatment in one case, and is following up with the residents in the other two.
Another case, which involved the deliberate use of noise to disturb neighbours, has abated after intervention by officers from different agencies.
The last case saw both neighbours directed to attend mediation.
As a last resort, the CRU can refer the most severe nuisance-makers to HDB to consider the compulsory acquisition of their flats, Mr Tan said.
Mr Murali added that the CRU has issued one mediation direction since the pilot started. HDB has not issued such directions, while the CMC has not issued any remediation directions for cases in which a dispute resurfaced after being resolved previously.
Mr Tan said other efforts by HDB include increasing the thickness of floor slabs to 200mm for new BTO projects from February 2023, which has reduced noise transmission between floors by up to five decibels.
The average monthly number of neighbour noise feedback in HDB estates over the past five years has held steady at about 2,500, he added. In Tampines, there have been 160 reports per month since April.
Mr Tan said it is neither desirable nor sustainable for Singapore’s community spirit for the authorities to step in as a first response for all neighbour disputes.
The CRU’s framework is not a substitute for a strong foundation of good neighbourly relations and community dispute resolution options, he added. Instead, it strikes a balance between intervention by the authorities and allowing neighbours to settle disputes themselves.
In response to a question by Dr Choo Pei Ling (Chua Chu Kang GRC) on whether the authorities could consider setting maximum permissible decibel levels, Mr Tan said the severity of noise disturbances can vary depending on ambient noise.
“Rather than just across-the-board decibel thresholds, CRU measures noise levels above the ambient,” he said.
Mr Gerald Giam (Aljunied GRC) asked about the rate of referrals to the CRU that can be expected when it is expanded to other towns, given that the unit took on “only five cases in the six months since it started”.
Mr Tan said: “I think the member would agree with me that we would ideally have fewer cases.”
He added that the cases were “very complicated”, and the CRU pilot has demonstrated how to handle severe cases with the enhanced framework.
Mr Kenneth Tiong (Aljunied GRC) asked about perceptions that the CDRTs are “quite toothless”, as some have faced difficulty in getting an enforcement order.
Responding, Mr Murali said that current legislation allows for a person who receives a special direction to be prosecuted and convicted, “and that must mean that there’s some tooth to the action”.
He noted that HDB has powers to evict a person from the flat, and there have been instances where home owners were ordered to leave their homes for between 10 and 14 days.
