ERC Is Taking Legal Action On Scope.

Due to the sudden phone call of Mr Andy Ong from ERC today with regards to his reading of my blog, I decided to delete the Venessa Anne posting (because the response was louya) and make this posting the current one.

It will be all dedicated to the discussion of ERC’s legal action on a blogger, my blog ie.

As for those who do not know ERC, you can:
1. Check up through the internet;
2. Go to the sales pitch Mr Andy Ong mostly held on Wednesday.

Actually, the best is to go for the sales pitch if you picked up the time and address from ERC’s advertisement in Today, telling you should kick your jobs and sign up with the course and be an entrepreneur.

“Do you want to be successful…?” I’d always remember Andy Ong’s presentation to me during the sales pitch in the room of people.

Scope wants to be successful, but I don’t trust him anymore. And now, after paying the full fee, this Andy Ong is sending his lawyer after an unhappy customer.

This posting is dedicated to ERC’s threat to take legal action on a blogger in Singapore, who happens to be an unhappy consumer.

Not only the threat of legal action, he also claimed that I made veiled threats to ERC through his staff, that I harassed his female staff, that I was taking advantage of what situation, that I am arrogant, that I bla bla bla in our email communication. I don’t care if he is so influencial in Singapore.

Simply put, he can never be my mentor in entrepreneurship.

And obviously, he can never keep his part of the contract since I will not trust him again.

And today, he came calling demanding that I obliged or else he’d take legal action, and the deadline was within this day. He’s just too much. I am not a sandbag he can just punch anyohow~

Encounter: Scope Wants Justice.

It’s going to be interesting. Singapore ERC’s Andy Ong has visited this hilarious blog and decided to give me a call this noon. He told me politely “I don’t want to talk to you anymore…” Just as my battery gone flat. (Actually, the battery went loose.)

Knowing Mr Andy Ong, I decided to go back home right after delivery and gave him an email requesting him to email me the request to remove the mentioning of ERC here in the Blog. I even took the time to write to him, nicely. It was obvious, Mr Andy was working up his temper again.

My due respect became arrogance… (?!)

He called me in the noon when I was carrying heavy loads of goods, fighting for time to unload at somewhere nearby some construction site at Tanglin Road, and all he wanted was to threaten to take legal action on my voicing out of unhappiness about ERC in the blog by an extremely unhappy consumer (Me lah~) with his service. That’s so like him.

After I took the pain to respectfully email him in reply, he alleged that I was arrogant?!

I don’t understand where have I been arrogant? And he claimed that I was determined to hurt them? Now… did he refund me? Nope. Did I sue him? Nope. So?

I may be a nobody. But I am feeling very unhappy now. This is Singapore, hailing service quality when a consumer can’t even vent out some frustration in his personal blog, which is designed for unserious blogging. Now, who is out to hurt again? Why? If Seiko’s product can’t work, you mean I can’t even say it is a waste of money? Or I should just keep this from the world?

Now, Mr Andy Ong has found a lawyer and will be taking legal action against a Blogger after Mr Philip Yeo did so a few years back. In this case of mine, it is even more ridiculous. It is between an unhappy consumer and a government linked ERC on a small blog which is written-for-written’s sake. So… The next Marytr has to be me.

So be it. I paid $1680 to ERC who has nothing better to win a consumer’s approval but to resort to legal action on his non-serious blog. And it wants to teach me how to be an entrepreneur…

Now I am waiting for his lawyer’s letter to share with you guys and gals. I have gone to my MP on this before I left for China, disillusioned with Singapore. Mr MP wanted facts. Now he can have alot of facts.

How can I have such a mentor???

No. Whatever proposals I got, I am not going to ERC, to Andy Ong. He asked us to trust him back then during his sales pitch. I had. I even paid the money in full. It is now very obvious that he cannot be my mentor in entrepreneurship in this manner. He should not keep my fee.

If I obliged, then oil companies can sue me if I complain their fucking oil bloody expensive and I use my hero bicycle instead~!

This happens in Singapore, today… in the 2007, when MM said people should return to Singapore and they will be taken care of. Now even a consumer cannot talk about his frustration over a paid service in this tiny island. (Laughing…)

It seems that I am right. That’s how caring it is?

Aspiring people should try to move overseas.

I am very tired about hiding or running away as and when a bully comes by. If Andy Ong insists on legal action on a non-serious blogger’s blog, anything can happen anyway. If my promised pinnacle by ERC is in the jail or what, I have paid for it.

