Its my money, why can't i have it?

[sherrry]

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?

I think there's only a few possibilities.
They "encourage" people to park their funds here for good, so they can fully exploit the principle sum to get as much interests/dividends possible. Notice, most of their investments are dumped into very very long term investments, that take eons for returns. Just like what they're doing with CPF.

Or, they expect people to park their funds here, hope & pray very hard that those people forget about their funds parked here.

So, when people wanna take back their $, they're stuck, no cold hard cash to return.

 

[Zombie]

Assuming the adopted girl points a gun to the old woman' head, and both walk into the bank. Then the old woman gives very clear and technically proper bank instructions to withdraw all her monies, and she immediately hands them over to the girl. The girl escapes with the money.

Can the woman sue the bank?

 

[annexa]

Sound like CPF.

You get graduate from the world best education system (Poly, NUS, NTU) but you cannot be trusted to manage your own money.

Diu.

 

[Einfield]

will take out my 3 millions from OCBC tomorrow.....

Nahbeh, own money also must get lawyer to help to withdraw..

kepala pisang!

If we all go withdraw our money, within a week, Singapore bank will tank.

 

[sherrry]

If we all go withdraw our money, within a week, Singapore bank will tank.

Even if the entire nation goes to the banks to withdraw all their $, the $ is also going into expenditure somehow. Isn't that what they gahmen wanted in the 1st place - for Sgporeans to spend more?

 

[Microsoft]

Actually you know there are two sides to the coin.
If you are the 91 year old and you have been manipulated but cannot do anything, you will thank the bank.
If it was not so, you would be angry with the bank.

However, your age of 91 would mean that you could be coerced, victimised. So, it is prudent to be cautious. The bank is not saying you cannot take the money out. It just want to ensure that you gave the instructions when you are of sound mind.

Yah... there's 2 side 2 de coin... Wat if 1 mth later after withdrawl the old lady found begging in the street with all her moni con... PPL will turn around n say wtf OCBC is doing any how release the moni...

Any which way... ocbc gonna kena fark big time...

 

[diversifyx2]

OCBC is not kaypoh, just abit hesitating how to handout huge amount when economic crisis is on.

 

[prince123456]

don't anyhow give excuses.... say hardup for cash say so lar,.....

need to care of face issit....... i dont trust bank..

cash and gold is king !!!!:oIo:

 

[theblackhole]

cash out when you are still rational and able!!!

waulau lidat, deposits gone man!!!

 

[scoobyhoo]

better withdraw all your savings from banks to avoid such unthinkable situation. one day, may be like cf, one could not withdraw his deposits with bank freely. who knows?

 

[shelltox]

If all her money are gone , who is going to take of care of Ah mah. Do you like to volunteer.

 

[CENWEN]

Plaintiff, 93, too ill to testify

Singapore
Home > Breaking News > Singapore > Story
Jan 26, 2010

$9M BANK TUSSLE
Plaintiff, 93, too ill to testify

<!-- by line --> By Selina Lum
<!-- end by line --> <!-- end left side bar --> <!-- story content : start -->
A 93-YEAR-OLD woman whose accounts totalling $8.9 million were frozen by OCBC Bank, citing concerns about her mental state, has sued the bank for damages. But Madam Hwang Cheng Tsu Hsu will not be testifying in the suit, which opened in the High Court yesterday, because her health has worsened. Aside from Alzheimer's dementia, which she was diagnosed with in 2004, she is also suffering from pneumonia, shingles and other medical problems.

At the heart of the case is whether the bank acted appropriately when it stepped in to freeze her accounts nearly two years ago. The bank claims it did so to protect Madam Hwang, who did not seem competent by then to manage her accounts. But her lawyers argue that the bank was in no position to conclude this. Madam Hwang, a retired Chinese teacher also known as Nellie, had applied to open a joint account at the bank with her adopted and only child, Ms Amy Hsu, in May 2008.

Read the full story in Tuesday's edition of The Straits Times.

 

[Unrepented]

An incident happened very recently to a friend of mine (who is just a man-in-the-street) when he requested to withdraw about twenty thousand SGD. The local bank in question requested a reason for the withdrawal. He was infuriated but was told by the bank staff that it is their policy. When he related the incident to me, I was very puzzled with regard to the rationale as well as intent of such a policy.

It is understood that customers have to inform the bank in advance of cash withdrawals requests if the amount if relatively large. But this was not the case.

But to give a reason for the withdrawal?

If one tells them that one intents to spend it in gl and have a mass orgy in one of the legal whore house, can they stop one from withdrawing money? Then what is the point in asking for a reason for the withdrawal

Does the bank have a legal right to reject the withdrawal if we do not give a reason as requested?

Any of you had similiar experience?

 

[jw5]

An incident happened very recently to a friend of mine (who is just a man-in-the-street) when he requested to withdraw about twenty thousand SGD. The local bank in question requested a reason for the withdrawal. He was infuriated but was told by the bank staff that it is their policy. When he related the incident to me, I was very puzzled with regard to the rationale as well as intent of such a policy.

It is understood that customers have to inform the bank in advance of cash withdrawals requests if the amount if relatively large. But this was not the case.

But to give a reason for the withdrawal?

If one tells them that one intents to spend it in gl and have a mass orgy in one of the legal whore house, can they stop one from withdrawing money? Then what is the point in asking for a reason for the withdrawal

Does the bank have a legal right to reject the withdrawal if we do not give a reason as requested?

