# Ineligible applicants allocated HDB flats, housing grants due to weaknesses in checks: AGO report

- **Source:** Channel NewsAsia
- **Published:** 2026-07-15T07:13:00.000Z
- **Author:** Not listed by source
- **Original:** https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapore/hdb-ago-lapses-season-parking-housing-grant-car-park-6255066
- **Topics:** HDB & Public Housing, Commercial & Industrial

## Featured rationale

Stronger verification and grant recovery could tighten access to housing subsidies, potentially changing applicant compliance obligations and improving allocation fairness.

## AI summary

AGO found address discrepancies affecting 1,619 HDB grant applications involving about S$92.9 million, alongside grants and flats allocated to ineligible applicants.

## Original article

SINGAPORE: Weaknesses in checks and oversight led to ineligible applicants being allocated Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats, receiving housing grants and gaining access to subsidised parking, the Auditor-General’s Office (AGO) said in a report released on Wednesday (Jul 15). HDB accounted for the highest number of lapses flagged in this year’s report, which also uncovered issues with contractor oversight that could have resulted in millions of dollars in overpayments. In a media statement, HDB said it takes the AGO's findings seriously and has taken steps to rectify the issues and strengthen controls. The audit covered the period Apr 1, 2022 to Mar 31, 2025. HOUSING PRIORITY, GRANT SCHEMES The audit uncovered weaknesses in eligibility checks across the Married Child Priority Scheme, the Proximity Housing Grant and the CPF Housing Grant. Data analysis and test checks of approved applications during the audit period identified cases where: Proximity criteria under the Married Child Priority Scheme and Proximity Housing Grant were not met at the point of application Proximity Housing Grant or CPF Housing Grant were given to applicants who received the same grant previously CPF Housing Grant was given to applicants who exceeded the income ceiling Conditions were not met during the minimum occupation period (MOP) for the Proximity Housing Grant and CPF Housing Grant “As a result, flats were allocated and grants disbursed to ineligible applicants. Grant conditions might also not have been complied with,” the AGO said in its report. “This increased the risk of not achieving the intended policy outcome of these schemes, such as for family members to live near one another for mutual support.” Under the proximity criteria for the Married Child Priority Scheme and Proximity Housing Grant, the flat intended for purchase must be within 4km of the property where the parent or child is living or will be living. AGO’s data analysis of more than 37,700 approved applications found that 37 applications for the Married Child Priority Scheme and 27 applications for the Proximity Housing Grant did not meet the criteria. The grants in question amounted to S$470,000. For nine of the Proximity Housing Grant applications, involving grants totalling S$170,000, HDB informed AGO that two were due to staff oversight and seven to inconsistencies in the calculation of distances by its internal systems. All nine affected applications have been rectified. AGO noted that HDB also relied on internal records and applicant declarations, which may not reflect actual residence if individuals had moved without updating their details. It said HDB should have verified such information against Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) records, which are considered authoritative as residents are required by law to update their addresses. HDB said in a separate statement that it acknowledges the importance of using accurate, up-to-date information on residential addresses to assess eligibility for proximity-based priority schemes and grants. It has since introduced additional checks against ICA’s records and taken steps to recover grants where necessary.

