# Could This Proposed Move Let Homeowners Sell Without Property Agents? It’s Not That Simple

- **Source:** Stacked Homes
- **Published:** 2026-08-02T12:53:06.000Z
- **Author:** Ryan J. Ong
- **Original:** https://stackedhomes.com/could-this-proposed-move-let-homeowners-sell-without-property-agents-its-not-that-simple/
- **Topics:** Government & Policy, Transactions & Deals

## Featured rationale

Direct listings could reduce reliance on agents, but verification, moderation, data-security and scam risks may raise portal costs and affect listing reliability for buyers.

## AI summary

Authorities are studying whether homeowners should be allowed to advertise properties directly on commercial portals, a privilege currently generally restricted to licensed property agents.

## Original article

Should individual homeowners be allowed to list their properties on online property portals, instead of it being exclusive to agents?

On July 28, after announcing major upcoming changes to the property agent industry, I heard Senior Minister of State for National Development, Sun Xueling, also share that this is something the authorities are currently studying.

On the surface, allowing homeowners to list their properties for sale on listing portals seems like a fair and straightforward issue, since it would save them some money by cutting out the middlemen (in this case licensed property agents).

But here’s something else that I think we all need to consider.

There’s a reason most property portals limited the ability to list properties for sale on their platforms to licensed property agents. Several major portals (and I’m not going to drop any names here) began by allowing individuals to list their properties for sale. This includes a certain property platform that I worked with over a decade ago.

But back in 2015, they changed their policy too. So before we reopen the doors to allow individual homeowners to post their own property listings, it’s worth remembering why most platforms ended up placing limits in the first place.

Everyone should gear up to become a detective agency again, if individual listings become permissible.

For smaller property portals, this may not be a monumental issue. But for the largest portals on the market – including the market leader we all know – I reckon that the resulting administrative chaos could be spectacular.

I was working for one of them when it happened, so I’m not throwing hypotheticals – I had a front row seat to the chaos back then.

The main issue with allowing individuals to list their properties is simple: they don’t have any accountability.

A property agent has their license on the line to lose if it is uncovered that they’ve posted misleading or fake listings. The vast majority don’t do this, and it is for the most part, not worth losing a career over.

But individual sellers and landlords are different. To be clear, I’m not saying that they’re somehow scammers or intentionally lying, and a majority are sincere. The problem is that most people put up their property for sale perhaps once every decade or so.

Being out of touch like that means that many don’t understand prevailing market terminology, and a good number don’t understand where enthusiasm ends and misrepresentation begins.

In the past, I’ve seen these types of homeowners list a two-bedroom unit as a three-bedder, arguing that because there’s a study nook and: “you can put a bed there, what.”

I’ve also seen descriptions of a seven-minute driving distance becoming: “just a short walk,” and a partial glimpse of water from the service yard becoming a “sea view unit.”

By and large, most of these owners didn’t have any malicious intent. It was simply how the owner saw their own home. But if you multiply this across several thousand listings, every portal suddenly needs a small department of detectives to verify everything.

The quality of listing descriptions also deteriorates unless the portal is willing to devote a lot of resources towards moderating it.

Some owners take the time to write a proper description, but others simply wrote: “CALL ME AT XXXXX” into every field.

Others upload blurry photographs or mixed genuine photographs of their own unit* with images from interior design firms or magazines. One owner appealed after his listing was removed for this reason. His defence was that the various images were from another unit in the same condo anyway, so it should be okay.

*Special thanks to the person who attached a picture of their unflushed toilet. I will remember it forever.

Don’t even get me started on the NSFW images that sometimes turn up. Some people leave questionable items on tables, shelves, etc. that they don’t bother clearing away first.

Actually, come to think of it, that might make property searches more interesting to some people out there. But it still results in a lot of unreliable or useless listing descriptions!

Then there’s the issue of pricing.

Professional agents generally have systems which help them generate a reasonable price for most listings. This varies between different teams and agencies, but they’re generally closer to the valuation compared to an industry outsider. Perhaps more importantly, they want the property sold. To an agent, an overpriced listing simply wastes everyone’s time.

But individual sellers and landlords are far less predictable. Some decide on a price because that’s what their neighbour claims to be getting, while a handful decide on an outrageously high price because: “I want to test the waters”. Others put in a misleading low price to attract enquiries, which is precisely the kind of misrepresentation we want to avoid.

