anaudienceof3: Summing Up (72)

13.

12 May 19

Email to Prime Minister

Meet-The-People Sessions

Dear Prime Minister,

Meet-The-People Sessions

There is some difficulties at MPS of Pasir Ris-Punggol GRC.

Mr Teo wrote to CPF, but instead of replying to me as usual I found out at the MPS that they had replied to Mr Teo. I did not read the letter when Mr Teo pointed to it while asking me whether I had received it. The few lines in the letter could have informed Mr Teo that they had already replied to me in previous correspondence as Mr Teo had said to me.

In my accompanying letter of 10 May 19 titled Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE handed in at the MPS, I wrote that in most of the previous correspondence with officers they did not address the subject in question followed by three questions to be addressed by CPF LIFE.

My email of 14 Mar 19 showed how CPF officers did not address the subject in question. Obvious mistakes were made with CPF refund after sale of flat and with monthly payout from CPF LIFE.

Mr Teo said he would write to CPF again. It would be the third times that he had written to them on CPF LIFE since my email of 3 Mar 19. There is urgency since final deduction from Retirement Account to CPF LIFE is two months before monthly payout begin in Aug 19.

It is likely CPF may again not give an interim reply within the required number of days and a full reply within the weeks or a month as stated in their service commitment.

I know the solution will not come easy and have therefore made my request to Mr Teo a few times to ask for your assistance. This is only one of five issues needed to be addressed by officers that were listed in my letter of 5 Apr 19 titled Bringing Up To The Prime Minister. All my emails and letters to officers and Mr Teo are in Summing Up (72) of my blog.

Yours Sincerely,

12.

10 May 19

Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session

Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE

10 May 2019

Mr Teo Chee Hean

Blk 738 Pasir Ris Drive 10

#01-21

Singapore 510738

Dear Sir,

Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE

I refer to our meeting and the letter you wrote to CPF on 5 Apr 19. This is one of those times when officers did not reply to email or letter written to them. It cannot be in the public interest other than of self or group interest.

Normally officer would give me a reply by the required number of days. They had delayed subsequent enquiries on the same subject by the number of days each time. They had informed me a number of times that they had replied numerous times and would no longer reply to me on the same subject. They had officers informed me by referring to email or letter of previous officers.

In most of my cases officers did reply, but they did not address the subject in question.

The questions on CPF LIFE:

Was it in my interest to have brought the additional CPF LIFE on 27 Sep 10? The officer who asked me to buy did not give any explanation. No important notes or grace period was given. In fact, there was no need for the additional CPF LIFE because it was stated that the final transfer from Retirement Account to CPF LIFE would be made one or two months before monthly payout began at age 65. Retirement Account paid an interest rate of 4% whereas calculation in my spreadsheet showed the additional CPF LIFE paid an average of 3.2% (upper range rate of return plus lower range rate of return divided by two).

If rate of return from CPF LIFE were lower than Retirement Account, could this have been one of the reason to make the purchase of CPF LIFE compulsory as stipulated in the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme? The second additional CPF LIFE was purchased on 12 Jan 15 under the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme. The spreadsheet showed the second additional CPF LIFE paid an average of 2.9%. A much lower rate of return.

Was there a mistake in the monthly payout from CPF LIFE with the interest amount of $1757.88 transferred from Retirement Account under the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme? Without even considering interest rate and inflation over time the additional $4.21 monthly payout from age 65 added up to less than the $1757.88 over a lifetime. The spreadsheet could only show a rate of return less than 0.001%.

For more details on the CPF LIFE, please refer to Salient Points (40) and my letter of 5 Apr 19 titled Bringing Up To The Prime Minister.

Yours Sincerely,

11.

5 May 19

Email to MP

Dear Mr Teo,

I refer to our meeting on 5 Apr 19 and my letter Bringing Up To The Prime Minister submitted on the same date.

Of the five issues, the first two issues brought up to officers were not addressed.

At the meeting of 5 Apr 19 you again wrote to CPF on the monthly payout from CPF LIFE, but to date there is no reply from CPF.

I refer to https://www.psd.gov.sg/who-we-are/our-service-commitment:

“Feedback and Enquiries

Respond to letters and faxes within 10-14 days

If we need more time, we will give an interim reply within 10 – 14 working days and a full reply within 1 month.”

Yours Sincerely,

10.

29 Apr 19

Email to Resale Section of HDB

Dear [Sir],

I refer to your reference 01110A14/NBM of the email dated 16 Apr 19 in reply to my email of 10 Mar 19.

I negotiated the price with the buyers on 25 Jan 14 in the presence of salespersons for seller and buyer. If the Option To Purchase (OTP) was signed on 25 Jan 14 as indicated in the OTP, why wasn’t the OTP handed to me on the same day. Clause 5.1(b) of the OTP stated “deliver the signed Option (original copy) to the Seller”. And if I had received payment of option fee and exercise fee, were there receipts.

