|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
The legal system is there for one purpose: to prevent the society from causing shit and protecting it.
But it also happens to protect those that do not deserve it. Contracts, when signed by unsuspecting victims, protect the scammers. There is no reasoning, just what is written on black and white.
And that is exactly what happened to my dad.
My dad's english has never been great. I used to always think that he couldn't be someone who graduated from MIT, with his standard of English. ( Yes, he did graduate from MIT, truth. ) He has also always been a giver, never really demanding much. He would take whatever hardship by his stride and keep it all to himself, which doesn't feel so great for anyone once others find out what he's going through.
Just tonight, my dad sat me down and started talking to me. He always do, but today was different. It was all serious.
Over the next thirty minutes, he described how he got scammed by a broker, whom his lawyer suspects is working with the bank to pull it off. In a summary:
- Broker offers to grant him a loan of X amount from "A" bank
- Dad signs contract, with the condition that the broker receives certain percentage of that loan once it is approved.
- Bank sends approval letter.
- Broker starts demanding for his amount, BUT the amount he demanded was less than what we are supposed to give him. (Around few hundred bucks less)
- Bank sends loan cancellation letter, with reasons stating that my dad's company's turnover does not mean the requirement to get the X amount of loan. (Question is, why didn't the bank check this before sending the approval letter?)
- Dad requests for return of money.
- Broker responds verbally (no written notes/contracts) by saying that he'll get another bank to loan the X amount.
- Months pass, no response.
- Dad "fires" him.
- Few months later, broker sends a court letter to dad, telling him to "pay off the remaining amount" plus the legal fees.
- Dad reports case to police, police says no fault.
- Dad reports case to prosecutors. Prosecutors say the broker has violated nothing in the contract, and that if taken to court, my dad will lose as he has broken one of the agreements (he did not pay the full amount), plus he'll be fighting against a major bank.
Now, TL. I really have no idea how my dad is supposed to win this case and claim back his money. It's a really huge sum of money, which I shall not disclose. But my dad, mom and I (my sister's in China on an attachment course, she does not know yet) are feeling so upset yet helpless over this. Odds are definitely not in our favor. Of course, legally speaking, my dad is at fault because he didn't pay up the full amount. But really? Apply some basic common sense and reasoning and I'm pretty sure we can all agree on who's the one at fault. The thing is, I don't know how to translate this to legal terms.
Anyone, law student or not, if you can provide some help that tip the case in our favor even by a fraction of a margin, I'd be grateful.
|
16953 Posts
Are you still in Singapore? If so, I could edit that in the title to make it more clear.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
Yep, still in Singapore. though i figure an american or any other person can help equally as well.
|
Hong Kong20321 Posts
wtf broker and DBS bank scamming people!?
|
My uncle is a barrister/my cousin is doing law, I'll see if I can hit up either of them tomorrow and if they have any experience with Singaporean law or if any Australian law advice they have can apply.
Hopefully someone else who sees this thread can help if I can't get in contact with either of them, I'm sure we have at least a few well qualified people on TL (didn't Hot_Bid do a law degree, you could try PMing him, I guess).
Thanks for all the contributions you've made to the site :D
|
Dad signs contract, with the condition that the broker receives certain percentage of that loan once it is approved.
I'm not a law student, but... Does this contract describe what happens in case bank won't approve on the loan (how much broker is paid, if ever)? I thnk this might be hugely relevant.
Also, I assume your Dad has a document confirming that he paid the broker lesser amount of cash. However, from what you wrote, I think his mistake was not re-signing the contract with broker, that would include new, lowered payement that guy agreed to recieve.
Finally, can you elaboate what does 'my dad's company turnover' mean? I don't see the context here.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 21:56 alffla wrote:
wtf broker and DBS bank scamming people!?
supposedly, anyway. the thing is, we can't call out to the government about this because DBS is a government-owned bank, and if we talk shit about them, and we're in their turf... you know what happens to us.
On March 23 2011 21:58 Suc wrote:
My uncle is a barrister/my cousin is doing law, I'll see if I can hit up either of them tomorrow and if they have any experience with Singaporean law or if any Australian law advice they have can apply.
Hopefully someone else who sees this thread can help if I can't get in contact with either of them, I'm sure we have at least a few well qualified people on TL (didn't Hot_Bid do a law degree, you could try PMing him, I guess).
Thanks for all the contributions you've made to the site :D
thank you so much, any help will be forever be appreciated.
