A reader discovered three unauthorised overseas transactions on his DBS account amounting to $2000.

When he approached DBS to report this case, their immediate response was for the reader to inform the police instead as these transactions were successfully made with a secure OTP. The reader feels frustrated and confused as he had never received any OTP notification of these fraudulent transfers. The other fishy bit was that these transfers were made to Malaysia even though he had not activated overseas transactions.

His story is published below:

"DBS IS NOT SAFE AT ALL!!!

On 16 September, I discovered three transactions on my account that I never authorized. The total transactions was $2000.

I immediately contacted DBS and reported the case because I was never aware of these transactions, no notifications, no SMS, no email, nothing at all. It's like my money was gone like a wind when I woke up one morning.

To my surprised, the immediate answer to my call was SORRY, WE CANNOT HELP YOU BECAUSE THE TRANSACTION WAS SECURED WITH AN OTP (ONE TIME PIN) All you can do is to report to the police.

As we all know, OTP is required for every online bank transactions in order for us to authorise any transactions using our online account. AND I NEVER RECEIVE ANY OTP AT ALL!
I've made a police report and send to them, been calling them so many times and all they can say is my claim was denied because the transaction was authorise with an OTP. Called them again and again and what they can say is my appeal was denied because there was an OTP.

DBS is claiming that they are Asia's Safest Bank????? is this what you called safe??? Are you not ashamed how you treat your account holders???

I don't even activate my overseas transactions and these money was transferred to Malaysia based on the conversion that I can see from my transaction history. I'm just feeling so disappointed with their bank security.

Also, all my bank transactions whether it's a money transfer, online purchase that I do has notifications through email and SMS. I just smell something fishy that these fraudulent transactions went through without any notifications at all.

Obviously, DBS failed to protect their account holders, I regret that I trusted you as my bank.

I know I am not the first customer, I have read another case similar to me and based on the comments, there's a lot us. You can read the link below from The Online Citizen Asia post https://www.onlinecitizenasia.com/.../netizen-claims-dbs.../

I'm so lost right now as $2000 is not a joke, speaking to DBS customer service feels like you are not talking to a human being, it is very easy for them to say "SORRY WE CANNOT DO ANYTHING"

FEEL FREE TO SHARE FOR EVERYONES AWARENESS. I HOPE THE SINGAPORE GOVERNMENT CAN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT. Too much sadness and disappointments in this time of pandemic."

Tope Li

<Reader's Contribution>

Dear Admin,

I have a submission to make.

So this is the background of what happened. Our helper has been working hard to take care of my grandparents and my mom and aunt decided to purchase a spa day form Belle Care through Fave.

The ad stated that Singaporeans, PR and Work pass holders were welcome. Belle care was discriminatory towards domestic workers and said they do serve workpass holder except domestic workers. And even brought into context on how their Bangladeshi boyfriends purchase spa packages for them and even wanted us to write consent form allowing our helper to enjoy a spa day? In her words she described us as the “owner”..

Doesnt everyone deserve to relax and have a day off? So does a maid have less rights that we do? Furthermore we are her employers that booked the spa day for her. And despite confirmation and payment a month ago, they called at the last minute to tell us they do not want to service domestic workers knowing full well she was a domestic worker then the appointment was made.

Sad to see that we still have such discrimination and narrow minded people around.. shame on you belle care... Located in Singapore Shopping Centre 190 Clemenceau Ave.

M Wong

The PAP MP in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC for Zhenghua is Edward Chia Bing Hui, who is a first-timer. He is also the co-founder and managing director of Timbre Group.

In one of his recent Facebook posts, Edward Chia tried to feature how he has made improvements to the Segar area by cleaning up the dirty sheltered walkways and link houses.

However a resident has informed that these photos of Segar being spring cleaned is an act of wayang. Apparently the Residents' Committee (RC) Chairpersons had been requested to gather their RC members to take these pictures to paint a positive image that the MP is working for the residents.

These photos only tell one side of the story. While the MP tries to bring attention to how he has been improving Segar, he has not been able to settle a persistent dengue problem at the Senja area. According to our contributor, there are already 330 dengue cases at Senja, making this a dengue red zone.