This isn’t harmless to genuine homebuyers and the average consumer. You may spend hours arranging a viewing, only to find out the unit is nothing like what was advertised. Finally, there is the biggest issue of all: outright scams.

Unfortunately, property scams are one of the more lucrative forms of online fraud. The moment anyone can publish a listing with minimal barriers, scammers inevitably follow.

So, a portal that allows direct owner listings needs to verify the property, as well as the people behind it. This type of verification also raises an uncomfortable question:

How much personal information should a property portal be allowed to collect?

If an individual wants to list a property, should the portal ask for proof of ownership? What form does that come in? NRIC numbers? A recent property tax filing? A mortgage statement? Three months of utility bills? Even if all this is submitted, how should all of that sensitive information be stored and who should have access to it?

Modern property portals are inherently technology companies, not law enforcement agencies. Their job is to connect buyers and sellers, and there’s a good argument to be made that they shouldn’t be handling this sort of data.

That said, the advent of AI-powered systems may offer some help

Today artificial intelligence (AI) is much better at detecting duplicate photographs, identifying copied listing descriptions, flagging suspicious pricing patterns, etc. At the very least, AI systems can flag questionable listings for human review, and dramatically reduce the manpower needed to moderate a large portal.

It’s still not a magic bullet. For now, the AI probably still can’t determine whether a photo is genuinely from the unit being sold, or whether a three-bedder is just a two-bedder with a study and a vivid imagination.

But AI will almost certainly make direct owner listings easier, compared to a decade ago. And I do think with time – and perhaps even soon – it will make individual listings more commercially viable in ways that weren’t possible a decade ago.

And when that time comes, and most homeowners are free to list their properties for sale on rent on whichever property platform they choose, we too can join the agents’ outrage at the cost to refresh a listing.

What, you didn’t think you could just list for free and not watch paid listings climb all over yours did you? 🙂

Meanwhile in other property news…

The 15-month waiting period for buying a resale flat, after you sell your private property, is finally lifted. This topic is a must-know for buyers and sellers in the market today.

The property agent’s license has been extended to three-years rather than a one-year validity; but that doesn’t mean it’s easier to be your agent. In fact, the overall change has raised demands on agents’ market expertise.

Who are the buyers of million-dollar flats, and what does that say about our property market? Check out the insights here.

Signature Park is a well-regarded name in the Bukit Timah area; but did you know it has the best performing two-bedders in Bukit Timah and Newton? Check out the reasons with Stacked Pro.

Weekly Sales Roundup (13 – 19 July)

Top 5 Most Expensive New Sales (By Project)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

UPPERHOUSE AT ORCHARD BOULEVARD | $7,970,000 | 2056 | $3,877 | 99 yrs (2024)

GRAND DUNMAN | $7,800,000 | 3057 | $2,552 | 99 yrs (2022)

THE CONTINUUM | $5,463,000 | 1905 | $2,867 | FH

DUNEARN HOUSE | $4,603,000 | 1378 | $3,341 | 99 yrs

ZYON GRAND | $4,388,000 | 1421 | $3,088 | 99 yrs (2024)

Top 5 Cheapest New Sales (By Project)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

GRAND DUNMAN | $1,386,000 | 549 | $2,525 | 99 yrs (2022)

TEMBUSU GRAND | $1,426,000 | 527 | $2,704 | 99 yrs (2022)

NEWPORT RESIDENCES | $1,431,000 | 452 | $3,165 | FH

THE CONTINUUM | $1,480,000 | 560 | $2,644 | FH

DUNEARN HOUSE | $1,484,000 | 527 | $2,814 | 99 yrs

Top 5 Most Expensive Resale

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

KLIMT CAIRNHILL | $7,675,000 | 2056 | $3,733 | FH

BEAVERTON COURT | $6,300,000 | 3229 | $1,951 | FH

THE MORNINGSIDE | $5,288,000 | 2411 | $2,193 | FH

THE WATERSIDE | $4,700,000 | 2142 | $2,194 | FH

D’GROVE VILLAS | $4,200,000 | 1690 | $2,485 | FH

Top 5 Cheapest Resale

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | TENURE

SUITES @ PAYA LEBAR | $660,000 | 377 | $1,752 | FH

HERITAGE EAST | $700,000 | 355 | $1,971 | FH

LAVERNE’S LOFT | $748,000 | 398 | $1,878 | FH

CANBERRA RESIDENCES | $805,000 | 614 | $1,312 | 99 yrs (2010)

THE POIZ RESIDENCES | $810,000 | 420 | $1,930 | 99 yrs (2014)