On March 23 2011 22:02 popzags wrote:Show nested quote +Dad signs contract, with the condition that the broker receives certain percentage of that loan once it is approved. I'm not a law student, but... Does this contract describe what happens in case bank won't approve on the loan (how much broker is paid, if ever)? I thnk this might be hugely relevant. Also, I assume your Dad has a document confirming that he paid the broker lesser amount of cash. However, from what you wrote, I think his mistake was not re-signing the contract with broker, that would include new, lowered payement that guy agreed to recieve. Finally, can you elaboate what does 'my dad's company turnover' mean? I don't see the context here.
nope, it didn't indicate it. that's the thing too. my dad is really upset over how he missed such details...
yep, he didn't sign a new contract. another mistake.
and basically, my dad's annual revenue isn't high enough to convince the bank to loan us the X amount.
|
i don't know if this would help you but try complaining to CASE.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 22:12 JMave wrote:
i don't know if this would help you but try complaining to CASE.
what are the other agencies? other than CASE. the agency that goes around checking for corruption and shit
|
i'm not relaly sure about the other agencies. but my family had issues with the bank for like over a decade and complaining to CASE seemed to work.
|
Well, from my average guy viewpoint, if your dad can prove to the court that no relevant circumstances around his company changed between the first (approval) bank letter and the second (rejection) bank letter, he might demand a compensation from bank for cancelling the loan for no reason; after all, his company lost some benefits due to sudden, unjustified loan cancellation not to mention the whole broker affair (which is very weird TBH).
It looks like a very difficult case to win, though.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 22:19 JMave wrote:
i'm not relaly sure about the other agencies. but my family had issues with the bank for like over a decade and complaining to CASE seemed to work.
oh alright, thanks a lot!
|
Law students can't give binding advice, you should really go to a lawyer. Assuming SG contract law is not too different from Canadian contract law (both common law countries that has english law as the basis for their laws), here's what I see:
My dad's english has never been great. I used to always think that he couldn't be someone who graduated from MIT, with his standard of English.
depending on how bad his english is, you might have a case for unconscionability, aka your dad didn't know what he was signing, therefore the contract is void.
- Dad signs contract, with the condition that the broker receives certain percentage of that loan once it is approved.
how is the word 'approved' to be interpreted? does it really mean that you just a letter of approval that might be cancelled? ("approved" doesn't necessarily mean "letter of approval") If your dad understood it mean "bank actually gives me loan", then he might have case, but it's a stretch.
- Broker responds verbally (no written notes/contracts) by saying that he'll get another bank to loan the X amount.
Do you have any other evidence that this conversation existed (hell, the broker might be stupid and even admit that he told him this)? If so you might have the broker on the hook for a new contract or promissory estoppel.
- Dad reports case to prosecutors. Prosecutors say the broker has violated nothing in the contract, and that if taken to court, my dad will lose as he has broken one of the agreements (he did not pay the full amount), plus he'll be fighting against a major bank.
lol, don't necessarily have to sue the bank, you might be able to sue the broker personally for negligent misrepresentation (aka he didn't explain things well enough, while knowing that ur dad's english is not very good).
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 22:21 Kalingingsong wrote:Law students can't give binding advice, you should really go to a lawyer. Assuming SG contract law is not too different from Canadian contract law (both common law countries that has english law as the basis for their laws), here's what I see: Show nested quote +My dad's english has never been great. I used to always think that he couldn't be someone who graduated from MIT, with his standard of English. depending on how bad his english is, you might have a case for unconscionability, aka your dad didn't know what he was signing, therefore the contract is void.
it's not horri-bad. he can get by doing businesses, but just enough to be understood. his english is really sub-par.
Show nested quote +- Dad signs contract, with the condition that the broker receives certain percentage of that loan once it is approved. how is the word 'approved' to be interpreted? does it really mean that you just a letter of approval that might be cancelled? ("approved" doesn't necessarily mean "letter of approval") If your dad understood it mean "bank actually gives me loan", then he might have case, but it's a stretch.
yep, saying that "we have approved, but we haven't actually given you yet." i still don't understand how this can be cancelled though.
Show nested quote +- Broker responds verbally (no written notes/contracts) by saying that he'll get another bank to loan the X amount. Do you have any other evidence that this conversation existed (hell, the broker might be stupid and even admit that he told him this)? If so you might have the broker on the hook for a new contract or promissory estoppel.
no evidence whatsoever. if we did then it would really be favorable to us.