The OTP was not given to me. I did not remember receiving any fee on 25 Jan 14.

Is there the original OTP I could collect and the receipts showing we had received the fees?

Yours Sincerely,

5 Apr 19

Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session

Bringing Up To The Prime Minister

5 Apr 2019

Mr Teo Chee Hean

Blk 738 Pasir Ris Drive 10

#01-21

Singapore 510738

Dear Sir,

Bringing Up To The Prime Minister

I refer to my email of 31 Mar 19 on the various issues in the hope that you will bring up to the prime minister.

Since our meeting and accompanying letter to you in Govt Dept (10) on 28 Dec 18, the issues that were brought up to HDB and CPF had not been addressed by officer giving the reply. It was the same sort of replies given many times before.

There were issues where actions were taken. I could think of the stopping of noise from the neighbour after Standpoint (34) was published in 2012, assistance given before the flat was sold in 2014, Silver Housing Bonus (SHB) was given after being told we were not eligible and police took actions after you wrote to them in Govt Dept (10).

Other issues have persisted--issues with CPF on the refund to CPF Account and the rate of returns from two additional CPF LIFE purchased--issues at resale section of HDB on the resale documents--issues with salespersons on estate agent’s duties.

In the email of 14 Mar 19 I showed Section 15(15)(e) of 2012 CPF Act that the senior assistant director quoted to stop the refund to CPF Account was the fault. Section 15(15)(e) required an application to be made before the charge would be cancelled if the Board was satisfied. We did not made an application therefore Section 15(15)(e) did not apply. The senior assistant director and other officers had been giving misleading replies.

In the email of 3 Mar 19 I submitted spreadsheet calculation that could be used to compare the four calculations on similar terms across the board. The rate of returns of two additional CPF LIFE were shown to be low compared to the CPF LIFE purchased when it was first introduced. The fourth calculation was an obvious mistake. I already had my doubt with the first additional CPF LIFE purchased on 27 Sep 10. Although I substantiated, a director and officers had dismissed my concerns without any explanation.

There is some urgency with CPF LIFE because the final deduction from RA is in a few month time before monthly payout begin.

The email of 24 Mar 19 referred to the sale of the flat in general and the third salesperson in particular. He and his company failed to inform me about the refund to CPF Account and the details of an Option To Purchase (OTP). I wrote to them about the refund to CPF Account but they did not assist and the option was never explained. When I requested to reduce their fee to 1%, the company replied that they reserved all rights to proceed against me through other avenues if I chose not to mediate or pay the full fee.

The email of 31 Mar 19 referred to the officers at the resale section of HDB. The handling officer set me up for monetary losses. It was the issues of no refund to CPF Account, OTP and SHB. I was aware there was a need for refund to CPF Account, unaware there was a OTP and unaware SHB was involved. The principal estate manager who processed the SHB after we were found to be eligible did not refer us to the Important Notes in the form but instead caused a 10 weeks delay and a $219.60 fee to register our name to the studio apartment.

The email of 31 Mar 19 is also on all the issues relating to officers that started with noise from the neighbour in 2007. I think the prime minister could help.

Yours Sincerely,

31 Mar 19

Email to MP

Dear Mr Teo,

1. The next item refers to the counselling session with the principal estate manager of HDB who filled in the Application for the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme without allowing us to read the Important Notes nor did he explained to us what was required.

2. The first line stated “Please read the Conditions for the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme (attached) before completing the form”. He did not refer us to Section E: Declaration and Acknowledgement on the additional CPF LIFE that was needed to be purchased using my entire balance in RA nor the top up my mother had to make to RA. He did not refer to the Silver Housing Bonus (SHB) in another document, which stated the amount of top up required based on net sale proceeds from the sale of the flat.

3. The Silver Housing Bonus (SHB) required one or more owners to top up their RA from the net sale proceeds from the sale of the flat. For net sale proceeds more than $160,000, the owner with the lowest RA was required to top up to the prevailing Minimum Sum. The bonus of $20,000 in cash would then be distributed to the owners in proportion to their top up to their RA. In my case, as stipulated, I had to top up and used the entire balance in RA to buy an additional CPF LIFE.

4. I was set-up when an officer asked me whether to register the studio apartment either in both our names or only in my name. I asked whether it was allowed to be registered in my name and she said Yes. I asked because the sale of the 5-room flat was under joint ownership with my mother. In retrospect, my mother was left without an address when I signed my name to the studio apartment.

5. From there on I was not given the Application for the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme when I asked for it at HDB Hub and CPF Tampines and received no reply after I submitted a note, which I placed into the feedback box at CPF Tampines, for the form to be sent to me.