Top 5 Biggest Winners

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD

THE MORNINGSIDE | $5,288,000 | 2411 | $2,193 | $3,538,000 | 27 Years

GOLDHILL TOWERS | $3,668,000 | 1550 | $2,366 | $2,118,000 | 17 Years

HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM | $2,660,000 | 1518 | $1,753 | $1,804,308 | 27 Years

GALLOP GABLES | $2,535,000 | 1130 | $2,243 | $1,523,650 | 20 Years

THE GARDENS AT BISHAN | $2,100,000 | 1152 | $1,823 | $1,518,000 | 23 Years

Top 5 Biggest Losers

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | RETURNS | HOLDING PERIOD

THE SAIL @ MARINA BAY | $1,608,000 | 883 | $1,822 | -$467,050 | 16 Years

CITY SUITES | $825,700 | 527 | $1,565 | -$107,870 | 8 Years

ESPADA | $1,660,000 | 689 | $2,410 | -$46,402 | 16 Years

FLORAVIEW | $1,070,000 | 1055 | $1,014 | -$21,600 | 10 Years

HYLL ON HOLLAND | $3,050,000 | 1055 | $2,891 | -$15,931 | 4 Years

Top 5 Biggest Winners (ROI%)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | ROI (%) | HOLDING PERIOD

THE GARDENS AT BISHAN | $2,100,000 | 1152 | $1,823 | 261% | 23 Years

GRANDEUR 8 | $1,950,000 | 1259 | $1,548 | 215% | 23 Years

HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM | $2,660,000 | 1518 | $1,753 | 211% | 27 Years

THE MORNINGSIDE | $5,288,000 | 2411 | $2,193 | 202% | 27 Years

JC COURT | $1,400,000 | 980 | $1,429 | 192% | 21 Years

Top 5 Biggest Losers (ROI%)

PROJECT NAME | PRICE S$ | AREA (SQFT) | $PSF | ROI (%) | HOLDING PERIOD

THE SAIL @ MARINA BAY | $1,608,000 | 883 | $1,822 | -23% | 16 Years

CITY SUITES | $825,700 | 527 | $1,565 | -12% | 8 Years

ESPADA | $1,660,000 | 689 | $2,410 | -3% | 16 Years

FLORAVIEW | $1,070,000 | 1055 | $1,014 | -2% | 10 Years

COMMONWEALTH TOWERS | $945,000 | 441 | $2,141 | -1% | 3 Years

Transaction Breakdown

Follow us on Stacked for news and updates on the property market.

## Chinese translation

> Translation model: grok_cli

### 这项拟议举措能否让业主不经房产经纪直接卖房？事情没那么简单

是否应允许个别业主在网上房产门户自行挂牌出售物业，而非仅限经纪专属？7月28日，在公布房产经纪业多项重大即将实施的改革之后，我听到国家发展部高级政务部长孙雪玲还提到，有关方面目前正在研究此事……

是否应允许个别业主在网上房产门户自行挂牌出售物业，而非仅限经纪专属？

7月28日，在公布房产经纪业多项重大即将实施的改革之后，我听到国家发展部高级政务部长孙雪玲还提到，有关方面目前正在研究此事。

表面上看，允许业主在挂牌门户上自行刊登售房信息，似乎公平且简单直接，因为这能省去中介（在此即持牌房产经纪）费用，从而省下一些钱。

但还有一点，我认为我们都需要认真考虑。

多数房产门户之所以把挂牌出售权限限制给持牌房产经纪，是有原因的。几家主要门户（我在此不点名）起初都允许个人挂牌出售物业。其中包括我十多年前曾合作过的某个房产平台。

但到了2015年，它们也改了政策。因此，在我们重新打开大门、允许个别业主自行发布房源之前，有必要先回顾一下，多数平台最终设限的原因。

如果个人挂牌获准，所有人都得再次做好准备，化身侦探社。

对较小的房产门户而言，这或许不是天大的问题。但对市场上最大的门户——包括大家都知道的那家市场领导者——我认为随之而来的行政混乱会相当壮观。

当时我正在其中一家工作，所以我说的不是假设——我当时就坐在前排，亲眼目睹了那场混乱。

允许个人挂牌的核心问题很简单：他们没有问责机制。

房产经纪若被发现发布误导性或虚假房源，其执照会面临吊销风险。绝大多数经纪不会这么做，而且总体而言，为这种事葬送职业生涯也不值得。

但个别卖家和房东则不同。要说清楚，我并不是说他们都是骗子或故意撒谎，多数人是真心的。问题在于，多数人大约十年左右才挂一次牌卖房。

如此脱节，意味着许多人并不了解当前市场术语，也有不少人不清楚热情与虚假陈述之间的界限在哪里。

过去我见过这类业主把两房单位挂成三房，理由是有个书房角，而且：“你可以放张床啊，怎么了。”