Show nested quote +- Dad reports case to prosecutors. Prosecutors say the broker has violated nothing in the contract, and that if taken to court, my dad will lose as he has broken one of the agreements (he did not pay the full amount), plus he'll be fighting against a major bank. lol, don't necessarily have to sue the bank, you might be able to sue the broker personally for negligent misrepresentation (aka he didn't explain things well enough, while knowing that ur dad's english is not very good).
hmm but the thing is, we don't know what to nitpick on. like, pushing on what points did he not explain enough.
|
Well, I study American Law and can't really comment on how Singapore law works. The answer to your question, I would imagine, largely depends on what contract was signed.
The situation does appear fishy though. I mean, you were supposed to give a % to the broker once the loan was approved? I would've thought it makes more sense to give it to him once you have the money in hand. Maybe you can sue the bank for approving the loan and then canceling it. Your argument could be that the bank and you entered into a contract, you guys acted in reliance of this contract and the bank breached the K by later declining and they should be liable for the damages you incur on acting in reliance of the contract.
Then again, I'm just throwing guesses around. I have no knowledge of Singapore law and I don't have the full facts of the case.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 22:34 Sultan.P wrote:
Well, I study American Law and can't really comment on how Singapore law works. The answer to your question, I would imagine, largely depends on what contract was signed.
The situation does appear fishy though. I mean, you were supposed to give a % to the broker once the loan was approved? I would've thought it makes more sense to give it to him once you have the money in hand. Maybe you can sue the bank for approving the loan and then canceling it. Your argument could be that the bank and you entered into a contract, you guys acted in reliance of this contract and the bank breached the K by later declining and they should be liable for the damages you incur on acting in reliance of the contract.
Then again, I'm just throwing guesses around. I have no knowledge of Singapore law and I don't have the full facts of the case.
yep, but the broker kept calling and texting my dad for the money (which i remind you again, was an amount stated less than the one in the contract). my dad got annoyed so paid first. big mistake again.
your stand seems strong though. i'd consolidate all these and pass them to my dad, who will check with his lawyer if they're feasible.
|
Please explain what exactly happened after the broker got you the loan-approval.
A. Was there a signed contract between your dad and the bank?
B. Your post implies your dad is a businessman - is that right?
C. WAS there some "dad's company's turnover"?
Basically I can tell you this using the information you gave:
There are different phases of a loan.
1. loan-application
2. borrowing-power check
3. credit-ranking check
4. check and estimation of the loan security
5. credit approval
6. loan-contract
7. appropriation of loan security
8. appropriation of the loan (contract signing)
If your dad agreed on the clause in the brokercontract, that once surpassing point 5 the broker will be granted his courtage-demand, well, then he has a case.
Usually the broker gets his courtage only in case point 8. is surpassed. This might be the best point to attack in case of a judicial proceeding since there are some legal ruses you can use.
Furthermore you can always sue the bank to grant you the loan if there was no "sudden company turnover" (which is unclear to me atm).
Please note that all my explanations are derived from german law and that there might be differences to your law system.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 22:44 C.W. wrote:
Please explain what exactly happened after the broker got you the loan-approval.
A. Was there a signed contract between your dad and the bank?
B. Your post implies your dad is a businessman - is that right?
C. WAS there some "dad's company's turnover"?
Basically I can tell you this using the information you gave:
There are different phases of a loan.
1. loan-application
2. borrowing-power check
3. credit-ranking check
4. check and estimation of the loan security
5. credit approval
6. loan-contract
7. appropriation of loan security
8. appropriation of the loan (contract signing)
If your dad agreed on the clause in the brokercontract, that once surpassing point 5 the broker will be granted his courtage-demand, well, then he has a case.
Usually the broker gets his courtage only in case point 8. is surpassed. This might be the best point to attack in case of a judicial proceeding since there are some legal ruses you can use.
Furthermore you can always sue the bank to grant you the loan if there was no "sudden company turnover" (which is unclear to me atm).
Please note that all my explanations are derived from german law and that there might be differences to your law system.