6. On query a CPF officer wrote that we were not eligible for SHB. When I wrote that my Minimum Sum was not fully top up, she wrote that I was eligible. After I wrote to MPs, a senior assistant director replied that we were both eligible.

7. We ended up with the principal estate manager, mentioned in the first paragraph, who continued to make things difficult for us with a $219.60 fee to register both our names to the studio apartment and a 10 weeks delay with an online form meant for new owner before he would submit the form to CPF for processing.

8. If you refer to my email of 24 Mar 19 on the third salesperson, the set-up began at the resale section of HDB with the cheque issued in my name without refund to my CPF Account. The cheque in my name instead of both our names would seem to make my mother not a joint-owner and therefore not eligible for SHB. The delay of a few days in the cheque after an earlier date fixed with the buyers to conclude the sale may be to allow time to change both our names (both names were required under joint ownership) to only my name. Of course, the handling officer asked me if I wanted the cheque in my name knowing that I had purchased it with my money with most of it coming from my CPF Account.

9. The no refund to CPF Account for money withdrawn from CPF Account to pay for the purchase of the flat was an abnormality. We did not make an application for withdrawal. CPF officers had been unable to justify it. HDB officers handling the resale would have known from past cases. Estate agents in the business of resale had to know. Yet it happened to us.

10. If the Option To Purchase for the flat had indeed came from HDB, it would be a mistake. The Exclusive Estate Agency Agreement For The Sale of Residential Property had this statement:

Schedule 1, Explanatory Notes: (10) An agreement for sale and purchase may take the form of an executed sale and purchase agreement or an option to purchase which has been exercised by the Buyer.

We had an agreement with the Estate Agent, there was no need for the option. If the option was together with the agreement, I would have known about the cost and exercise price of the option and the prescribed documents. (The principal estate manager of the letter dated 4 Mar 19 wrote that the cost and exercise fee of the option were considered part of the agreed resale transacted price of the flat. He had not produced the documents I requested.) Thus without knowing the detail of the option, I had unintentionally lowered the price of the flat by the cost and exercise fee of the option that were deducted from the price of the flat shown in the resale document.

11. After I wrote Item 10, I found the Important Notes On Option To Purchase dated 10 Mar 14 from HDB website. I quote:

“16 Additional Highlights for Resale Flat Sellers and Buyers For Sellers:

b. Calculate the estimated proceeds you will get from the sale. Note that:-

(ii) If the resale price can cover the outstanding loan but is not enough for the refund of CPF money, the cash deposit you received will have to be used for refund to your CPF account.”

However, the Important Notes On Option To Purchase was dated 10 Mar 14 after the resale price was negotiated on 25 Jan 14.

The main difference between the Option To Purchase (OTP) before and after the date 10 Mar 14 may be only these:

a) Before 10 Mar 14--Valuation report had to be obtained before the exercise of OTP

b) After 10 Mar 14--OTP had to be exercised before obtaining the valuation report.

If the Important Notes On Option To Purchase dated 10 Mar 14 was applied to my case, then it would seemed there was a need for refund to CPF Account (Was this one of the reason the principal estate manager was unable to produce the OTP I requested?) but it was not clear whether the cash deposit (Option Fee + Option Exercise Fee = Deposit) was part of the resale price.

I quote from the Option To Purchase forms of the Standard Contract for Resale of HDB Flat dated 1 Aug 18:

“6. Exercise of Option by Buyer

6.2 This Option and the Acceptance signed by the Buyer will form a binding contract for the sale and purchase of the Flat. The Deposit will form part of the Purchase Price to secure the performance of the terms and conditions in this Option and completion of the sale and purchase.”

Here in the Option To Purchase forms dated 1 Aug 18, the deposit was part of the resale price.

12. The handling officer of the first appointment and principal estate manager who filled the Application for the Silver Housing Bonus Scheme were from the same department under Resale Operation Section, Estate Administration & Property Group.

13. The many troubles I have with officers is actually the same problem I encountered from the neighbour since 2007. The noise from the working of a trade drove me to sell the flat. After two years of complaining to the authorities, I have no choice but to blog from 2009.

14. The noise started earlier in 1999 with an eviction of an occupier and a transfer of the flat to the second owner who continued with the trade. I gave evidence that officer facilitated the transfer of the flat. Then there was evidence that the people in the flat across the neighbour watched out for them. When I moved to the studio apartment, I suspected they were still with me as my next-door neighbour.