我也见过把七分钟车程写成：“步行很近”，把从杂物阳台隐约可见的一点水景写成“海景单位”。

总体而言，多数业主并没有恶意。那只是业主看待自己房子的方式。但若把这种情况放大到数千条房源，每个门户突然都需要一个小型侦探部门来逐一核实。

除非门户愿意投入大量资源进行审核，否则房源描述的质量也会下降。

有些业主会花时间写好描述，但另一些人只是在每个栏位里写：“打我电话 XXXXX”。

还有人上传模糊照片，或把自家单位*的真实照片与室内设计公司或杂志图片混在一起。有一位业主因这个原因房源被下架后提出申诉。他的辩解是，那些图反正来自同一共管公寓的其他单位，所以应该没问题。

*特别感谢那位附上未冲马桶照片的人。我永生难忘。

更别提有时会出现的不雅（NSFW）图片了。有些人把可疑物品留在桌上、架子上等，懒得先收拾干净。

说起来，这或许会让某些人的找房过程更“有趣”。但结果仍是大量不可靠或毫无用处的房源描述！

然后是定价问题。

专业经纪通常有系统帮助他们为多数房源给出合理价格。不同团队和中介机构做法不一，但总体比业外人士更接近估价。或许更重要的是，他们希望把房子卖掉。对经纪来说，定价过高的房源只会浪费所有人的时间。

但个别卖家和房东则远不可预测。有人因为邻居号称能卖到那个价就定了价，也有少数因为“我想试水”而定出离谱高价。还有人故意挂出误导性低价以吸引询盘，而这恰恰是我们希望避免的虚假陈述。

这对真正的购房者和普通消费者并非无害。你可能花数小时安排看房，结果发现单位与广告完全不符。最后，还有最大的问题：彻头彻尾的骗局。

不幸的是，房产骗局是网上欺诈中较有利可图的形式之一。一旦任何人都能以极低门槛发布房源，骗子必然尾随而至。

因此，允许业主直接挂牌的门户需要核实物业，以及背后的人。这类核实也引出一个令人不安的问题：

房产门户应被允许收集多少个人信息？

若个人想挂牌，门户是否应要求所有权证明？证明是什么形式？身份证（NRIC）号码？近期产业税文件？按揭结单？三个月水电煤账单？即便全部提交，这些敏感信息应如何储存、谁应有权访问？

现代房产门户本质上是科技公司，而非执法机构。它们的职责是连接买卖双方，有充分理由认为它们不应处理这类数据。

话虽如此，人工智能系统的出现或许能提供一些帮助

如今，人工智能（AI）在检测重复照片、识别抄袭的房源描述、标记可疑定价模式等方面已经好得多。至少，AI系统可以把可疑房源标给人工复核，并大幅减少大型门户审核所需的人力。

它仍不是灵丹妙药。就目前而言，AI大概仍无法判断照片是否真来自待售单位，也无法判断所谓三房是否只是带书房、外加丰富想象力的两房。

但与十年前相比，AI几乎肯定会让业主直接挂牌更容易。我也认为，随着时间推移——或许甚至很快——它会让个人挂牌在商业上更可行，这在十年前是做不到的。

而到了那个时候，当多数业主可以在任意房产平台自由挂牌出售或出租时，我们也能和经纪们一起，对刷新房源的费用表示愤怒。

怎么，你以为可以免费挂牌，然后眼睁睁看着付费房源爬到你上面去吗？🙂

与此同时，其他房产新闻……

出售私人住宅后须等待15个月才能购买转售组屋的规定终于取消。对当今市场的买卖双方而言，这是必知话题。

房产经纪执照有效期已从一年延长至三年；但这并不意味着当经纪更容易了。事实上，整体改革提高了对经纪市场专业能力的要求。

谁在买百万组屋，这又说明我们的房地产市场怎样？在此查看分析见解。

Signature Park在武吉知马（Bukit Timah）一带颇有口碑；但你知道它拥有武吉知马与纽顿（Newton）表现最佳的两房单位吗？用Stacked Pro查看原因。

每周成交综述（7月13日–19日）

五大最贵新盘成交（按项目）

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 地契

UPPERHOUSE AT ORCHARD BOULEVARD | $7,970,000 | 2056 | $3,877 | 99年（2024）

GRAND DUNMAN | $7,800,000 | 3057 | $2,552 | 99年（2022）

THE CONTINUUM | $5,463,000 | 1905 | $2,867 | 永久地契

DUNEARN HOUSE | $4,603,000 | 1378 | $3,341 | 99年

ZYON GRAND | $4,388,000 | 1421 | $3,088 | 99年（2024）

五大最便宜新盘成交（按项目）

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 地契

GRAND DUNMAN | $1,386,000 | 549 | $2,525 | 99年（2022）

TEMBUSU GRAND | $1,426,000 | 527 | $2,704 | 99年（2022）

NEWPORT RESIDENCES | $1,431,000 | 452 | $3,165 | 永久地契

THE CONTINUUM | $1,480,000 | 560 | $2,644 | 永久地契

DUNEARN HOUSE | $1,484,000 | 527 | $2,814 | 99年

五大最贵转售成交

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 地契

KLIMT CAIRNHILL | $7,675,000 | 2056 | $3,733 | 永久地契

BEAVERTON COURT | $6,300,000 | 3229 | $1,951 | 永久地契

THE MORNINGSIDE | $5,288,000 | 2411 | $2,193 | 永久地契

THE WATERSIDE | $4,700,000 | 2142 | $2,194 | 永久地契

D’GROVE VILLAS | $4,200,000 | 1690 | $2,485 | 永久地契

五大最便宜转售成交

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 地契

SUITES @ PAYA LEBAR | $660,000 | 377 | $1,752 | 永久地契

HERITAGE EAST | $700,000 | 355 | $1,971 | 永久地契

LAVERNE’S LOFT | $748,000 | 398 | $1,878 | 永久地契

CANBERRA RESIDENCES | $805,000 | 614 | $1,312 | 99年（2010）

THE POIZ RESIDENCES | $810,000 | 420 | $1,930 | 99年（2014）

五大赚最多

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 回报 | 持有期

THE MORNINGSIDE | $5,288,000 | 2411 | $2,193 | $3,538,000 | 27年

GOLDHILL TOWERS | $3,668,000 | 1550 | $2,366 | $2,118,000 | 17年

HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM | $2,660,000 | 1518 | $1,753 | $1,804,308 | 27年

GALLOP GABLES | $2,535,000 | 1130 | $2,243 | $1,523,650 | 20年

THE GARDENS AT BISHAN | $2,100,000 | 1152 | $1,823 | $1,518,000 | 23年

五大亏最多

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 回报 | 持有期

THE SAIL @ MARINA BAY | $1,608,000 | 883 | $1,822 | -$467,050 | 16年

CITY SUITES | $825,700 | 527 | $1,565 | -$107,870 | 8年

ESPADA | $1,660,000 | 689 | $2,410 | -$46,402 | 16年

FLORAVIEW | $1,070,000 | 1055 | $1,014 | -$21,600 | 10年

HYLL ON HOLLAND | $3,050,000 | 1055 | $2,891 | -$15,931 | 4年

五大最高回报率（ROI%）

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 回报率（%） | 持有期

THE GARDENS AT BISHAN | $2,100,000 | 1152 | $1,823 | 261% | 23年

GRANDEUR 8 | $1,950,000 | 1259 | $1,548 | 215% | 23年

HAZEL PARK CONDOMINIUM | $2,660,000 | 1518 | $1,753 | 211% | 27年

THE MORNINGSIDE | $5,288,000 | 2411 | $2,193 | 202% | 27年

JC COURT | $1,400,000 | 980 | $1,429 | 192% | 21年

五大最低回报率（ROI%）

项目名称 | 价格 S$ | 面积（平方英尺） | 每平方英尺价格 | 回报率（%） | 持有期

THE SAIL @ MARINA BAY | $1,608,000 | 883 | $1,822 | -23% | 16年

CITY SUITES | $825,700 | 527 | $1,565 | -12% | 8年

ESPADA | $1,660,000 | 689 | $2,410 | -3% | 16年

FLORAVIEW | $1,070,000 | 1055 | $1,014 | -2% | 10年

COMMONWEALTH TOWERS | $945,000 | 441 | $2,141 | -1% | 3年

成交明细

关注Stacked，获取房地产市场新闻与动态。