A: yes
B: yes
C: turnover basically means revenue, i suppose. my dad used the term "turnover" but im guessing he means the same thing as revenue.
im not sure if that was written on the contract, it usually is the case, no? i'll ask him to check with his lawyer and the contract once again. i'm not sure what you mean by your sentence "Furthermore you can always sue the bank to grant you the loan if there was no "sudden company turnover" (which is unclear to me atm)." though.
also, based on the order, they should check if they can approve the loan first, before sending the approval letter, right? so why on earth did the bank send the letter before even checking?
|
I would imagine that the bank probably has some terms somewhere indicating that they can cancel. But if the reliance argument can work that would certainly be good, however, as far as I know the reliance rules is somewhat unique to the US (and civil law countries), that argument would not be as feasible in Canada for example. So it really depends on jurisdiction.
your stand seems strong though. i'd consolidate all these and pass them to my dad, who will check with his lawyer if they're feasible.
this seems fishy tho lol, why do you ask us when your dad already have a lawyer? loll
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 22:52 Kalingingsong wrote:I would imagine that the bank probably has some terms somewhere indicating that they can cancel. But if the reliance argument can work that would certainly be good, however, as far as I know the reliance rules is somewhat unique to the US (and civil law countries), that argument would not be as feasible in Canada for example. So it really depends on jurisdiction. Show nested quote +your stand seems strong though. i'd consolidate all these and pass them to my dad, who will check with his lawyer if they're feasible. this seems fishy tho lol, why do you ask us when your dad already have a lawyer? loll
what seems fishy? what is wrong with trying to look around for any bit of help that i can give my dad? power of many > power of one.
|
I would say the verbal conversations altered the contract. In my legal system, verbal contracts are allowed.
After that, it's all a case of proving things. If you prove the conversations, you win because he didn't fulfill his contract, therefore you have no obligation to pay. The old contract is void.
|
what seems fishy? what is wrong with trying to look around for any bit of help that i can give my dad? power of many > power of one.
well no, its just that, if your dad's lawyer is doing his job, he should be able to tell you most of what you need to know within a reasonable time [he's suppose to be the expert after all, if not you might want to switch to a new lawyer]. The rest of us can only give you vague assessments based on laws from other jurisdictions (I think so far we've had US, Canada, and even Russia? [which is not a common law country]). Which might be helpful, but ultimately its up to your lawyer to apply the laws of Singapore.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 23 2011 23:00 SkytoM wrote:
I would say the verbal conversations altered the contract. In my legal system, verbal contracts are allowed.
After that, it's all a case of proving things. If you prove the conversations, you win because he didn't fulfill his contract, therefore you have no obligation to pay. The old contract is void.
not sure how to prove the conversations though. maybe recording somewhere...
On March 23 2011 23:03 Kalingingsong wrote:Show nested quote +what seems fishy? what is wrong with trying to look around for any bit of help that i can give my dad? power of many > power of one. well no, its just that, if your dad's lawyer is doing his job, he should be able to tell you most of what you need to know within a reasonable time [he's suppose to be the expert after all, if not you might want to switch to a new lawyer]. The rest of us can only give you vague assessments based on laws from other jurisdictions (I think so far we've had US, Canada, and even Russia? [which is not a common law country]). Which might be helpful, but ultimately its up to your lawyer to apply the laws of Singapore.
right, sorry. just really upset and frustrated, so i'm sorry for my snappy response. i havent met the lawyer and i dont think my dad told me the exact 100% of what the lawyer said, that's why im just trying to see if i can help in any way.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
I strongly suggest you consult another professional. Getting legal advice online in a situation like this is a terrible idea.
|
On March 23 2011 22:19 JMave wrote:
i'm not relaly sure about the other agencies. but my family had issues with the bank for like over a decade and complaining to CASE seemed to work.
CASE could work, but we're talking about brokers and financial institutions here. Might be wise to lodge a complaint with MAS (Monetary Authorities of Singapore) too.
MAS has been very tight on these sort of transactions following 2008.
|
That smells like shit, but asking for legal advice that's specific to Singapore on an international forum from foreigners with no legal experience or knowledge of your country's legal system is gonna get you no where.
|
also, based on the order, they should check if they can approve the loan first, before sending the approval letter, right? so why on earth did the bank send the letter before even checking?
I thought that they approved of the loan application not the loan.
But why the hell, indeed.
"Furthermore you can always sue the bank to grant you the loan if there was no "sudden company turnover" (which is unclear to me atm)." though.
As someone already stated your dad can always sue the bank for damages because he depended on the contract with the bank (-> "breach of faith"), so that the bank has essentially to pay the broker.
Guess that's the easiest solution here.
|
I don't even see how you're legally bound to pay him seeing how the condition was that you'd actually get the loan if the broker were to receieve a % of it.