15. The troubles have been inconveniences, hurts and monetary losses. Where monetary losses were concerned I also provided evidence:

a) With refund to CPF Account, I referred to 2012 CPF Act and Changes to CPF Housing Refund Policy Effective 1 January 2013.

b) With CPF LIFE, I provided spreadsheet calculation to show rate of returns were low with additional CPF LIFE.

c) With SHB, I showed an obvious mistake was made with the monthly payment after $1757.88 of interest for the year was transfer from RA to CPF LIFE as stipulated in Item 2 and 3.

d) With registration fee of $219.60, I showed in Item 1, 2, 3, 7 and 12 what the principal estate manager did and he caused the delay and fee.

e) With $5000 deposit indicated in the resale document, the principal estate manager of Item 10 stated that the deposit was two payments of option money deducted from the resale price because it was considered part of the resale price but had not produced the documents requested.

f) With sale of flat, I had wrote to MPs and the flat was sold with their assistance (I wrote to the estate company to reduce the third salesperson’s fee to 1% without success. My email of 24 Mar 19 showed that he did not perform his estate agent duties to a) “provide reasonable assistance and advice to the Seller”, b) “reasonably explain to the Seller all relevant forms and documents” and c) “disclose and avoid any potential or actual conflict of interest”.)

16. Item 8 and Item 4 led to the signing of my name to the studio apartment. We were not informed both I and my mother were eligible for SHB because that was what the officers intended. The principal estate manager delayed and imposed a fee to include both our names in the studio apartment when we were all along eligible for SHB, Item 6.

17. It was a setup that involved--

a) Refund to CPF, Item 9, Item 11 and a) of Item 15; involved CPF LIFE as two additional CPF LIFE purchased, one of which was stipulated in SHB, Item 2 and 3 and b) and c) of Item 15;

b) the Sale Agreement with the third salesperson, Item 8, Item 9, Item 10, Item 11 and e) and f) of Item 15; and

c) HDB at the Resale Operation Section, Item 8, Item 9, Item 10, Item 11, a), c), d) and e) of Item 15 and Item 16.

d) All the problems started with noise from the neighbour and with officers in Item 13 and Item 14.

18. The issues in question:

a) Email to MPs of 5 Oct 14 referred to refund to CPF Account in Changes to the CPF Housing Refund Policy Effective 1 January 13.

b) Email to MP of 3 Mar 19 and 14 Mar 19 referred to refund to CPF Account required under 2012 CPF Act and rate of returns of CPF LIFE from spreadsheet calculation.

c) Email to MP of 24 Mar 19 referred to duties of the Estate Agent.

d) Item 17 referred to mistakes made but not rectified by government departments that started with officer who facilitated the transfer of the neighbour’s flat.

19. Salient Points (40) consisted of SP-Neighbour, SP-Sales Agents, SP-CPF Refund, SP-SHB, SP-CPF LIFE and SP-Miscellaneous in shorten form with comments. Hard copy of the documents were submitted at Meet-the-People Session, Ang Mo Kio.

20. The above issues at HDB, CPF and CEA that affected me affect the people of Singapore. The issues persisted over the many years because there were evidence of wrongdoing. Although the issues were revisited many times, these were not addressed due to the same group of officers preventing resolution.

21. I could only hope the-whole-of-government takes action. Will the prime minister, cabinet or parliament consider the problem?

Yours Sincerely,

26 Mar 19

Email to MP

Dear Mr Teo,

I am not sure what to think of the second and third sentence from [your PA].

There is no organisation behind me. I think you may be referring to Mr Tan’s request to go through the Estate Agent agreement that was inadvertently sent to you when I forwarded the agreement the assistant manager of [the estate company] had sent (I clicked on the icon at the top right corner of the particular email the assistant manager had sent to forward the agreement, not the forward button at the end of the email that would include the correspondence with Mr Tan. But the correspondence was sent anyway. There was nothing in the correspondence that did not pertain to the sale of the flat.).

I included the email from the assistant manager with the agreement to show the date it was sent, which was after the sale was completed.

I initiated the contact with Mr Tan when I requested his help to find a lawyer because [the estate company] may sue me. There was no other contact before or after, except for one at the last paragraph.

As a token of appreciation, I subscribed to his financial newsletter with one payment and it was not renewed.

I came to know Mr Tan through http://civicadvocator.net/category/forem when they published my email on 11 May 09. The email is at Help (69) in my blog. His reply was to work with MP and RC to resolve the problem.

Yours Sincerely,

24 Mar 19

Email to MP

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

Dear Mr Teo,

1. The next item concerns the third salesperson I engaged to sell my flat. The problem revolves around the same issues of refund to CPF Account and return of deposit after sale of the flat in my email of 20 Feb 19 to you.

It seemed the deposit after sale of flat was not a deposit as such but two payments made by the buyers when they brought the option and when they exercised it that was part of the price of the flat. The option was never explained to me. It caused me to sell the flat lower by the amount paid for the option than the price I intended. When I lowered the price of the flat, l lowered it unintentionally by $5000 more as it seemed to be the case.