Any of you had similiar experience?

I think the request for withdrawal has to be made in advance if it is wanted in cash.
Did your friend insist on withdrawing the money without giving a reason? Or did he end up not withdrawing or withdrawing after giving a reason?
It would have been interesting to see how the bank would have reacted if he had insisted on withdrawing without giving a reason. I don't think they have legal grounds to insist on a reason.
The bank might argue that they want to know what their customers' are doing with the money for information and marketing purposes (e.g. if they are depositing or investing with another bank).

 

[Meltdown]

That Ah Mah obviously didn't know that in theory bank deposits belong to the customers. But in practice, it depends on the willingness & financial capacity of the banks to release the funds to the customers. If the banks are in a severe liquidity crunch during a financial crisis, they can legally stop withdrawals by coordinating with the gahmen to declare a bank holiday, or limit the withdrawal amount customers can make by gahmen decree.

Money placed in banks carry a certain type of risk called "Counterparty Risk." If the bank defaults on it's obligation, the depositors will not get their money back upon demand.

Depositors placing money in banks should be willing to assume the "Counterparty Risk" justs like the investors of Lehman Minibond should be willing assume the "Counterparty Risk" of Lehman Brothers not being able to honour its financial obligation. In other words, the risk of their bank deposits being wiped out to ZERO is there. Just like loaning money to a friend, the risk of him not being able to pay you back is there.

Banks can always come up with plenty of legal excuses (like the depositor is not legally competent, fighting money laundering, fighting terrorism, following international financial protocol set out by the G20, for the client's own good, etc.) if the amount of withdrawal request is substantial which could affect their balance sheet & liquidity.

Bank depositors beware: The money you place in the banks don't really belong to you in practice until you have withdrawn your money. Even if you have withdrawn all your money & place them under mattresses, the money don't really belong to you because the gahmen can always demonetize the bank notes by declaring them "no longer legal tender" after a certain cutoff date unless you surrender them to the banks in exchange for new bank notes which usually happen when the old bank notes suffer severe currency devaluation. One way or another, the banks & gahmen always win while the people always lose.

 

[mscitw]

Monkey see, monkey do.

the silly bank probably learn this trick from the regime who used various vile schemes to lock peasants' monies/pension.

The Compelled Pension Fishtrap is another example. Old Autocrat claimed he will return peasants' pension/monies once they turned 55. Ex-regent Woody raised the withdrawal age and came up with a minimal sum scam to prevent peasants from seeing their money.

Young Autocrat merely inherited the system and came up with the Analities to make sure most peasants die before their cut off age so that they could pocket the principal with a legal provision to stop payouts should the scheme become insolvent.

Woe woe woe, peasantpore, kiss bye bye to your money.

 

[jw5]

That Ah Mah obviously didn't know that in theory bank deposits belong to the customers. But in practice, it depends on the willingness & financial capacity of the banks to release the funds to the customers. If the banks are in a severe liquidity crunch during a financial crisis, they can legally stop withdrawals by coordinating with the gahmen to declare a bank holiday, or limit the withdrawal amount customers can make by gahmen decree.

Money placed in banks carry a certain type of risk called "Counterparty Risk." If the bank defaults on it's obligation, the depositors will not get their money back upon demand.

Depositors placing money in banks should be willing to assume the "Counterparty Risk" justs like the investors of Lehman Minibond should be willing assume the "Counterparty Risk" of Lehman Brothers not being able to honour its financial obligation. In other words, the risk of their bank deposits being wiped out to ZERO is there. Just like loaning money to a friend, the risk of him not being able to pay you back is there.

Banks can always come up with plenty of legal excuses (like the depositor is not legally competent, fighting money laundering, fighting terrorism, following international financial protocol set out by the G20, for the client's own good, etc.) if the amount of withdrawal request is substantial which could affect their balance sheet & liquidity.

Bank depositors beware: The money you place in the banks don't really belong to you in practice until you have withdrawn your money. Even if you have withdrawn all your money & place them under mattresses, the money don't really belong to you because the gahmen can always demonetize the bank notes by declaring them "no longer legal tender" after a certain cutoff date unless you surrender them to the banks in exchange for new bank notes which usually happen when the old bank notes suffer severe currency devaluation. One way or another, the banks & gahmen always win while the people always lose.

Bro Meltdown,

Firstly, we should never be afraid to "lose". Have more courage.
Secondly, the banks and gahment "always win" and the people "always lose", only if the banks or the gahment choose to play out the people. If they perform their respective fiduciary duties as they are supposed to, the people will "never lose".
Thirdly, if the people are ever played out by banks or the gahment, the people should seriously consider plucking up the courage to go after the individuals who run the banks or the gahment, going back several years if necessary. In most cases, the individuals would have enriched themselves before screwing the ordinary people.

 

[jacobsgoh]

The banks should withold LKY's money because he is senile. :p

Give the banks a break, the guy you mentioned is a confirmed bankrupt how could he be allowed to open a bank account locally.

 

[xebay11]

How did a retired 92YO teacher accumulate $9m?

 

[Muthukali]

with $8.8m OCBC can play around n do wonders juz like Ho Jinx!
knn... try 2 tekan ah ma...
wah... ah ma rich leh...

Over the counter become Market maker for FX and give mankali spread...... 8.8m, very good to roll..............:oIo: