The question is does one's deposits belongs to the bank when they are said to be senile.
The banks should withold LKY's money because he is senile. :p
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Its my money, why can't i have it?
- Thread starter CENWEN
- Start date
The banks should withold LKY's money because he is senile. :p
The question is does one's deposits belongs to the bank when they are said to be senile.
If found senile, you are as good as dead. If you have made a will, then when you are really dead, the probate decides.
If you did not make a will, then it goes intestate and distributed accordingly.
Meanwhile, you will continue to accumulate interest on your account.
If no one contest, it will remain this way. The money still does not belong to the bank, but you cannot take it out unless instructions come from a court. I think very likely, the court will appoint a custodian to manage your affairs.
So, someone is right. The lawyers will alligator it if not careful. Lawyers are known to screw up your affairs but interestingly, they always screw it up in such a way that you need them to resolve it and so they will be able to derive fees from your dilemma.
Concurred, but I believe banks has no rights to hold on to one's money, senile or not. The money just dont belong to the bank, it has to be returned. Or to one's estate if demised.:p
He's senile alright, the difference is he holds the bank and not the other way around.:p
If found senile, you are as good as dead. If you have made a will, then when you are really dead, the probate decides.
If you did not make a will, then it goes intestate and distributed accordingly.
Meanwhile, you will continue to accumulate interest on your account.
If no one contest, it will remain this way. The money still does not belong to the bank, but you cannot take it out unless instructions come from a court. I think very likely, the court will appoint a custodian to manage your affairs.
So, someone is right. The lawyers will alligator it if not careful. Lawyers are known to screw up your affairs but interestingly, they always screw it up in such a way that you need them to resolve it and so they will be able to derive fees from your dilemma.
A person can become senile from diseases, it can happen suddenly and without one expecting it let alone making a will. Concurred, the money doesnt belong to the bank and has to be returned one way or another. It is just very sad and unfortunate that to withdraw one's own money one has to go through such hassling.:p
My capable daughter-in-law is witholding all the money from you senile Singaporeans. *hee*hee*
So which is more dangerous? A senile holding other people's money or the bank holding money from the senile? :p
The sad truth is a senile holding people's money and the bank. No bank is holding from a senile or is able for that matter. Until his demise and his people are out, the monopoly remains.:p
In March, Madam Hwang was seen by a psychiatrist of 30 years' experience, who assessed her to be fit to make a will despite mild dementia.
Well, she is fit to make a will and and have done her check in March.
So let's say that the old women was checked again and she is found fit, would OCBC have to foot all the legal and medical examination bills including compensation for causing distress to the old lady and her step daughter ?
OCBC is cleary using bullying tactics here. Going by the recent tresspass of DBS banks and how it has misrepresented its sales and MAS playing meek and acting blur, our banks have now a freehand to do whatever it please.
This is a dangerous precedent which have implications which affects all the elderly account holders in every bank. If this case fly and OCBC wins, can it then, do that to every single senior account holder ?
Dan
Well, she is fit to make a will and and have done her check in March.
So let's say that the old women was checked again and she is found fit, would OCBC have to foot all the legal and medical examination bills including compensation for causing distress to the old lady and her step daughter ?
OCBC is cleary using bullying tactics here. Going by the recent tresspass of DBS banks and how it has misrepresented its sales and MAS playing meek and acting blur, our banks have now a freehand to do whatever it please.
This is a dangerous precedent which have implications which affects all the elderly account holders in every bank. If this case fly and OCBC wins, can it then, do that to every single senior account holder ?
Dan
Last edited:
There are cases where the children purposely on pretext of their old aged parent's senile condition request for the money to be withdrawn and after getting their hands on the money, throw the old parents away like a ball.
And if the old parents regain consciousness, meaning to say when they start to not be senile, they can sue the bank as to why the money were released while they are not in a conscious state of mind.
No money, no problem. Have money, have problem. That is why certain laws on banking has to be in place for such controversial situations.
Couldnt agree more with you. The banking and financial institutions needs to be challenge and publicise, it has no rights to a freehand. If indeed OCBC were to win this case, it will definitely set precedence for others to follow. We are looking at dangers never seen before, it affects everyone, the old now and us, we'll grow old too. And nobody knows when one will become senile or when they'll say one is senile.:p
Agree, highly suspicious. The adopted daughter would not need to get her to withdraw if she has already made her will.
Put it another way. Will she be so concern about her adopted mother if she did not have $9 mil?
True, where you are coming from is about abuse but abuse go both ways. The bank should seek immunity rather than denying one's right to their own money. I believe banks had such immunity, it must not be allow to judge when not to release one's money.:p
There's only very few ways to see things;
- you can see but you can't touch (personal savings)
- now you see it, now you don't (CPF & TC funds *poof*)
- you can't touch this (CPF)
Banks interfering with our lives, determining whether or not we deserve our $. CPF interfering with our lives, determining when we deserve to retire. That is what 66.6% of the voters chose, a people minded governance.WTF! Since when did the Banks start to behave like our CPF board?
OCBC say she senile.
Any lawyers here care to comment.
I thought this country is you die your own business. If she really senile, withdraws the $9.2m and gets cheated by her relatives, is it really the bank's business?
I find this case really funny.
During the 1997 ASIAN Financial Crisis, I heard a similar story when an Indon man wanted to withdraw several million in cash, he was told to come back the next day as the MAS needed to be notified first.
He was so furious because he was travelling the same night that he and several of his Indon kakis decided to trasfer huge chunks of money out of Singapore to HK's banks.
Again why are our banks doing such things? Any laywers here care to comment. Thought we a leading financial center. I am confused.
I do not doubt our banks' liquidity but why such strange rules and laws?
Any lawyers here care to comment.
I thought this country is you die your own business. If she really senile, withdraws the $9.2m and gets cheated by her relatives, is it really the bank's business?
I find this case really funny.
During the 1997 ASIAN Financial Crisis, I heard a similar story when an Indon man wanted to withdraw several million in cash, he was told to come back the next day as the MAS needed to be notified first.
He was so furious because he was travelling the same night that he and several of his Indon kakis decided to trasfer huge chunks of money out of Singapore to HK's banks.
Again why are our banks doing such things? Any laywers here care to comment. Thought we a leading financial center. I am confused.
I do not doubt our banks' liquidity but why such strange rules and laws?
Similar threads