Who issued the Option To Purchase (OTP)? A CPF officer wrote in her email of 26 Feb 19 that HDB had explained to me (there was not) that the deposit after the sale of flat was for the option followed by an officer from HDB (she was the handling officer of the first appointment) who wrote in her email of 1 Mar 19 that they would look into it. The principal estate manager has yet to send me the documents relating to the option in my email of 10 Mar 19 to him.

(Under Schedule 1, Explanatory Notes: (10) An agreement for sale and purchase may take the form of an executed sale and purchase agreement or an option to purchase which has been exercised by the Buyer.)

I had terminated the contract of the first and second salesperson because they were not acting in my interest. I had referred to the transcript of text messages between us. With the first salesperson I lodged a complaint by filling up the official forms from CEA (Council of Estates Agencies). There was no reply to the complaint except for an officer who defended him later through emails. During the emails exchange I mentioned that the first and second salesperson still had my property listed on the web after termination. The second salesperson was in the same company as the third salesperson.

To explain further, the three salespersons did not allow direct negotiation between sellers and buyers. With the first salesperson there was three viewers; with the second salesperson, one viewer; and with the third salesperson three viewers. Only after the first two buyers did the third salesperson asked me to negotiate directly with the third and last buyer because of intervention from MPs. Doing so at a moment notice without explaining the option caused me to sell at $5000 below my intended price. I concluded that the option could commit the buyer into buying the flat but it was also used against me. I sold on my own for a period after the second salesperson and only engaged the third salesperson because he was the company top producer. The transcript of text messages showed that I had trouble selling with salespersons and with For Sale By Owner (FSBO).

(Under Schedule 2, Duties of Estate Agent, The Estate Agent shall: (f) promptly forward to the Seller all offers, proposals or expressions of interest from potential Buyers or their agents.)

Before the first appointment at HDB Hub with the third salesperson, he informed me that HDB required the death certificate of my father and asked me to bring along. He also informed me that HDB would delay the cheque for a few days after an earlier date fixed with buyer just before my turn as seller at the first appointment. No reason was given in each case. During the final appointment he did not speak for me after I insisted an officer in charge speak to me because the handling officer of the first appointment was on leave. As a top producer of his company he could not be unaware there was a need for refund to CPF Account. I see it as collaboration between the handling officer and the third salesperson.

He knew I did not made an application to withdraw the CPF fund used to purchase the flat (he was with me when I spoke about the refund with the officer in charge at the final appointment) and he could have checked instead of asking for his fee after the final appointment. He would have known about the OTP (an additional item was written in the contract that half of the option money forfeited by the seller would go to the Estate Agent), but he never brought up the subject. He asked me to negotiate the price with the third and last buyer only because of intervention from MPs, but without explaining the detail of the option he caused me to lower the price of the flat unintentionally by the amount of the option. He did not advertise in the newspaper to sell the flat. The contract with him was given to me only after the sale when I wrote to them because someone offered to look through the contract. I did not ask for the contract from the second salesperson too. (The supposed contract that the second salesperson and I had signed consisted of seven pages, each with the company logo and a total of eight of our signatures but without any signature of my mother who was joint-owner, was sent to me later through a link in an email not from the company. If look at it carefully, the signatures are not signed individually but printed identically.) I had thought the contracts were similar to that of the first salesperson that was without the additional item on the option.

(Under Schedule 2, Duties of Estate Agent, The Estate Agent shall:

(d) provide reasonable assistance and advice to the Seller throughout the process of sale of the Property.

(h) assist the Seller to enter into binding agreement for sale and purchase with the Buyer and reasonably explain to the Seller all relevant forms and documents. However, if the Estate Agent is in doubt on any matter, he shall state his doubt and advise the Seller to seek advice from appropriate professionals.

Note at the end of the Exclusive Estate Agency Agreement For The Sale of Residential Property:

The Estate Agent must provide the original or a copy of this Agreement to the Seller immediately upon signing.)

I wrote to his company to reduce his fee to 1% from the 2% stated in the exclusive contract with him because he gave minimal attention to my case. I had written earlier to them whether there were other such cases they came across where no refund was required but they did not reply. (To the extent that they withheld information I should know about, they acted against me.) However, his company replied that they reserved all rights to proceed against me through other avenues if I did not proceed with mediation. I checked the website of several mediation centres, mediation referred to mediation based on the letter of the contract. It would not be an investigation.

(Under Schedule 1, Explanatory Notes: (12) The Code of Ethics and Professional Client Care prescribes the Estate Agent’s and Salesperson’s duty to disclose and avoid any potential or actual conflict of interest.)

2. The following records the main events:

In Salient Point (40), please refer to the comments at SP-Sales Agents and SP-Miscellaneous, Seller Who Do Not Engage A Salesperson. Hard copy of the documents were submitted at MPS, Ang Mo Kio.

