Wednesday, November 19, 2008

OCBC is NOT on the verge of bankruptcy.


OCBC IS NOT GOING BANKRUPT!


90 years old retired female teacher, already certified mentally sound by two medical professionals - a psychiatrist with 30 years of professional experience, and a clinical psychologist - wanted to withdraw $9,000,000 from her bank account.

The Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation (OCBC) refused to comply!

The poor teacher wrote a lawyer's letter to OCBC.

OCBC still refused to return her, her money!!

She then wrote a letter to MAS chairman Goh Chok Tong.

OCBC still refused!!!

She then wrote to OCBC Chairman.

OCBC still refused!!!!

She commenced law suit.

OCBC froze her account!!!!!

The case is now in high court.

You can read about it here (link valid for next 6 days).



I shall not speculate on OCBC's action.

But one thing I do know for sure - OCBC is NOT on the verge of bankruptcy!

If OCBC would rather go to court than to return 9 millions, it certainly must have had a very good reason that far outweighs the bad publicity and the legal fees that will be incurred...

...and this reason, of course, most certainly and most absolutely has NOTHING whatsoever to do with imminent or not-so-imminent bankruptcy.

I am absolutely confident that OCBC has some other reason for insisting in its court document that the woman be examined - yet again! - by a doctor (after having already insisted on, and obtained 2 medical reports from the psychiatrist (30 years of experience) and the clinical psychologist)


But if I were you, I will not put any money in OCBC any more!

Not because OCBC is going bankrupt (It's not! Trust me! I am a very trust-able member of Young Pay-And-Pay, as are all my fellow members!), but because it is a little bit/ slightly cumbersome to withdraw money from OCBC.

Try DBS instead. DBS, I am sure, will return you your millions any time you want. DBS is owned by our number 1 (as ranked by us in Young Pay-And-Pay) government. And as we all know, our government will never, ever, withhold any of our hard-earned money...

8 comments:

Your money is my money said...

近900万存款取不出 九旬老妇怒告银行
(2008-11-19)
郑靖豫

  年逾九旬的退休教师要取消户头,提出近900万元存款,但遭银行拒绝。她多次与银行交涉,不但无法如愿,户头还被冻结。如今,她诉诸法律,要华侨银行发还存款。

  中正总校退休华文教师黄诚子(92岁)今年5月到华侨银行,要把单名户头转换成与养女徐安美(43岁,家庭主妇)联名的户头。可是,银行不批准。

  有鉴于此,黄诚子决定关闭来往户头和定期存款户头,把886万多元转到其他银行去。

  然而,尽管黄诚子与银行多番交涉,也通过不同途径包括授权女儿处理她所有的事项、给银行发律师信、向金融管理局主席吴作栋国务资政和华侨银行主席张松光博士投诉等,她就是不能如愿关闭户头。

  辗转三个月、双方无数信件往来后,黄诚子的户头关闭不成,反而遭冻结。

  黄诚子在8月通过余宗南律师入禀高庭,起诉银行违反合约,要求对方即刻连本带利发还她的巨额存款。

  根据起诉状,黄诚子声称她至少五次要求关闭户头,可是一再被拒。

银行曾派职员上门

  华侨银行否认无理扣留黄诚子的存款,银行在抗辩书中说,他们因黄诚子年事已高、看起来有点迷惘,质疑她是否具有足够的心智能力

抗辩书中引述两个例子来说明银行的怀疑。首先,银行职员收到联名户头开设的要求时“觉得不自在”,因为提出要求的是黄诚子的女儿徐安美,而不是黄诚子直接提出的。

  其次,在提出开设联名户头要求的几天后,银行安排了两个职员登门造访黄诚子。据银行说,这次拜访更加深了他们的顾虑,因为两名职员认为,黄诚子看来虚弱和迷惘。他们也声称黄诚子当时不记得曾提出开设联名户头的申请。

  银行坚称它是谨慎行事,并且有责任采取合理措施,以确保指示来自客户本身。

此外,银行也通知黄诚子,在银行无法确定她有足够的心智能力前,将不接受有关她名下户头的任何指示。换言之,户头冻结了,黄诚子无法调动或提取任何存款。

  黄诚子受访时向记者抗议银行的行为:“我不管什么理由,钱是我的!你(银行)葫芦卖什么药?这是不公道的!”