But what's been mentioned before is that all you can get from law students not residing in singapore is a comment on how it works in our jurisdictions which doesn't really help you at all because you need experts on singapore law. What's your lawyers stance on this, like more specifically? And on what grounds does the broker claim that you are legally bound to pay him?
|
by the way the op phrases it, the broker is due a percentage of the loan recieved, but your dad hasnt been loaned any money yet, so infact the broker has taken money for "work" he hasnt done, or cant do. which is either misrepresentation or fraud.
unless im missing something it looks like a free win?
|
I'm a pretty bad law student but I can offer just a couple insights. I'm from a common law country as well, so I'd assume the law isn't too much different.
Based on the facts, it doesn't seem you have any evidence that the bank did anything wrong. Depending on whether your dad can get more information and credible evidence, he might have a case of fraud against the bank and the broker. However, that's probably impossible given the lack of information behind the bank's decision-making. In any case, your dad should probably avoid a case against a major bank as they'll presumably drag the case on in cost and time by procedural means.
So your best bet is against the broker, framed under contract. If your dad wants to claim the money back or avoid paying the rest to the broker, then the case will hinge on the wording of contract itself as it's basically the conclusive evidence of the agreement between your dad and the broker. Specifically, the case will hinge on the interpretation of "approval". Your dad should probably look for circumstantial evidence pointing to the interpretation of the time of "approval" as when the loan money is received, as well examining standard practice of similar loan brokering contracts. I'm not sure if your dad can use the point of his handicapped English since the wording of the contract is pretty much conclusive, and most likely the standard practice will be considered conclusive evidence of what "approval" actually means.
Anyway, as I said, I'm a pretty bad law student, so you should definitely consult a professional lawyer. There's probably other means of remedy like what Kalingingsong said about the verbal agreement forming the basis of promissory estoppel, but that would only work if your dad relied on that promise to his detriment (and from what you said, it seems that the hurt was already suffered before that verbal agreement, and plus you'd need evidence of the agreement).
|
On March 23 2011 23:26 turdburgler wrote:
by the way the op phrases it, the broker is due a percentage of the loan recieved, but your dad hasnt been loaned any money yet, so infact the broker has taken money for "work" he hasnt done, or cant do. which is either misrepresentation or fraud.
unless im missing something it looks like a free win?
Yeah, but the OP would have phrased in the way that he and his father understood the contract. However, the agreement will be what is actually worded in the contract itself. Maybe, the OP's father can claim misrep from the broker by saying something and asking him to sign another. However, the Court would probably say that his father should have read and understood the contract thoroughly.
So it's gonna hinge on what the contract actually means, and if it's up for interpretation, then what standard practice and circumstantial evidence will conclude it means. Basically, we can't help the OP any further unless we see the contract ourselves.
In all honesty, I think the OP's father has a strong case, but it can all change based on the contract itself.
|
I can't offer you any help but I'm sorry your family has to go through this, I hope you have a positive outcome.
|
Oh boy contract law - no one on here can help you and I've graduated.
Thing is you need someone who knows what they are doing to look at the contract and look at the way in which this remuneration works. You say that the broker was meant to "get a percentage of the loan on approval of the loan".
But in essence the loan was declined? Thus he would get no remuneration but we need the exact contractual wording not your interpretation of the wording. There may be other terms that deal with what happens if there is a decline and if there are inconsistencies parts of the contract could be severed or the contract could be void due to them.
Mate there are heaps of issues that could theoretically apply... You have to look at the specific wording of the contract and construct it in your mind given the local legal principles.
Thing is because you don't have any legal training you won't know what to look for and what is important. Best seek a commercial lawyer and NOT a local wills+conveyancing lawyer as they don't know what they are doing.
Also local laws may have a slight twist to them but if that twist applies to your situation it means a completely different outcome. You should absolutely not listen to advice given on the basis of another country's laws.
Good luck!!
|
I recommend getting a good lawyer for advice.
Would going to the media help? I think it's just a couple of bad people in the DBS bank doing shit like this, but the bank should at least take some responsibility.
