Man used shell companies to rent landed homes, later defaulting on rent and refusing to move out

American Anthony Thomas Price had used Noranth Ventures, a shell company, to rent this semi-detached house in Lengkong Dua in Kembangan for $7,500 a month.

Published Oct 12, 2026, 07:30 PM

Updated Oct 12, 2026, 07:30 PM

SINGAPORE – A man used shell companies to rent three landed homes in Singapore at different times for his family to live in , and then stopped paying rent shortly after moving in, embroiling his landlords in legal processes to avoid moving out.

Anthony Thomas Price, a director and shareholder of Noranth Ventures, had used Noranth Ventures and its wholly owned subsidiary Bundleluxe, to enter into separate agreements with different landlords between 2019 and 2026.

The American man then refused to pay subsequent rent on the grounds of alleged defects in those properties, but Price and his family continued to live in the properties. They also ignored demands to vacate the properties.

In the latest case involving a semi-detached house in Kembangan, Price filed a court application to stop the landlords from taking back possession of their property.

The application was dismissed by a district judge as “wholly without merit”.

In a written judgment on Oct 7, District Judge Chiah Kok Khun said the application was filed “in plain abuse of process of the court”.

Price used legal means “to frustrate the landlords’ efforts to pursue their lawful rights against him, and to further his scheme to rent premises for him and his family with no intention to pay rental”, the judge added.

Price used Noranth Ventures, which had a paid-up capital of $200, to rent a semi-detached house in Lengkong Dua in Kembangan for $7,500 a month for two years, starting from May 1, 2026.

Noranth Ventures was registered under a virtual office address run by an entity known as VOffice Singapore, the court noted.

The landlords Loo Kin Ben and Tong Pek Eng, are an elderly couple in their 80s.

When they tried to repossess their property after Price defaulted on rent from the second month , Price filed a court application to stop them .

The landlords represented by lawyer Brendan Tan Zi Jian from Rajah & Tann Singapore, opposed the application and filed a counterclaim seeking to recover the property, unpaid rent with interest and other outstanding sums.

Under the tenancy agreement dated April 27, there were four authorised occupants of the premise: Price’s wife Lizzy Hashim Price , Nur Fitriqah Mohamad Fitrin, Quraisha de’ Melda Ridzwan and Norai’rin Md Hashim. Price was not named as an authorised occupant, but he also stayed at the property.

Noranth Ventures agreed to pay a security deposit of $15,000, but only $7,500 of the deposit was paid. The company also paid only the first month’s rent and stopped paying rent from June 2026 .

Price claimed there were about “35 repair, rectification or practical occupation issues” with the property.

The landlords had resolved 32 of the complaints by June 8, while the remaining drainage-related issues required more extensive work and would take more time to complete, the district judge noted.

Chiah added that the landlords were “accommodating and had taken reasonable steps to resolve the repair items raised by Price, despite rent not been paid”.

The district judge found that Noranth Ventures had breached the tenancy agreement by refusing to pay rent and the landlords had “every right to re-enter the premises”.

He then dismissed Noranth Ventures’ application and allowed the landlords’ counterclaim including possession of the property , unpaid rent, interest and double rent from Aug 15 until vacant possession is handed over to the landlords.

He also ordered the company to pay $15,000 in legal costs and $2,031.98 in disbursements.

Tan from Rajah & Tann Singapore said his “client feels vindicated by the judgment and hopes that the tenants can vacate the property and settle all unpaid amounts immediately”.

“The clients will take the necessary measures to enforce the court judgment,” added Tan.

As at Oct 12, the occupants had not vacated the property.

Similar pattern in earlier cases

In his judgment, the district judge also identified a pattern similar to the Lengkong Dua case in two earlier tenancy disputes involving Price and his companies .

In 2019, Noranth Ventures had rented a landed property in Jalan Selamat for $7,200 a month under a two-year tenancy agreement beginning in September 2019. This property is about 10 minutes’ walk from Lengkong Dua.

As in the most recent case, the company paid only part of the $14,400 security deposit and stopped paying rent after about 1½ months.

The property owner commenced legal action against Price and his company, while Price and his family continued living in the house .

“Price and his family effectively lived in the Jalan Selamat Property rent-free for at least five months,” noted district judge Chiah.

That case was subsequently settled and discontinued. No further details were available in the Oct 7 written judgment.

In another dispute, Price used Bundleluxe, a wholly owned subsidiary of Noranth Ventures, to rent a semi-detached house at Burnfoot Terrace in Siglap for one year, from January 2024.

At the time Bundleluxe, which had a paid-up capital of $1 , entered into the tenancy agreement, it had accumulated losses of about $1.34 million between December 2021 and November 2023.

“It was a shell company,” the district judge said.

Price had also cited alleged defects as the reason for not paying rent.

Price and his family continued living in the house despite the landlord’s demands for payment and vacant possession. They eventually moved out on March 18, 2025, more than two months after the tenancy expired.

The district judge noted that the family had stayed rent-free for close to 12 months.

The property owner commenced legal action on February 2025 against Price and Bundleluxe for various breaches and losses suffered. The proceedings are still ongoing as at Oct 7.

Chiah pointed out concerns raised by the landlords in the Lengkong Dua and Burnfoot Terrace cases , that rental arrears might never be recovered because the contracting tenants were shell companies with minimal paid-up capital.

The district judge agreed that the pattern of using shell companies to rent residential premises as observed “is a matter of some concern for landlords in Singapore”.