The contracts with the second and third salesperson are attached. Three emails are forwarded: a link to the supposed contract with the second salesperson dated 11 Nov 13, the contract with the third salesperson sent by assistant manager of the estate company dated 17 Jun 14 and my email to the principal estate manager of HDB dated 10 Mar 19.

I wrote to terminate the service of the first salesperson dated 7 Nov-9 Nov 13 and of the second salesperson dated 23 Nov 13. Transcript of text messages between myself and salespersons were submitted to CEA dated 30 Oct 13; to MPs dated 6 Nov 13, 21 Nov 13 and 28 Dec 13; to the estate company dated 28 Apr 14 and 16 May 14. After termination of service of the first salesperson, Manager Licensing of CEA emailed on 29 Nov 13 that there was no misconduct on the part of the first salesperson and my returned reply on 30 Nov 13 and on 1 Dec 13 to include the second salesperson.

No reply to my email to the estate company dated 19 Apr 14 on whether no refund to CPF Account was normal. Request to the estate company to discount fee of salesperson dated 28 Apr 14 and 16 May 14 because he gave minimal attention. The former date included my letter to the MPs dated 28 Dec 13 on why I cannot sell my flat with transcript of text messages enclosed.

Letter from senior legal manager of the estate company dated 6 Jun 14 that the company reserved all rights to proceed against me through other avenues if I chose not to mediate or pay the full fee.

3. I need your assistance to request HDB and CEA to review the case.

Yours Sincerely,

14 Mar 19

Email to MP

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

Dear Mr Teo,

1. CPF Refund

The senior assistant director’s email of 21 Nov 14 is better than her email of 16 Dec 14 as it referred directly to the 2012 CPF Act.

She stated Section 21B(11)(b) applied. But Section 21B(11)(b) refers to Section 15(15)(e), which states: “the charge shall on the application of the member or any other person having an interest in the property be cancelled if the Board is satisfied of the occurrence of any one of the following events...”. Since we did not make an application, Section 21B(11)(b) and Section 15(15)(e) do not apply.

The second paragraph of her reply quoted here cannot be followed because she did not expand on the various sub-sections. In any case it does not apply to our case because we did not make an application for withdrawal.

I stated Section 21B(11)(a)(i) applied. If it is Section 21B(11)(a)(ii), then the charge “are no longer required by any regulations made under section 77(1) to be repaid to the Fund”. Is there any reason why these two should not apply?

Her reply and the portion of 2012 CPF Act she quoted are as follows:

Her Reply

There was a CPF charge imposed on your HDB flat under section 21B(1) of the 2012 CPF Act due to the CPF moneys you used to purchase your flat. Section 21B(11)(b) of the 2012 CPF Act stated that a housing charge imposed under section 21B(1) would lapse when any of the events listed in section 15(15)(e) of the 2012 CPF Act happens.

Section 15(15)(e)(iii) of the 2012 CPF Act refers to a member complying with requirements of section 15(6). Section 15(6) refers to setting aside the Minimum Sum. Since you have set aside the full Minimum Sum before 1 Jan 2013, the CPF charge on your flat had lapsed pursuant to section 21B(11)(b) read with section 15(15)(e) of the 2012 CPF Act.

The Portion of 2012 CPF Act She Quoted

2012 CPF Act provisions:

15.- (6) Subject to subsections (6A), (8) and (8A), where a member of the Fund is entitled under subsection (2)(a), (3) or (4) to withdraw the sum standing to his credit in the Fund, at the time of the withdrawal and in accordance with any regulations made under this Act —

(a) a prescribed sum (referred to in this Act as the minimum sum) shall be set aside or topped-up —

(i)by the member; or

(ii)from the sum standing to the member’s credit in the Fund; and

(b)unless the Board otherwise allows, such amount as may be specified under subsection (6D) shall be set aside or topped-up in the member’s medisave account —

(i)by the member; or

(ii)from the sum standing to the member’s credit in the Fund after deducting any sum standing to the member’s credit in his retirement account.

(15) The following provisions shall apply to a charge created over any immovable property under subsection (9) or (9A):

(e)the charge shall on the application of the member or any other person having an interest in the property be cancelled if the Board is satisfied of the occurrence of any one of the following events:

(i)the death of the member;

(ii)the member is suffering from a terminal illness or disease;

(iii)the member has complied with the requirements of subsection (2A), (6), (7B) or (8A);

(iv)the member’s minimum sum has been exhausted on account of withdrawals made by him under subsection (7), the payment by him of a premium referred to in section 27L(1) or (1A), or both; or

(v)the member satisfies any of the grounds for withdrawals under subsection (2)(b) or (c).