A Senja resident even complained about Edward Chia's lack of "extra effort" in tackling the dengue outbreak. After all, the MP's job is more than just a photo op of interacting with residents in dengue green zones.

A netizen posted photographs showing MOM staff confronting an unknown female who was said to be a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW). The netizen said that the MOM officers had caught the FDW doing distribution for her online fashion business. This incident happened on 4 October 11.30am in front of Tangs Orchard.

According to the netizen's account, the FDW was allegedly involved in doing fashion business and the bus stop at Tangs Orchard was the collection point for her customers. Before the MOM staff stepped in, many customers were witnesses going up to the FDW to pick up their orders.

She was so busy managing her customers that she did not notice the guy in blue. The guy later wore a lanyard with an ID card went up to the FDW. He was joined by another lady wearing a MOM vest who then spoke with the FDW, took her particulars and photos of the Work Permit (WP).

The netizen hopes to remind other FDWs that WP holders are disallowed from engaging in any online businesses or peddle any items during their off day. The harshest penalty will result in their WP being cancelled and the FDW being deported.

Prominent lawyer and Peoples Voice Party (PVP) chief Lim Tean will be at the Supreme Court today to defend blogger Leong Sze Hian against a defamation suit filed by Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. The open Court hearing will be taking place from 6 Oct to 9 Oct 2020.

Lim Tean shared that he alone will be up against 5 lawyers from Davinder Singh Chambers LLC. He will also be cross-examining Lee Hsien Loong today and Wednesday (7 Oct).

Due to the Covid19 safe distancing measures, the Court only released 20 seats in the public gallery for this 10AM open hearing. According to news reports, all tickets for this open Court hearing were snapped up by 7AM this morning.

This revelation caused lawyer Khush Chopra to comment "I wonder who knew the unusually early time that queue numbers would be issued and that only 20 seats in the public gallery would be available. I’m not sure you can say that this trial is being conducted in open court that anyone is allowed to attend in these circumstances."

Why were tickets for a 10AM hearing issued three hours ahead of time? Who were these 20 people who were so "enthusiastic" to arrive at the Court so early? Very peculiar indeed.

Hi All Singapore Stuff,

SPH has been strongly advertising their Business Times News Tablet bundle on Facebook. The deal offers subscribers access to the Business Times via their exlcusive SPHtab e-paper app which is pre-installed onto a Samsung Galaxy S6 Lite (tablet). Subscribers can sign up for this deal at S$39.90 per month for 30 months.

However if anyone tries to point out that the deal is really a bad deal, that person is quickly blocked, and his comment deleted. I tried adding such a comment to their post and was blocked within 5 minutes. 

My comment:

$39.90 for 30 months = $1200, but

Single digital subscription for 30 months = $300 (http:// btsub.sg/ btp99)

Retail price of tablet = $650 (prices vary according to your trusted online electronics dealer)

So this means subscribers will actually be paying $900 (based on $1200 - $300) to get a $650 tablet, and get locked in for 30 months? Does this look like a good deal?

Jason

A GrabMart delivery rider recently received a $495 grocery order, and he estimated he will need more than a couple of trips to complete the delivery. As a precaution, he called in Grab support to inform them of this super large order which may take more than one delivery. He also asked the support team if he will be compensated based on the number of trips, if not he may consider cancelling the delivery.

However, the support team allegedly avoided his question about fair compensation and simply instructed him to proceed with the delivery as he will be compensated. When he tried to clarify the exact amount he will be compensated, Grab support reassured him with a non-answer.

As the GrabMart rider had been given a "go ahead", he decided to take this delivery as a challenge. It eventually took him a total of 7 trips to complete this one heavy order.

However this turned out to be a bad decision as he found out later that GrabMart only offers a maximum compensation capped at $8. When he reached out to support to appeal his case, the team could only apologise as their policy only allows this $8 maximum limit.

To make matters worse, the GrabMart rider used a good 1.5 hours during evening peak hours to make his 7 trips. He could have used this same time to receive and complete even more orders, potentially earning more than his $8 compensation.