DUPLICATE GRANTS OR INCOME CEILING EXCEEDED The audit also uncovered six cases where applicants for the Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) and the CPF Housing Grant (CPFHG) received grants more than once due to system errors and staff oversight. HDB’s subsequent checks identified an additional four cases beyond the audit period. “HDB informed us that the programming error had since been rectified. It had issued verbal warnings to the officers involved and would conduct refresher training for staff. For the affected PHG and CPFHG applications, it had either recovered the grant or regularised the case,” said AGO. AGO also uncovered two instances where applicants exceeded income ceilings but were still granted the CPF Housing Grant. HDB identified three additional cases following the auditor's findings. HDB attributed these to system issues or oversight. "HDB informed us that it had previously detected the system issue and implemented a fix in November 2024, but these cases were not detected then," the AGO said in its report. "HDB would assess the cases to determine the appropriate follow-up actions. It would also implement measures to further strengthen detection and oversight, which included regular refresher training, system prompts and exception reports." WEAK MONITORING DURING MOP AGO also flagged gaps in HDB’s monitoring of compliance with grant conditions during the minimum occupation period, including the requirement for PHG recipients to live with or within 4km of their parent or married child throughout the MOP. For 1,619 applications involving about S$92.9 million in grants, discrepancies were found between HDB’s records and ICA address data. These discrepancies raised concerns that recipients or their family members may not have met residence requirements. HDB said it has taken follow-up actions, including recovering grants with accrued interest where conditions were breached. It will also revise the terms and conditions of the PHG agreements to require individuals to update their NRIC addresses within 28 days of moving into the purchased flat to stay with the applicants, or to an address within 4km of the purchased flat.

IMPROPER SEASON PARKING APPROVALS The audit also uncovered widespread lapses in eligibility checks for season parking. More than 228,000 applications and renewals, amounting to S$24.99 million in revenue, were approved despite applicants not meeting criteria. These included cases involving deceased applicants (S$2.95 million), applicants who were not the registered flat owner, tenants (S$21.58 million) and family parking arrangements that did not meet proximity requirements (S$490,000). Separately, more than 10,000 transactions involving commercial vehicles charged incorrect season parking rates, resulting in an estimated S$1 million in under-collection. The AGO report said HDB acknowledged the need to strengthen its verification checks on season parking and family season parking transactions, as well as its controls to identify commercial vehicles to charge the correct season parking rate. It would also introduce measures such as requiring applicants to declare at application that they had met the eligibility criteria and reminding them at renewal that they must continue to do so. In addition, HDB plans to implement a revamped season parking system by 2027. SOME CAR PARK PATROLS COMPLETED IN LESS THAN 10 SECONDS Significant gaps were also identified in HDB’s oversight of a contractor responsible for car park patrol and enforcement services from Nov 1, 2021 to Jan 31, 2026. A preliminary estimate found that HDB may have overpaid about S$9.7 million for work not performed. AGO uncovered “significant discrepancies” in patrol records, non-compliance with audit requirements and other indications of shortfall in patrol work, including multiple instances where the patrol of a location was completed in “less than 10 seconds”. “Given that about 50 per cent of the car parks to be patrolled were multi-storey car parks, it is highly implausible for a car park to be properly patrolled in such a short span of time," said the AGO. “We also noted that HDB did not make use of available data, such as actual patrol records, to facilitate its monitoring of the contractor beyond the existing system alerts. Thus, there was a risk that patrol duties might not have been performed as required under the contract.” In addition, the actual patrol frequency for some car parks was lower than required by HDB. There were also concurrent clock-ins by the same patrol personnel at different car park locations. “During our audit, HDB raised the data discrepancy issues with the contractor’s senior management who then initiated an investigation. According to the contractor, their investigation found that its IT system for managing the work of patrol personnel had access control weaknesses,” said the report. “This resulted in the integrity of the records in the system and data for the audit being compromised. HDB informed us that the contractor had since lodged a police report and that it had worked with the contractor to put in place protective measures.” HDB said it has zero tolerance for attempts to undermine its enforcement process and will exercise its full contractual rights. “Besides issuing a formal warning letter in March 2026 for contractual breaches, HDB has commenced recovery of the administrative charges, which includes the full extent of payments made for works not rendered,” said the agency, adding that it recognises that there were gaps in its processes and has taken steps to address them. This includes the implementation of automated system checks for more rigorous monitoring and adopting stronger contractual requirements in the latest contracts. OTHER LAPSES AGO also flagged errors in the valuation of variation works under Home Improvement Programme (HIP) projects, resulting in both overpayments and underpayments. HDB has since reassessed the affected variation orders and rectified the valuation errors. It also accorded a poor performance grading to the consultants involved, which will affect their future tendering opportunities for HDB projects. Possible irregularities were also identified in quotations for certain works, raising concerns about whether value for money had been achieved. AGO's checks also found “tell-tale signs” of possible irregularities in supporting documents submitted for audit. The construction contract concerned was managed by a consultant engaged by HDB. A subsequent investigation conducted by HDB found that the employee involved had no intention to impede the audit process. However, HDB acknowledged that making alterations to documents was a serious matter and said it takes a firm view of such lapses. Disciplinary action has been taken against the staff member responsible. HDB also issued a warning letter and accorded a poor performance grading to the consultant, which will affect its future tendering opportunities.