21B.—(1) Where in accordance with any regulations made under section 77, a member of the Fund had or has before, on or after 1st January 2003 withdrawn any money standing to his credit in the Fund —

(a)to make full or partial payment towards the purchase or acquisition of an HDB flat;

(b)to repay or to make periodic payments towards the repayment of any loan taken by the member to finance or re-finance the purchase or acquisition of an HDB flat;

(c)to pay any improvement contribution due to the Housing and Development Board in respect of upgrading works carried out on an HDB flat under Part IVA of the Housing and Development Act (Cap. 129), or any improvement contribution due to a Town Council in respect of lift upgrading works carried out in relation to an HDB flat under Part IVA of the Town Councils Act (Cap. 329A), including the payment of costs, fees or other incidental expenses arising from such works; or

(d)to pay any costs, fees or other expenses incurred —

(i)for the purchase or acquisition of an HDB flat;

(ii)for obtaining a loan to finance or re-finance such purchase or acquisition; and

(iii)in connection with withdrawals of any money from the Fund,

there shall, immediately upon any such withdrawal, be a charge constituted on that HDB flat to secure the repayment of the money withdrawn from the Fund including the whole or such part, as the Board may determine, of the interest that would have been payable thereon if the withdrawal had not been made and to secure the payment of the minimum sum into the member’s retirement account.

(11) Any charge constituted under subsection (1) shall continue in force until —

(a)all moneys secured by the charge —

(i)have been repaid to the Fund; or

(ii)are no longer required by any regulations made under section 77(1) to be repaid to the Fund;

(b)the Board is satisfied of the occurrence of any of the events mentioned in section 15(15)(e).

2. CPF LIFE

The spreadsheet submitted on 3 Mar 14 shows three rate of returns lower than the lower range estimated by CPF LIFE.

The director’s letter of 30 Apr 15 does not explained why the rate of returns were low. It cannot be right that one of the them was lower than 0.001%. The rate of returns were adjusted to give the same monthly payout as estimated by CPF LIFE.

What the director wrote was statements from records. They were not explanation of mistakes made or not made. A copy of the director’s reply of 30 Apr 15 was submitted at MPS, Ang Mo Kio.

I forward the reply of 12 Mar 14 on the above CPF Refund and CPF LIFE.

Yours Sincerely,

10 Mar 19

Email to Resale Section of HDB

Dear Sir,

I refer to your reference 01110A14/NBM dated 4 Mar 19.

I do not think the second paragraph is true. If the options were payments towards the price of the flat in the document handed to me at the final appointment, the document would have stated so. The document only showed a deposit of $5000 was deducted.

If you are correct, please show me that we had in fact received payments and the payments went into the price of the flat.

I quote: “Based from the Option To Purchase (OTP) and flat application submitted to us on 28 Jan 2014, you and your mother, Mdm Lim Gek Noi have granted the OTP to buyers on 25 Jan 2014 and received an Option Fee of $1000 in cash. After the buyers decided to exercise the OTP, they paid you an Option Exercise Fee of $4000. Together, the Option Fee and Option Exercise Fee form the deposit and is considered part of the agreed resale transacted price of $533,000.”

Please send me the documents in the quote above.

As to the third paragraph, the letter from HDB reference RS01110A14/PR/ZUR dated 29/01/2014 sent to me before the first appointment showed that the death certificate was not required if the deceased was not a co-owner of the flat. When I asked the handling officer why she required the death certificate, she did not reply.

Yours Sincerely,

3 Mar 19

Email to MP

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

Dear Mr Teo,

1. I forward two emails from the officers of CPF and HDB in response to your suggestion of 22 Feb 19 that CPF Board and the HDB set up a meeting with me. The two officers were shown to be wrong in my email of 20 Feb 19 but yet allowed to reply the way they did.

If officers were correct on the refund issue, they would have to show where in the 2012 CPF Act the refund issue was not required in my case. They have not been able to do so because a mistake was made.

2. The next item to resolve is my CPF Life. Payout from my CPF Life begins in half a year time and final deduction from Retirement Account to CPF Life is two months earlier. Please refer to Item 2d) in my letter to you on 28 Dec 18 in Govt Dept (10) and Item 4 and 5 in my letter to a director on 7 May 15 in CPF Life (78).

I made four calculations where lump sums were committed to compare rate of return that included the two instances just mentioned. Each of the calculation was in two stages. The first stage used the single payment formula from the date the lump sum was committed to the date at age 65 and the second stage used the annuity formula from age 65 for 20 years (life expectancy of Singaporean male at 65 is about 85). With the help of the spreadsheet the rate of return could be adjusted to give the same monthly payout as estimated by CPF Life.

Please refer to the comments and notes in the spreadsheet send separately. The rate of return for the second and third calculations were below the lower range estimated by CPF Life. The fourth calculation was lower than 0.001%.

CPF could be forthcoming with explanation and correct for mistakes made.