The GrabMart delivery rider felt it was an unfair system as delivery charges are capped regardless of how much a customer has ordered. The ones who get the short end of the stick are the Grab riders. He hopes to share his story so that other riders do not get caught unaware.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/100000706032067/posts/3690602410973257/

A customer of 87 Just Thai restaurants shared his unpleasant experience with one of the staff member. This incident happened after the customer left a 1 star rating on their Google page.

The story begun when the customer and his wife ordered some takeaway from the restaurant last week. The order came up to be $35 and the customer initially paid the cashier three $10 notes and three $2 notes ($36).

While waiting for his food, the customer realised he had another $10 note. So the customer returned to the restaurant counter and asked if they can return his small change (three $2 notes) and pay with his fourth $10 note instead. His request to change notes happened less than a minute after he made the initial payment.

However the staff manning the cash register refused and explained the $2 notes cannot be returned as the restaurant was also running out of small change. The customer felt the cashier could have handled the situation better, and so he left a 1 star review on their Google page.

Another restaurant staff member apparently saw this Google review and privately messaged the customer for feedback. After this customer recounted the above incident over the small change, this staff member took offence with the cashier being likened to an "idiot".

The staff member proceeded to question the customer's upbringing and advised him to take some English lessons as well because of his bad grammar. Based on the customer's bad English and the once-off use of "idiot", the staff member also assumed the customer might have been rude and demanding to the cashier, leading to the cashier being reluctant to exchange the notes. The staff member ended their conversation with an apology.

The customer feels that this staff member was "literally humiliating me with polite words."

Recently the state media reported that electricity tariffs for households are expected to rise by 9.3% in October to December 2020. A jobless Singaporean has spoken up on this issue.

He said that our electricity is largely generated by natural gas. An interesting point he observed was that the crude oil price has been rangebound in the past three months, and that there is a strong relationship between crude oil and natural gas. This should mean that crude oil prices should not be shooting upwards.

So this Singaporean questions why electricity tariffs are still expected to increase by 9.3%? He feels there is a lack of public consultation on why prices in Singapore keep increasing.

As Singaporeans become more educated and financially savvy with the happenings on the international level, it will not be easy for us to be taken for a ride.

The Workers Party (WP) politicians Pritam Singh and Yee Jenn Jong have come forward to reassure Singaporeans that our vote is secret.

Pritam Singh mentioned a "very small section of voters" continue to believe that votes are not secret. A main reason for such fear is because their names are called out by election officials before receiving their ballot slips or serial numbers on ballot slips.

He quoted Low Thia Khiang who once addressed these concerns: 1. the individual voter is not so important that the Government will spend time and effort to know how you voted and 2. Singapore wants to maintain its international image as a trusted place to conduct businesses, and any scandal or sham involving its voting process will cause irreparable damage to our law-abiding status.

Pritam Singh adds that all political parties will oversee any exercise which involves ballot boxes. For example political candidates will be invited into the Supreme Court to inspect and ensure ballot boxes have not been tampered with before they are destroyed at the Tuas incineration plant.

Yee Jenn Jong also comforted Singaporeans by pointing out that around 30-40% of voters have been voting against the PAP every GE, and the government will be unable to go after such a large number of Singaporeans. Even though it is possible to know how voting went at the precinct level, nothing has happened to those precincts that voted for the opposition.

Yee Jenn Jong then shared how impractical it will be to secretly match 2 million votes by serial numbers for every GE. Former civil servants and election officials have also told Yee Jenn Jong that they voted for him or the opposition.

Both WP politicians are 100% certain our vote is secret. So it is important to always make our vote count!

Lawyer and Peoples Voice Party (PVP) founder Lim Tean is currently defending his client Leong Sze Hian against a defamation suit filed by Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. Leong Sze Hian has been accused of defaming the PM by sharing an article, without commenting on it, over the 1MDB saga which The Coverage Malaysia had republished from The States Times Review. The legal team hired by the PM had called upon an expert witness Dr Phan Tuan Quang who estimated Leong Sze Hian's post would have appeared on the Facebook news feeds of 11,749 users.

Lim Tean has punched holes into the defence built by the PM's legal team: (1) why did Lee Hsien Loong not sue The States Review or The Coverage and (2) the expert witness Dr Phan could not be totally independent.