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad.
|
On March 23 2011 23:42 tyCe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 23 2011 23:26 turdburgler wrote:
by the way the op phrases it, the broker is due a percentage of the loan recieved, but your dad hasnt been loaned any money yet, so infact the broker has taken money for "work" he hasnt done, or cant do. which is either misrepresentation or fraud.
unless im missing something it looks like a free win? Yeah, but the OP would have phrased in the way that he and his father understood the contract. However, the agreement will be what is actually worded in the contract itself. Maybe, the OP's father can claim misrep from the broker by saying something and asking him to sign another. However, the Court would probably say that his father should have read and understood the contract thoroughly. So it's gonna hinge on what the contract actually means, and if it's up for interpretation, then what standard practice and circumstantial evidence will conclude it means. Basically, we can't help the OP any further unless we see the contract ourselves. In all honesty, I think the OP's father has a strong case, but it can all change based on the contract itself.
as far as im aware, atleast in english law. if you are told one thing, and they give you a contract that states another you arent expected to of actually read it, because as a hired consultant/professionally they are expect to be more experience with the jargon and phrasing than you are, and its part of their job to explain it to you.
but i might be wrong, and it might be situational
|
I'm sorry for your loss.
Like others have said, your dad needs to engage a real lawyer for advice. What legal recourse available to your dad really depends on the exact wordings of the contract. You can't really build a case just with a brief summary of the facts.
|
On March 24 2011 00:32 konadora wrote:
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad.
I don't understand why you're still accepting advice from people that have no understanding of law, let alone the specific laws that govern your country. Find a different lawyer if you feel yours is bad enough that you feel inclined to get input from the internet.
shit, if this is gonna have legs in a court of law, probably the last thing you want to do is go blabbering about it on a public forum
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On March 24 2011 01:05 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 00:32 konadora wrote:
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad. I don't understand why you're still accepting advice from people that have no understanding of law, let alone the specific laws that govern your country. Find a different lawyer if you feel yours is bad enough that you feel inclined to get input from the internet. shit, if this is gonna have legs in a court of law, probably the last thing you want to do is go blabbering about it on a public forum
This thread is amazing. Someone who wasn't actually part of the situation trying to give complex details of a contract he's never seen over the internet to potential law students using third-party information. What could go wrong?
|
konadora
Singapore66117 Posts
On March 24 2011 01:05 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 00:32 konadora wrote:
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad. I don't understand why you're still accepting advice from people that have no understanding of law, let alone the specific laws that govern your country. Find a different lawyer if you feel yours is bad enough that you feel inclined to get input from the internet. shit, if this is gonna have legs in a court of law, probably the last thing you want to do is go blabbering about it on a public forum
i didn't meet my dad's lawyer, so i have no idea about his capabilities. but i think the notion of helping here is great, but realistically it's gotten a bit messy. i was just trying to see if i can do anything to help my dad in any way. though the lawyer should have covered everything.
thanks for the responses guys, i'll ask my dad to go through the options here and see if the lawyer has already covered all these. thanks a lot once again.
|
On March 24 2011 01:22 konadora wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 01:05 Hawk wrote:On March 24 2011 00:32 konadora wrote:
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad. I don't understand why you're still accepting advice from people that have no understanding of law, let alone the specific laws that govern your country. Find a different lawyer if you feel yours is bad enough that you feel inclined to get input from the internet. shit, if this is gonna have legs in a court of law, probably the last thing you want to do is go blabbering about it on a public forum i didn't meet my dad's lawyer, so i have no idea about his capabilities. but i think the notion of helping here is great, but realistically it's gotten a bit messy. i was just trying to see if i can do anything to help my dad in any way. though the lawyer should have covered everything. thanks for the responses guys, i'll ask my dad to go through the options here and see if the lawyer has already covered all these. thanks a lot once again.
You're only gonna give your dad bad advice, or you're going to piss off your dad's lawyer by interjecting with dumbass, misinformed opinions. You've never seen those joke rate signs in mechanic shops '$80/hr normal, $100 if you tried DIY, $150 if you're gonna sit and give your opinion?' Having someone try to tell you something they read on the internet is annoying as shit.
There is absolutely zero positive that comes of this thread for you
|
No worries as long as you produce proof that the bank didnt give you any actual loan.
As regards the initial payment made to the broker, Id say you have a strong case but it might be worth your while to make an outofcourt settlement saying that he can keep the sum.
If your dad is a simple guy who doesnt have any political connections, I suggest he try the least dangerous way out of this. Shit could get dangerous real fast.
...Or maybe Im just thinking from an Indian perspective... Hopefully brokers in Singapore are less strongarmed than brokers are over here! 