Yours Sincerely,

Spreadsheet-CPF Life

Shareable Link

20 Feb 2019

Email to MP

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

Dear Mr Teo,

I refer to the letter from CPF dated 13 Feb 2019 reference PHS/0224JSULFS02029 with copy to you.

This is the second officer to avoid the issues since you wrote to them on 28 Dec 2018.

a) In the senior assistant director’s email of 16 Dec 2014, her statement that “the event referred to in section 21B(11)(b), i.e. the setting aside of your Minimum Sum, has occurred to result in the lapse of your housing charge” had not fully explained the situation. Its could not be traced in 2012 CPF Act as related to my case whereas I had pointed to passages in 2012 CPF Act and Changes to CPF Housing Refund Policy Effective 1 January 2013 that stated refund was required in my correspondence with officers but it was not addressed.

Please refer to my comments in Salient Points (40) on her email of 16 Dec 2014 and my emails to MPs dated 9 Jan 2105, 19 Dec 2014 and 5 Oct 2014 in CPF 2 (78) which were my concluding statements on the issue.

b) I negotiated with the buyer the price of the flat and the $5000 deposit was simply deducted from the price with the rest issued to me in a cheque. There was no option and exercise fee. How could the officer state “As explained by HDB, the deposit which consists of the option and exercise fee was paid by the buyer to you after the buyer brought the option and exercise the Option To Purchase contract on 25 Jan 2014.”?

If the deposit was paid to me, there would be an addition to the price of the flat and documents to show.

c) In the first meeting the handling officer asked for my father death certificate but did not reply to my question why she required it. It was indicated in the letter reference RS01110A14/PR/ZUR dated 29/01/2014 sent to me before the meeting showing that the death certificate was not required if the deceased was not a co-owner of the flat. But the officer stated “HDB had requested for a copy of your father’s death certificate to confirm your mother, Mdm Lim’s marital status.”

What the officer had stated was not what the letter from HDB had required.

Yours Sincerely,

20 Jan 19

Email to MP

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

Dear Mr Teo,

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

Your copy of the reply was sent to me. A photo of the reply is in the attachment.

A full reply would include the 2012 CPF Act and Changes to CPF Housing Refund Policy Effective 1 January 2013 where refund is required. Please refer to CPF 1 (78), CPF 2 (78), CPF/HDB (78), CPF Life (78) and Salient Points (40) in my blog and, in more details, hard copies with supporting documents were submitted at MPS, Ang Mo Kio. Officers at CPF, including assistant directors and a director, avoided the issue in their replies.

The officer stated in his letter “CPF Board has informed us that the sellers do not need to refund the CPF monies used previously”. Who informed him?

He also mentioned the $5000 deposit deducted from the sale of the flat. But what was the deposit for and when would it be returned? Instead, he referred me to the same officer who did not give me a reply at the first meeting when I asked why she required the death certificate of my father.

The two issues were amiss. Shouldn’t the handling department be responsible?

Yours Sincerely,

Observation

12.

10 May 19

Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session

Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE

Monthly Payout From CPF LIFE

The questions on CPF LIFE:

5 Apr 19

Letter handed in at Meet-the-People Session

Bringing Up To The Prime Minister

Bringing Up To The Prime Minister

“In the email of 14 Mar 19 I showed Section 15(15)(e) of 2012 CPF Act that the senior assistant director quoted to stop the refund to CPF Account was the fault. Section 15(15)(e) required an application to be made before the charge would be cancelled if the Board was satisfied. We did not made an application therefore Section 15(15)(e) did not apply. The senior assistant director and other officers had been giving misleading replies.”

“The email of 31 Mar 19 is also on all the issues relating to officers that started with noise from the neighbour in 2007. I think the prime minister could help.”

31 Mar 19

Email to MP

10. If the Option To Purchase for the flat had indeed came from HDB, it would be a mistake. The Exclusive Estate Agency Agreement For The Sale of Residential Property had this statement:

Schedule 1, Explanatory Notes: (10) An agreement for sale and purchase may take the form of an executed sale and purchase agreement or an option to purchase which has been exercised by the Buyer.

21. I could only hope the-whole-of-government takes action. Will the prime minister, cabinet or parliament consider the problem?

3 Mar 19

Email to MP

Refund to CPF Account and Return of Deposit After Sale of Flat

“I made four calculations where lump sums were committed to compare rate of return that included the two instances just mentioned. Each of the calculation was in two stages. The first stage used the single payment formula from the date the lump sum was committed to the date at age 65 and the second stage used the annuity formula from age 65 for 20 years (life expectancy of Singaporean male at 65 is about 85). With the help of the spreadsheet the rate of return could be adjusted to give the same monthly payout as estimated by CPF Life.”

Spreadsheet-CPF Life

Shareable Link

anaudienceof3

Page

Summing Up (72)

No comments:

Post a Comment