## Chinese translation

> Translation model: grok

### 稽查长公署报告：审核漏洞致不符资格者获配HDB组屋与住房津贴

建屋发展局亦可能就未实际执行的停车场巡查与执法服务，向承包商多付约970万新元。

新加坡：稽查长公署（AGO）周三（7月15日）发布的报告指出，审核与监督方面的漏洞，导致不符资格的申请人获配建屋发展局（HDB）组屋、领取住房津贴，以及使用津贴停车。本年度报告中，HDB被点名的疏失数量最多；报告亦揭发对承包商监督不力，或已造成数百万新元的超付。

HDB在媒体声明中表示，严肃对待AGO的发现，并已采取措施纠正问题、加强管控。审计涵盖2022年4月1日至2025年3月31日。

住房优先与津贴计划

审计发现，已婚子女优先计划、就近居住住房津贴（Proximity Housing Grant）与公积金住房津贴（CPF Housing Grant）的资格审核均存在漏洞。对审计期内已批准申请的数据分析与抽查发现：

· 已婚子女优先计划与就近居住住房津贴的邻近标准在申请时未获满足
· 曾获同一津贴者再次获发就近居住住房津贴或公积金住房津贴
· 超出收入顶限的申请人仍获公积金住房津贴
· 就近居住住房津贴与公积金住房津贴在最低居住年限（MOP）期间条件未获遵守

AGO报告称：“因此，组屋被配予、津贴被发放给不符资格的申请人。津贴条件亦可能未获遵守。”“这增加了未能实现这些计划既定政策目标的风险，例如让家庭成员就近居住以便相互照顾。”

根据已婚子女优先计划与就近居住住房津贴的邻近标准，拟购组屋须在父母或子女现居或将居物业的4公里范围内。AGO对逾37,700份已批准申请的数据分析发现，37份已婚子女优先计划申请与27份就近居住住房津贴申请未符合标准，涉及津贴共47万新元。

其中9份就近居住住房津贴申请（津贴合计17万新元），HDB告知AGO：2份因员工疏忽，7份因内部系统计算距离不一致。该9份受影响申请均已纠正。

AGO指出，HDB亦依赖内部记录与申请人申报，若当事人搬迁却未更新资料，未必反映实际居住情况。报告称HDB本应对照移民与关卡局（ICA）记录核实——该记录具权威性，因居民依法须更新地址。

HDB在另一份声明中表示，认同使用准确、最新的居住地址资料，对评估就近类优先计划与津贴资格至关重要。其已引入对照ICA记录的额外审核，并在必要时采取追回津贴等措施。

重复津贴或超出收入顶限

审计亦发现6起就近居住住房津贴与公积金住房津贴因系统错误及员工疏忽被重复发放的个案。HDB随后在审计期外再查出4起。“HDB告知我们，编程错误已纠正。相关人员已获口头警告，并将为员工开展进修培训。对受影响的就近居住与公积金住房津贴申请，已追回津贴或完成个案正规化，”AGO称。

AGO还发现2起申请人超出收入顶限仍获公积金住房津贴的个案。HDB在审计发现后另查出3起，归因于系统问题或疏忽。AGO报告称：“HDB告知我们，其此前已发现该系统问题并于2024年11月实施修复，但当时未侦测到这些个案。”“HDB将评估个案以确定适当后续行动，并将实施进一步强化侦测与监督的措施，包括定期进修培训、系统提示与例外报告。”