GL.
|
Calgary25969 Posts
On March 24 2011 01:51 Hawk wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 01:22 konadora wrote:On March 24 2011 01:05 Hawk wrote:On March 24 2011 00:32 konadora wrote:
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad. I don't understand why you're still accepting advice from people that have no understanding of law, let alone the specific laws that govern your country. Find a different lawyer if you feel yours is bad enough that you feel inclined to get input from the internet. shit, if this is gonna have legs in a court of law, probably the last thing you want to do is go blabbering about it on a public forum i didn't meet my dad's lawyer, so i have no idea about his capabilities. but i think the notion of helping here is great, but realistically it's gotten a bit messy. i was just trying to see if i can do anything to help my dad in any way. though the lawyer should have covered everything. thanks for the responses guys, i'll ask my dad to go through the options here and see if the lawyer has already covered all these. thanks a lot once again. You're only gonna give your dad bad advice, or you're going to piss off your dad's lawyer by interjecting with dumbass, misinformed opinions. You've never seen those joke rate signs in mechanic shops '$80/hr normal, $100 if you tried DIY, $150 if you're gonna sit and give your opinion?' Having someone try to tell you something they read on the internet is annoying as shit. There is absolutely zero positive that comes of this thread for you
I have one experience with this. During the BP gulf disaster, a lot of internet "engineers" came out of the woodwork to explain how they would fix the problem easily, not understanding things like what pipeline pressure is or how pumps actually operate. It was extremely annoying to read people calling BP engineers idiots and giving their potential solutions filled with innumerable holes.
I assume this is the same. Get a lawyer and tell him about the situation and what you need, but don't tell him about the law.
|
On March 23 2011 21:35 konadora wrote:
The legal system is there for one purpose: to prevent the society from causing shit and protecting it.
But it also happens to protect those that do not deserve it. Contracts, when signed by unsuspecting victims, protect the scammers. There is no reasoning, just what is written on black and white.
And that is exactly what happened to my dad.
My dad's english has never been great. I used to always think that he couldn't be someone who graduated from MIT, with his standard of English. ( Yes, he did graduate from MIT, truth. ) He has also always been a giver, never really demanding much. He would take whatever hardship by his stride and keep it all to himself, which doesn't feel so great for anyone once others find out what he's going through.
Just tonight, my dad sat me down and started talking to me. He always do, but today was different. It was all serious.
Over the next thirty minutes, he described how he got scammed by a broker, whom his lawyer suspects is working with the bank to pull it off. In a summary:
- Broker offers to grant him a loan of X amount from "A" bank
- Dad signs contract, with the condition that the broker receives certain percentage of that loan once it is approved.
- Bank sends approval letter.
- Broker starts demanding for his amount, BUT the amount he demanded was less than what we are supposed to give him. (Around few hundred bucks less)
- Bank sends loan cancellation letter, with reasons stating that my dad's company's turnover does not mean the requirement to get the X amount of loan. (Question is, why didn't the bank check this before sending the approval letter?)
- Dad requests for return of money.
- Broker responds verbally (no written notes/contracts) by saying that he'll get another bank to loan the X amount.
- Months pass, no response.
- Dad "fires" him.
- Few months later, broker sends a court letter to dad, telling him to "pay off the remaining amount" plus the legal fees.
- Dad reports case to police, police says no fault.
- Dad reports case to prosecutors. Prosecutors say the broker has violated nothing in the contract, and that if taken to court, my dad will lose as he has broken one of the agreements (he did not pay the full amount), plus he'll be fighting against a major bank.
Now, TL. I really have no idea how my dad is supposed to win this case and claim back his money. It's a really huge sum of money, which I shall not disclose. But my dad, mom and I (my sister's in China on an attachment course, she does not know yet) are feeling so upset yet helpless over this. Odds are definitely not in our favor. Of course, legally speaking, my dad is at fault because he didn't pay up the full amount. But really? Apply some basic common sense and reasoning and I'm pretty sure we can all agree on who's the one at fault. The thing is, I don't know how to translate this to legal terms.
Anyone, law student or not, if you can provide some help that tip the case in our favor even by a fraction of a margin, I'd be grateful.
Unfortunately you can't translate that into legal terms. It doesn't matter how wrong you think it is or how fucking awful it seems in court, you have to go by facts. If the contract states something, then most likely it will hold.
|
Along with several others, I also think it'll be pretty hard, if not impossible to get proper help over here.
Even if we were all well-versed in Singapore law (which most of us aren't), it'll be hard for us to say anything that'll be very accurately helpful because we have never seen the contract or know what details are in it. Hopefully your official lawyer will be able to find a way out/find a similar case that happened before to help your cause.