Property market/sector

Residential property

美国人安东尼·托马斯·普莱斯通过一家空壳公司 Noranth Ventures，以每月 7,500 美元的价格租下了位于肯邦安 Lengkong Dua 的这栋半独立式住宅。

发布于2026年10月12日晚上7:30

更新于2026年10月12日晚上7:30

新加坡——一名男子利用空壳公司在新加坡先后租了三套独立式住宅供家人居住，入住后不久便停止支付租金，导致房东们不得不提起法律诉讼以避免搬离。

Noranth Ventures 的董事兼股东 Anthony Thomas Price 曾利用 Noranth Ventures 及其全资子公司 Bundleluxe，在 2019 年至 2026 年期间与不同的房东签订了单独的协议。

这名美国男子随后以房屋存在缺陷为由拒绝支付后续租金，但普莱斯及其家人继续居住在这些房屋中，并无视搬迁要求。

在最近一起涉及肯邦安一栋半独立式住宅的案件中，普莱斯向法院提出申请，阻止房东收回其房产。

地区法官以“完全没有依据”为由驳回了该申请。

10月7日，地方法官谢国坤在一份书面判决中表示，该申请“明显滥用了法院程序”。

法官补充说，普莱斯利用合法手段“阻挠房东们依法维护自身权益，并进一步实施他为自己和家人租房而不支付租金的计划”。

Price 利用 Noranth Ventures 公司（该公司实缴资本为 200 美元）在肯邦安的 Lengkong Dua 租了一栋半独立式住宅，月租金为 7,500 美元，租期两年，从 2026 年 5 月 1 日开始。

法庭指出，Noranth Ventures 是以一家名为 VOffice Singapore 的实体运营的虚拟办公地址注册的。

房东卢建本和唐碧英是一对八十多岁的老夫妇。

在 Price 从第二个月开始拖欠房租后，当他们试图收回他们的房产时，Price 向法院提出申请阻止他们。

房东由新加坡 Rajah & Tann 律师事务所的 Brendan Tan Zi Jian 律师代表，反对该申请，并提起反诉，要求收回房产、未付租金及利息和其他未付款项。

根据4月27日签订的租赁协议，该房屋共有四名合法居住者：普莱斯的妻子莉齐·哈希姆·普莱斯、努尔·菲特里卡·穆罕默德·菲特林、库莱莎·德·梅尔达·里兹万和诺莱琳·穆罕默德·哈希姆。普莱斯本人并未被列为合法居住者，但他也居住在该房屋内。

Noranth Ventures同意支付15,000美元的保证金，但仅支付了7,500美元。该公司也只支付了第一个月的租金，并从2026年6月起停止支付租金。

Price 声称该房产存在大约“35 个维修、整改或实际入住问题”。

地区法官指出，截至 6 月 8 日，房东们已经解决了 32 起投诉，而剩余的排水相关问题需要更广泛的工作，并且需要更多时间才能完成。

Chiah补充说，尽管Price没有支付租金，但房东们“态度通情达理，并采取了合理的措施来解决Price提出的维修问题”。

地区法官认定 Noranth Ventures 公司拒绝支付租金，违反了租赁协议，房东“完全有权重新进入房屋”。

随后，他驳回了 Noranth Ventures 的申请，并允许房东的反诉，包括收回房产、未付租金、利息以及从 8 月 15 日起至将空置房产移交给房东为止的双倍租金。

他还命令该公司支付 15,000 美元的法律费用和 2,031.98 美元的支出。

来自新加坡 Rajah & Tann 律师事务所的 Tan 表示，他的“客户对判决感到满意，并希望租户能够立即搬离该房产并结清所有未付款项”。

“客户将采取必要措施执行法院判决，”谭补充道。

截至10月12日，住户仍未搬离该房产。

早期的案例也存在类似模式。

地区法官在判决中还指出，在之前涉及普莱斯及其公司的两起租赁纠纷中，存在与 Lengkong Dua 案类似的模式。

2019 年，Noranth Ventures 以每月 7,200 美元的价格租下了 Jalan Selamat 的一处独立式住宅，租期两年，从 2019 年 9 月开始。该住宅距离 Lengkong Dua 步行约 10 分钟。

与最近的案例一样，该公司只支付了 14,400 美元保证金的一部分，并在大约 1 个半月后停止支付租金。

房主对普莱斯及其公司提起诉讼，而普莱斯和他的家人继续住在房子里。

“普莱斯和他的家人实际上在 Jalan Selamat 房产中免费居住了至少五个月，”地方法官 Chiah 指出。

该案随后达成和解并撤销。10月7日的书面判决中没有提供更多细节。

在另一起纠纷中，普莱斯利用 Noranth Ventures 的全资子公司 Bundleluxe，从 2024 年 1 月起在 Siglap 的 Burnfoot Terrace 租了一栋半独立式房屋，租期一年。

Bundleluxe 的实缴资本为 1 美元，在签订租赁协议时，该公司在 2021 年 12 月至 2023 年 11 月期间累计亏损约 134 万美元。

“那是一家空壳公司，”地区法官说。

Price 还以房屋存在缺陷为由拒绝支付租金。

尽管房东要求支付租金并交还房屋，普莱斯一家仍继续住在房子里。最终，他们在租约到期两个多月后的2025年3月18日搬了出去。

地区法官指出，这家人已经免租住了近 12 个月。

2025年2月，业主就各项违约行为及所遭受的损失对Price和Bundleluxe提起诉讼。截至10月7日，诉讼仍在进行中。

Chiah 指出了 Lengkong Dua 和 Burnfoot Terrace 案件中房东提出的担忧，即由于承租方是空壳公司，实缴资本极少，因此拖欠的租金可能永远无法收回。

地方法官同意，观察到的利用空壳公司出租住宅的模式“是新加坡房东们比较关注的问题”。

房地产市场/行业

住宅物业