On his first point, Lim Tean produced evidence showing Lee Hsien Loong had sued a female Malaysian writer Rubaashini Shunmuganathan in the Singapore Courts for writing an allegedly defamatory 2019 article about him. As the writer is overseas, the PM's lawyers obtained the leave of the Singapore Court to serve the Writ of Summons out of jurisdiction on her. If the PM could have sued this foreigner based in Malaysia, Lim Tean questioned why he did not sue The Coverage Malaysia or The States Times Review as both sites are also based overseas. Lee Hsien Loong also did not instruct his lawyers to send these media outlets a letter of claim.

Secondly Lim Tean raised doubts about the independence of the expert witness Dr Phan Tuan Quang. When Lim Tean cross-examined Dr Phan, he challenged that the expert could not be totally independent. Lim Tean discovered that Dr Phan was part of a team that had obtained a $8.2 million research grant from the Ministry Of Education (MOE) which the doctor was teaching at NUS in 2018. Lim Tean also found that received a significant MOE research grant even as he is currently teaching at the University of Hong Kong. This complicates matters as Lee Hsien Loong is the head of the government which had offered grants to Dr Phan's projects.

Lim Tean has raised some interesting points and is putting up a strong defence even though he is facing five lawyers from Davinder Singh Chambers LLC.

An occult specialist currently based in Whampoa West claims to best shop in Singapore for getting Thai amulets and charms, and offers other various services like rituals to settle any financial or love problems.

However one of his rituals has upset some netizens. A photograph submitted showed the occult specialist apparently performing a ritual at a Muslim cemetery. The photograph contributor claims that the medicine man "regularly" performs black magic, and makes his customers sit on top of Muslim tombs.

This particular act has not been appreciated as it has been seen to be disrespecting the religion as well as those in their final resting place.

Our contributor went to Giant at Sembawang Shopping Centre to buy some items like frozen stuff, baby stuffs mainly food and drinks. When he tried to make payment using the Budget2020 Grocery Vouchers which were issued by the Ministry of Finance (MOF), the cashier said he could not use the vouchers for the full transaction. The cashier then proceeded to separate his purchases into groceries and non-groceries.

Curiously he was asked to pay for frozen goods and fresh food in cash while the rest of the items like wet tissue, cereal, pampers, milk containers, toothpaste, battery and others could be paid using the vouchers. According to the cashier, frozen food is not classified as groceries but "dry items" are considered as groceries. Amid this confusion, out contributor paid $80++ cash for the frozen stuff. To make matters more confusing, the cashier could only scan 5 items per transaction when keying in payment for his Grocery Vouchers.

Our contributor even went ahead to show proof of his purchase to stop people from doubting his story as these Grocery Vouchers could be used normally at other supermarkets like NTUC or Sheng Siong.

Fortunately Giant reached out to this contributor and admitted their staff had made a mistake. Apparently the cashier were not well informed and had mistakenly separated the goods. Giant clarified that the items he paid $80++ in cash could have been redeemed with the cash voucher. It seems the only exception to using these vouchers is for the purchase of items like alcohol or cigarettes.

The supermarket was sorry for this incident and apologized many times throughout their call. All their branches have been updated and informed on the use of these Budget 2020 vouchers.

The Elections Department (ELD) recently filed a police report claiming New Naratif of publishing five paid advertisements during the GE2020 campaign period. ELD accused New Naratif of violating the Parliamentary Elections Act. As the Act only allows election advertising which is done by or made on behalf of a candidate, the ELD said New Naratif was going against the law by publishing these five Facebook ads.

However New Naratif remains firm and called the police complaint an act of harassment to strike fear into government critics and citizenry, and an abuse of the law. New Naratif also responded that the law was written too broadly and therefore ELD could use the Elections Act to make legitimate political activity illegal without a permit.

New Naratif pointed out that it had been the victim of mounting attacks. The company was previously denied from being registered in Singapore by Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA). Minister of Law and Home Affairs K Shanmugam also went to great lengths to grill Thum Pingtjin's credentials and even questioned New Naratif's motives and source of funding. New Naratif had also been issued two POFMA correction notices for "fake news."