Anyway, for those that are interested to know, Singapore's legal system is indeed based on the English common law tradition.
To the guy above me - To be fair to the law system though, it is pretty just most of the time. It does not always follow exactly whatever is in the contract, because in some cases the terms of some contracts are just too unfair if followed exactly.
|
On March 24 2011 02:17 Chill wrote:Show nested quote +On March 24 2011 01:51 Hawk wrote:On March 24 2011 01:22 konadora wrote:On March 24 2011 01:05 Hawk wrote:On March 24 2011 00:32 konadora wrote:
just another bit of info that my mom just told me:
the broker apparently didn't give a copy of the contract to my dad, and now he's not answering calls, nor is he willing to give a copy of the contract over to my dad. I don't understand why you're still accepting advice from people that have no understanding of law, let alone the specific laws that govern your country. Find a different lawyer if you feel yours is bad enough that you feel inclined to get input from the internet. shit, if this is gonna have legs in a court of law, probably the last thing you want to do is go blabbering about it on a public forum i didn't meet my dad's lawyer, so i have no idea about his capabilities. but i think the notion of helping here is great, but realistically it's gotten a bit messy. i was just trying to see if i can do anything to help my dad in any way. though the lawyer should have covered everything. thanks for the responses guys, i'll ask my dad to go through the options here and see if the lawyer has already covered all these. thanks a lot once again. You're only gonna give your dad bad advice, or you're going to piss off your dad's lawyer by interjecting with dumbass, misinformed opinions. You've never seen those joke rate signs in mechanic shops '$80/hr normal, $100 if you tried DIY, $150 if you're gonna sit and give your opinion?' Having someone try to tell you something they read on the internet is annoying as shit. There is absolutely zero positive that comes of this thread for you I have one experience with this. During the BP gulf disaster, a lot of internet "engineers" came out of the woodwork to explain how they would fix the problem easily, not understanding things like what pipeline pressure is or how pumps actually operate. It was extremely annoying to read people calling BP engineers idiots and giving their potential solutions filled with innumerable holes. I assume this is the same. Get a lawyer and tell him about the situation and what you need, but don't tell him about the law.
Yeah I can only imagine how fun that was haha. I work in media. I get fits when dumb people talk about journalism ethics and bias in the media, blah blah blah.
|
I'd mostly agree with Chill and Hawk here, however, if you really would like an opinion from TL, maybe check the man power thread (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=84245 ) , d1v is listed as doing contract law, while in Europe, he can maybe tell you something less ill-informed than the rest of us.
Good Luck and I hope everything goes well for your family!
|
the only way this thread can help you is if a lurker here is an excellent lawyer, who is familiar with singaporean law and is currently in singapore, so you can meet with and discuss the case in detail
since i am not that person, the best i can say in this thread is good luck and i wish you all the best. sounds like a frustrating situation to be in.
|
I don't know why it is an issue if the broker demands less than the desired amount, other than the fact that you shouldn't pay the amount.
I think you'll have a case by arguing that not receiving the bank loan amounts to a rejection of the bank loan, in which your Dad does not need to pay the broker. Since the contract states that you'll have to pay him the % only upon approval.
If you feel that this is a scam, you have the burden of proof to show that the broker collaborated with the bank or whoever. This situation will be quite difficult and it may be extremely costly to proceed in this direction.
I've studied basic business law, inclusive of contract law. A lot would depend on the contents of the contract which your dad signed. If your dad really feels that the contract terms are not what it seems to be and the broker doesn't deserved to get paid (I feel he doesn't), then just don't pay. He'll probably take you to court though, but a sufficiently strong stand should suffice.
*Note: Please ensure that you have a case in the first place, it probably is better to leave things to your dad's lawyer, especially if you can't part with crucial information such as the terms of the contract.
|
Seems kinda bogus to me. You sign a contract to give a percent of a loan to a broker. Money was never received. Broker demands percent?
What kind of retarded contract was it?
|
If you really want to help, instead of trying to find law advice online I suggest you either try to find lawyers online or try to do background checks on this guy or this bank and see what kind of facts you can get up. Law is not so easily boiled down, but maybe you can find some ammunition for your father or your father's lawyer to work with in terms of unethical behavior, if you feel that is actually the issue.
|
If there really is a lot of money at stake, the best advice anyone on this thread can give you is to hire a good Singaporean lawyer . . .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