  黄诚子的丈夫在21年前逝世,夫妻俩膝下犹虚,在徐安美年幼时就领养了她。

  徐安美透露,黄诚子的定期存款户头开了近十年,近年因为把集体出售公寓和卖股票的收益存入,存款额所以才比较可观。

  这起官司尚未开审。

  诉方律师余宗南曾尝试以诉方证据充足而辩方无合理的辩护理由,向法庭申请无须开庭传召证人供证,只需按照呈堂文件直接裁定诉方胜诉。虽然这项即席裁决的申请被驳回,可是诉方已提出上诉。

银行向高庭申请委任医生检查诉方

  另一方面,银行也向高庭提出申请,由它委任的精神科医生检查黄诚子以及检阅她所有的医药报告。

  高庭今天将审理银行的这项申请,相信余宗南律师到时会提出反对。黄诚子认为,既然她已依照银行原先的要求提供了精神科医生和临床心理学家的报告,不该再由另一个医生检查,且得承担另一笔费用。

  检查黄诚子的精神科医生执业30多年,他在报告中说黄诚子有轻微的痴呆症,因而影响了她的短暂记忆力,但她的性格和语言及辨认能力都不受影响。

临床心理学家也持相同看法。

  黄诚子在这起关闭户头纠纷发生前,为了立遗嘱,而主动接受上述两个专家的检查。

Ghost said...

I agree that OCBC should return the money but the implication of 'the verge of bankruptcy' is false. OCBC is in a stronger position than say...DBS. IF OCBC go down, it wouldn't matter where u park your money, the whole of Singapore will be in trouble

nofearSingapore said...

Hi,
I just read about the story in the English papers today.

I think it is more complex than what you wrote.

Reading between th lines ( of the news story), there is an elderly woman who is arguably of diminished mental capacity; an adopted daughter; a bank who is also arguably trying to do the right thing.

It is one thing to say that OCBC should not care if the elderly lady knows what she is doing or if she is not totally in control of the situation and another to say that OCBC is hoarding the money because if that money is withdrawn it will go bankrupt.

Personally I feel that OCBC is doing the right thing.

It wants to make sure that no one is manipulating any one else and the elderly lady is not "short-changed" by her actions of withdrawing the $9m.

Others will argue ( with some justification) that OCBC should not be a nanny or a busy-body.

Dr.Huang

young-pap said...

Hi Huang,
The female retired teacher in question has already been certified mentally sound by not one, but two(!!) colleagues of yours from the health-care profession - a psychiatrist with more than 30 years of experience, and a clinical psychologist!

While a clinical psychologist does not have an MBBS, I do regard him as a respected member of the health care profession with equal standing as a doctor but with diff area of responsibility. A psychiatrist is a medical doctor from your medical fraternity, with specialised training in the diseases of the brain (and in this case, the doc has 30 years of professional experience after passing his M.Med or FRCS or whatever) - I don't think I need to elaborate more on this to you, though :)

Their reports were submitted to OCBC at OCBC's request. But, after finding that the reports were in the woman's favour, OCBC is now demanding that the woman be subjected to a 3rd medical exmination.

- Is this reasonable? Is this right?
- Does this ring an alarm bell in your mind about OCBC's standing?
- Were these reported in the English papers, or perhaps contrary to what you said, the English press had instead been subjected to greater censorship and had over simplified the matter compared to the true complex situation that the Chinese press reported?


May I know your positions:
1. Do you doubt the medical reports and hence the professionals competencies of your two health-care fraternity brothers?

2. If yes, why? Do you have any evidence to substantiate the implied inference (in fact, the only inference one can draw from your statement) that these are two charlatans who have committed professional misconduct, or are otherwise somehow professionally incompetent, in certifying that the woman is mentally sound?

3. If no, why do you think OCBC is "doing the right thing" to request for a 3rd medical examination? How many examinations do you think the woman should be subjected to, before OCBC's action can be deemed as the wrong thing?

Sincerely,
Mr. YPAP

P.S.This is the first time I sign off myself as "Mr. so-and-so". Usually, I prefer to call myself "so-and-so", and leave it to others to confer titles on me, when they address me. It's more satisfying that way, I think :)

nofearSingapore said...

Hi YPAP,

Please note that terms like “charlatans” and phrases such as “professional misconduct/professional incompetent” are yours alone and cannot be ascribed to me. As a member of the medical profession it is our honour code ( Hippocratic oath) never to cast aspersion on my other professional colleagues.

In view of the tone of this conversation and my opinion that meaningful exchange is only possible if one is willing to hear both sides of the story, I will end this conversation here.

But not before saying that it is common when there is dispute regarding medical opinions eg medico-legal cases about who/how much should be paid to accident victims etc, it is extremely common for both sides to get their own medical experts’ opinions without casting aspersions on the different doctors’ professional competence or conduct. The judge ( or arbitrator) will decide what is fair and right.

Thank you.

Dr.Huang

A 60 year old with little money left said...

To Dr. Huang>

Did OCBC hired you?

When people such as myself lost money to wrongfully sold investments, did banks like OCBC or DBS cared?

How could they now claim that they have the best interests of the 92-year old lady at heart?

I'm closing my account with OCBC today!!!

Mr. YOYO said...

I have two questions.

In Singapore, why do people always have a noble excuse when doing something criminal?

And in executing the criminal act, why do the same people accuse the innocent victims of being the criminal?

Two doctors already certified that the 90-year old lady is in good mental condition.

I pity all Singaporeans.

Anonymous said...

mr huang, why u dun answer the questions mr ypap asked you? dun siam by using excuse of "tone" of msg leh, just focus on the msg.


bystander