最低居住年限期间监察薄弱

AGO亦指出，HDB在最低居住年限期间对津贴条件遵守情况的监察存在缺口，包括就近居住住房津贴受惠人须在整个MOP期间与父母或已婚子女同住、或住在其4公里范围内的要求。

在1,619份申请、涉及约9,290万新元津贴中，HDB记录与ICA地址数据存在差异，令人担忧受惠人或其家庭成员可能未满足居住要求。HDB表示已采取后续行动，包括在条件被违反时连同应计利息追回津贴。其亦将修订就近居住住房津贴协议条款，要求相关人士在迁入所购组屋与申请人同住，或迁至所购组屋4公里内地址后28天内，更新身份证地址。

长期停车资格审批不当

审计亦揭发长期停车资格审核大范围疏失。逾22.8万宗申请与续期（涉及收入2,499万新元）在申请人未符资格的情况下获批，包括已故申请人（295万新元）、非登记组屋业主或租户的申请人（2,158万新元），以及未满足邻近要求的家庭停车安排（49万新元）。

另有逾1万宗商业车辆交易按错误的长期停车费率收费，估计少收约100万新元。AGO报告称，HDB承认需加强对长期停车及家庭长期停车交易的核实，以及识别商业车辆以收取正确费率的管控；并将引入措施，如要求申请人在申请时声明已符合资格，并在续期时提醒须继续符合。此外，HDB计划在2027年前实施经改造的长期停车系统。

部分停车场巡查在不足10秒内“完成”

在HDB对负责2021年11月1日至2026年1月31日停车场巡查与执法服务承包商的监督方面，亦发现重大缺口。初步估算，HDB可能就未实际执行的工作多付约970万新元。

AGO发现巡查记录存在“重大差异”、未遵守审计要求，以及其他巡查工作不足的迹象，包括多起某地点巡查在“不足10秒”内完成的情况。“鉴于约50%待巡查停车场为多层停车场，在如此短时间内妥善巡查一个停车场极不可能，”AGO称。“我们亦注意到，HDB未充分利用现有数据（如实际巡查记录）在既有系统警报之外监督承包商。因此，存在巡查职责可能未按合同要求履行的风险。”

此外，部分停车场的实际巡查频率低于HDB要求；亦出现同一巡查人员在不同停车场地点同时打卡的情况。报告称：“审计期间，HDB向承包商高级管理层提出数据差异问题，后者随即展开调查。据承包商称，调查发现其管理巡查人员工作的IT系统存在访问控制漏洞。”“这导致系统记录与审计数据完整性受损。HDB告知我们，承包商已报警，并已与承包商合作落实防护措施。”

HDB表示对破坏执法流程的企图零容忍，并将行使全部合同权利。“除于2026年3月就合同违约发出正式警告信外，HDB已启动追回行政费用，包括就未提供工作所付的全部款项，”该局称，并承认流程存在缺口，已采取措施应对，包括实施自动化系统检查以加强监督，以及在最新合同中采用更严格的合同要求。

其他疏失

AGO亦指出家居改进计划（HIP）项目变更工程估价错误，造成超付与少付。HDB已重新评估受影响变更令并纠正估价错误；亦对相关顾问给予不良表现评级，将影响其未来竞投HDB项目的机会。

部分工程报价亦发现可能存在的异常，令人关注是否实现物有所值。AGO抽查还发现提交审计的佐证文件有“明显迹象”显示可能存在异常。相关建筑合同由HDB聘用的顾问管理。HDB随后调查发现涉事员工无意阻碍审计；但HDB承认改动文件事关重大，并对此类疏失持坚定立场。已对责任员工采取纪律处分，并向顾问发出警告信及不良表现评级，将影响其未来竞投机会。