ST : Loan sharks' vandalism costs town councils

Jan 15, 2010

CHANGES TO MONEYLENDERS' ACT

Loan sharks' vandalism costs town councils

By Mavis Toh

EACH year, town councils have to dig deep into their pockets to clean up after loan sharks.

Eight town councils interviewed said that they pay sums of between $15,000 and $70,000 annually just to rectify the damage caused by the loan sharks.

In Parliament on Tuesday, Madam Cynthia Phua (Aljunied GRC) said the number of loan shark harassment cases reported in estates under Aljunied Town Council jumped from 212 in 2008 to 378 last year. The town council had to spend $69,370 last year, up from $49,843 in 2008, to make good the damage.

Those caught for loan shark activities, she said, should be made to repaint defaced walls as part of community service.

Speaking to The Straits Times, she said that besides re-painting, the money was also spent on installing closed-circuit television cameras (CCTVs) in blocks most prone to the loan sharks' vandalism.

One particular block had 11 CCTVs installed late last year after loan sharks repeatedly splashed paint along the common corridor and on doors throughout the block. 'The fellow had borrowed from many different loan sharks and it was very frustrating for the residents,' she said, adding that the CCTVs did help stem the harassment.

Other MPs are also exasperated about having to spend more to clean vandalised walls and repair defaced surfaces.

Marine Parade Town Council's cleaning and repair bill went up from $20,000 in 2008 to $30,000 last year.

'These are monies that could be better deployed for improvements to estate upkeeping,' said Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade GRC).

Jurong Town Council paid contractors $32,100 over the last two years to remove traces of loan shark activity.

Madam Halimah Yacob (Jurong GRC) said she gets at least one resident complaining about loan shark vandalism each time she does her house-to-house visits.

'The loan sharks are a nuisance and threat not only to the property but also to residents' lives,' she said.

At Pasir-Ris Punggol GRC, MP Charles Chong said that besides splashing paint, loan sharks also break flowerpots, set fire to doors and scribble the unit's number all over the block.

'It can be very frustrating because a few days after you paint and clean up, or even within the same day, they strike again,' said Mr Chong.

Some residents also take the task of re-painting into their own hands.

One 43-year-old cabby, who declined to be named, said: 'I've stopped borrowing from them for years but they still harass me. Each time I hurry to paint over the damage before my neighbours or family see it.'

While some residents buy and fix their own CCTVs as a deterrent, others ask their town council or the police to install them. Jurong Town Council, for example, spent $50,000 two years ago to install CCTVs in 26 blocks and multi-storey carparks. It also pays an annual maintenance cost of $15,000.

'But loan sharks still strike despite the CCTVs, so there's a need to step up enforcement and strike the head, not just the runners,' said Madam Halimah.

The police also use portable CCTVs in those HDB units subject to loan shark harassment.

But the damage caused by the loan sharks goes beyond dollars and cents.

Said Mr Seah: 'It is the trauma and inconveniences to the affected families of such units and the adjoining units as well. This distress cannot be quantified.'