And I tell the government of Singapore… aspiring people should find a place elsewhere in the globe for themselves. Singapore is just too dangerous. You can’t even express unhappiness over service bought, what else?

Life… it is just a continuous chain of struggles… in Singapore.

Wait for the update then. It’s a prime case in Singapore’s blogging environment… plus (laughably) a drama between an unhappy nobody consumer Vs a very rich service provider, in this education hub of Singapore.

I’d wear brown in court if I am allowed to.

It is going to be a landmark case. I suppose Andy’s lawyer must be very excited about this.

She Vs a nobody blogger. How sweet… …

How Valid Is This Case.

No doubt lawfirm S could send in a letter in behalf of Andy Ong. But whether Andy and ERC has a case is another issue. The case is not on whether ERC will refund Scope, but on Andy’s unhappiness over my unhappiness with him.

However, Andy is the service provider, and Scope is the customer. That’s the basic relationship between ERC, Andy and Scope.

And read ERC’s communication to public via ads. Must read~!

In such a manner, the service provider is unhappy that the user makes noise. I really do not understand if Andy has even consulted Carrie before he made the phone call.

If Andy Ong can succeed in this, then Seiko Watch can just have a Law department instead of a customer service department and repair workshop. Carrie (Andy’s lawyer)should understand that Seiko can just sue whomever made noise (words of mouths), and there shall be no need for customer service nor repair. Hence, if Carrie sends this lawyer letter, she is telling the world that Scope cannot make noise or do something about his unhappiness over what he perceived as bad service.

Is this a defamation? Nope. Besides, blog cases have never really being fought in Singapore’s court. And between an unhappy consumer and an unhappy service provider, who has the case?

Consumers paid service providers to be satisfied. When consumers are not happy because the providers won’t deliver, isn’t it more obvious that the service provider do something to make consumers happy?

Otherwise, why should consumers pay?

Now I consider Andy’s demand and this case ridiculous. As the blog shows, the aspiring Scope had started from zeal with ERC to utter disappointment, and total disillusion upon wanting a full refund.

Rationally, Carrie should understand when a consumer is unhappy, and he had tried all the ways to get off the boat but met with such things as excuses and allegations, he’d certainly make noise. This is a simple consumer case, not a defamation case.

If a parent complains to Straits Times that the school her daughter is in sucks, will the school hire S lawfirm and threaten the parent to shut up or face legal action for defamation?

This blogger is discussing this case now. Anyone in the law society wants to render this discussion to ‘shut up’ by slapping a threat of legal action?

Andy is too much. I was an aspiring man signing with a fee fully paid to ERC. And at this very moment, I can confirm I am right: He is unfit to be my mentor. Because if I run a big company like Volvo Beijing, I don’t go around suing consumers who made noise.

There might be a contract saying you must pay in full after the first drive of my Volvo, but if I can’t deliver that Volvo eventually, should I not refund my customer?

If I have known ERC is like this, do you think I’d pay a single cent to sign up? Carrie, is this not sounding rational to you?

This case is very funny. Besides, filing against a blog itself is already a venture into a new scope of laws. Fair judgement here, if Scope must oblige by reasons of legal action instead of other justification… We will have a problem. REACH will have a problem. Various forums and blogs will also have a problem. The impact is going to be huge.

I have emailed Andy. If he or his lawyer can justify whichever is unfair in this blog, I will be more than happy to amend. But first… whenever the customer is unhappy or puzzled, what he needs is good customer service and reasonable answers.

Andy wrote “I hope you’d appreciate my efforts” in his book issued to me. I really don’t know how I can appreciate such efforts of his. He has driven one zealous aspiring man into a total disillusioned, and he is threatening to sue or take legal action on him.

When I was going to Beijing… I was already prepared for the worst. What makes Andy think that I will back off like this? I saw death just in front of me in China, I didn’t even shake.

Andy, I am utterly disappointed with you. And to think that you have pushed me again and again and again. I take your threat seriously. But you have never taken me seriously.

November 2, 2007

Scope

Categories: Blogging, Business, Business ethics, china, Contract laws, Corporate, creative, Defamation, design, Elites, ERC, Investment, Lawsuits, Legal, photoshop, Rights, Scope, Singapore, Society, Start-up, Vision

71 responses to “ERC Is Taking Legal Action On Scope.”