On 21 Sep 2020 New Naratif updated that Thum Ping Tjin (PJ Thum) had been hauled up by the police for questioning at Clementi Police Station over the ELD police report. After a lengthy hours-long police interview, the police brought PJ Thum home and his laptop was seized as evidence during this raid.

Even international organisations like International Press Institute (IPI) have denounced the police actions against New Naratif as it is a new blow against press freedom.

Has journalism become a crime here?

Our contributor alerted us to a post about a job interview with Lionsbot International Pte Ltd which appeared to be "just for show." Lionsbot International is a robotics company that focuses on automated cleaning. Even before being invited to an online interview, the interviewee saw that the employer had keyed in an entry which said "not suitable" into the JobStreet portal. When he was invited into an online video call, there was only one Human Resource executive present, and she only asked him three general questions in a three-minute interview.

Could this company be simply going through the motions to say they tried to hire Singaporeans?

The post in full:

"Last week Friday, I received a phone call inviting me for a zoom interview for a CFO post scheduled to be held today 420pm.

But when I logged in jobstreet portal yesterday, the employer logged an entry "not suitable" and I was puzzled so I went back to ask for a reason for the sudden change.

The human resource lady, Wang Yurong, executive of Lionsbot International Pte Ltd which is part of SuperSteam Asia Pacific Pte Ltd replied via email that the interview will proceed.

Today 420pm, i promptly attended the Zoom interview. Noone else except Wang was there. Only 3 questions asked but frankly they are all related to only funding. Interview ended in 3 min. I was wondering why these 3 questions cod be be posted on jobstreet, saving time. It seems to me that the interview is just for show.

I am writing this post to share because I believe some of us will see such things happen to them. I have been searching for near two years. There are good people around and I also believe that there are good employers out there too willing to give us chance. A lot speak about the organisation and its values from the way they conduct themselves. I have stopped getting angry with them. I am glad i seen their true colors today than after i join them."

The LinkedIn post by an interviewee who allegedly experienced a three-minute online interview with Lionbots International Pte Ltd has gone viral. The manner in which the interview was conducted apparently felt insincere as the interviewee was only given three minutes to answer three questions by one HR executive.

The viral post caught the attention of Supersteam Asia Pacific's CEO Dylan Terntzer. He posted a personal apology and explained what had happened. The HR executive was a part-timer who had not graduated yet, and she mistakenly clicked on the "not suitable" link on JobStreet before the interviewee even had the chance to be interviewed.

He also claims the job position title was changed from what was initially advertised because the title "may not reflect the jobscope well." The CEO asked for understanding as they are a start-up and still learning their way around. This particular interview was not supposed to come across as a sham interview.

The interviewee has also shared his side of the story. His intention was not to shame the company but to just share his personal struggle. While he agrees job seekers cannot force employers to hire them, he feels that they should not have been treated in such a manner. Job seekers like him are professionals with qualified degrees and years of experience behind them and do not deserve such treatment.

The interviewee also questions if the government is doing enough about fair employment practices although much has been preached about it. Fortunately he has not been demoralised by this incident and has learned much about it instead.

Tan Kin Lian recently posted his views on high levels of corruption in many democratic countries, where it happens at the top levels involving people with power and influence. Such countries are even worse off when their leaders remain in power for decades and abuse state resources. Such leaders mask their acts behind words like "free market" and "democratic electoral system."

He also observes that the system creates greater inequality when the appointed regulators of these free markets eventually take on top positions in the private sector after leaving the government service. It seems only the rich and elite get to benefit from such a system.

Does this type of democracy sound familiar?

Tan Kin Lian's post:

"There is a high level of corruption in many democratic countries.

I am not referring to low level corruption where a lowly paid government servant need to collect small brides to make a living. I refer to corruption at the highest level where people in power favor families and friends and put them in top positions to earn very high income.

The corruption is worse in countries where the leaders remain in power for many decades. These leaders even fix the electoral system and abuse state funds and facilities to remain in power.

They claim to believe in the free market and appoint regulators to ensure that big businesses do not abuse their market power to take advantage of consumers. Sadly, these regulators are also corrupt. They do not control the businesses adequately. In fact many hope to take top position in the same private sector (that they are supposed to regulate) after they leave government service. This is called "the revolving door".

Do not think that a democratic electoral system and the free market is good for the people. In most cases they lead to a corrupt government, high inequality and a hard life for the people.

The ordinary people in most countries are probably better off with a socialist or even a communist government which has the social goal of uplifting the likelihood of the people and alleviate poverty. It is better to live in a relatively poorer country with more equality than to live in the relatively prosperous country with high inequality.

Do not believe in the propaganda of democracy and free markets. They are deceiving. They serve mainly the rich and elite. They leave the ordinary people with a harsh life and an uncertain future.

Agree or not?"

Lawyer and political veteran Lim Tean shared on his Facebook that he will be representing The Online Citizen Asia (TOC) editor Terry Xu in his trial against a defamation suit filed by Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong. The PM had initiated court proceedings against Terry Xu over an Aug 2019 TOC article “PM Lee’s wife, Ho Ching weirdly shares article on cutting ties with family members”. LHL claims the article contained repeated false allegations regarding the PM and the family dispute surrounding 38 Oxley Road.

Lim Tean praised Terry Xu for his amazing work at TOC to being free and independent news. He adds that TOC and other alternative media are the true Fourth Estate in Singapore's democracy, as opposed to the State Media which has been ranked 158th position in the World Press Freedom Index.

Lim Tean also believes courageous individuals from alternative media are important in demanding accountability from the powerful and elite in society.

This is the second defamation suit Lim Tean will be defending against LHL's lawyers. Lim Tean previously cross-examined the PM in another defamation suit filed against Leong Sze Hian.

The upcoming liberal trial against Terry Xu will be held from 30 Nov to 4 Dec 2020.

A reader shared how his 84-year-old grandmother was scammed of her hard-earned life savings. The alleged scammer is an auntie named He Kim Chun in her late 60s / early 70s, and has known the grandmother over 10 years as they both worshipping at the same temple at Jalan Limbok. The auntie apparently developed a close relationship with the grandmother during this time, to the point where she even called the elder lady as "mom" to gain her trust.

The grandmother previously worked as a part-time cleaner UOL Group Limited. Back then, the auntie started asking money from the grandmother to "invest" in her son's company and promised a handsome monthly return.

However the grandmother is illiterate and chose to trust her god daughter's words. Slowly but surely her life's savings was drained away into this "investment." After receiving a few months of the promised returns, the alleged scammer suddenly stopped handing back the cash and started to give a ton of excuses to the grandmother.

The god daughter eventually disappeared and become uncontactable.

Even after making a police report in 2018, the police only came back to the family after 2 years to advise them to take civil action. However the family is stuck as they do not know where she stays or her personal details. The family is reaching out to the public for any relevant information about her whereabouts so they can take legal action and seek justice for their grandmother who has since been suffering from insomnia.

Source: https://www.facebook.com/100001487848544/posts/3491634920896068/

Dear All Singapore Stuff,

I would like to bring to your attention and escalate a very active noise pollution case caused by a healthy looking elderly man.

The ordeal and noise pollution take place at the road-facing sheltered/seating area between 201D and 201E Tampines Street 21/23 near guardian pharmacy. Separate random sessions would start as early from 8am, at lunch, midday, dinner, and after dinner with extremely loud oldies music blasting from his speaker for a couple of hours. He is often seen smoking in the prohibited zone too.

Zero consideration and thoughts are given to the residents living and business owners working nearby. Such display of selfish behavior has been causing my family and myself distress lately as most of us are working from home and couldn’t function properly even with doors and windows closed. It feels like a roadshow taking place daily on irregular hours. There are so many ways to enjoy music but definitely not at the expense of others, especially not within the residents’ compounds.

We have approached him on the 8 Oct to inform him nicely that his music is too loud but it seems that he is very stubborn and resistant against the idea as the music went back to extreme loudness early morning next day at 8am on 9 Oct. We observe that the neighbours have been frustrated and slamming the door too due to the noise pollution.

This “concert” started happening after phase 2 commenced in late June and we have been putting up with it. We really hope that some action can be taken as we are all looking forward to regaining our peace and harmony in our 20 years of living here.

We have reported this pressing matter to the Police, NEA, HDB, town council and MP but no further actions have been taken yet.

Best regards,
Dontbeselfish