Me
March 7th, 2008 at 02:09

I’ve attended the seminar and thinking seriously to sign up with his value proposition of money back guarantee. Came across your blog. Now, i’m having doubts on his sincerity. Is the “course fee” $10K money back guarantee for real or total BS? According to his promise, if the partner achieved 90% attendance and recruited at least 1 student, he will refund the money. Can you give more details on your case so that I can make a more informed decision.
Scope
March 7th, 2008 at 18:27

The program I took was the BAP. There was many promises esp the funding part back then. Now a couple of us actually went for the funding which was not that readily available, and by the last session, the promise of a good idea for us to start out with many many ideas actually was a disappointment.

Actually, there were many who turned out for its presentations, and plenty of sceptics. I was one of those few who ‘bought’ the presented pressence of Kenny Yap, plus the government agency’s logos, and trusted Andy Ong.

Now look at how Andy treated people who trusted him. He even has the audacity to threaten to take legal action.

I can only confirm that ERC is actually going out in looking for student, no matter its ‘performance’ has not seemed to be drawing that much volume it needs. You see, if ERC is really that good, words of mouth would have spreaded and Andy would never even need to advertise, cos everyone becomes successful and will draw friends in, flooding ERC.

If Kenny Yap was not in the sales doc, and the government agencies were not listed, and SM Goh was not mentioned, I won’t even bother to sign up with ERC.

I hope you can supply more details. It’s very vague here you mentioned since after this incident, I have completely distrust this agency.

Right now, the government is looking to take control of this sector. I am also waiting for me fee and apology.

If you are sincerely thinking of taking up, here’s one way since you have come across the experienced: let the others go ahead, and see if they really make the money.

For us, the terms back then (according to some pros I talked to) are actually against the Unfair Trading Act itself. But CASE, as one of us had approached, wasn’t quite useful. Hence the government involvement now is highly appreciated, if it works for us consumers.

Now since, Andy Ong mention this name Carrie Ho, a lawyer; if she took the ERC offer, you may ask her how it goes. 😀
Zebra
March 13th, 2008 at 08:59

Wow. Thanks for sharing this information scope.Good thing I did not sign on the spot. I went for the Wednesday talk after seeing the advertisement in the newspaper. He told the group of people that he would waive off the license fee of $20k. Then someone requested for waiver of the $10k course fee which he agreed upon the condition that there is 90% attendance and 1 student enrollment and that this offer is valid only for today..Anyway, I must say that after attending his talk, I was motivated and even though after this, I will not join the course, it was something of a wake up call for me.tks
Scope
March 13th, 2008 at 20:59

Zebra,$20k?!! Wow!

Anyway, I am aware of him offering a percentage commission to pple looking for (foreign) students. Most schools I know are doing something like that. Just call the schools and inform them you have someone/s who’d like to enrol, you can get comm readily!

Out of curiousity… how many of those group of yours actually took up the scheme??? 😀 OMG.

Course fee is $10k?! Zebra, what is being offered that is worth $10k???

As one of the sceptics now, I am wondering… If this scheme is partnered by the government, and it makes almost riskless money, you can imagine the loads of grassroots, MPs, their relatives, friends… will flood to ERC! ^.^

Whether you are motivated or not, that’s your issue. But you have shared something indeed.

As the state papers have indicated, the government is handling this sector, say, about 2009. Investigations on such ‘schemes’ and relevant departments should be on the way. Our role is merely bringing up the awareness for the authority. Of cos, if we can recover the losses, and for me to get my rightful apology, that’d be best.

Why don’t I waive you off $1m if you can bring me a pack of students worth $2m in comm? Interested? 😀 The nature of this ‘condition’ is rather interesting.

If you buy one product from a Tshare coy, and you got ‘waiver’ by introducing members… sounds like… sounds like…

Sounds like what???

Certain happenings shouldn’t happen in education…

Come 2009, I hope the government can yield something. Wondering can it be done… Let’s hope.

Scope.
A.T
December 4th, 2008 at 23:55

Hi Scope, can you email me more on the details about ERC and the “unfortunate” case you came across? Thanks.
Scope
December 5th, 2008 at 00:22

ERC has made news recently in a scandal, and even Andy Ong’s details were splashed in a forum online. Calls for its (now ERCI) closure was also seen. The details of ERC schemes or the ‘unfortunate’ case can be observed from ads by ERC (which Andy Ong claimed he personally did those words).

This case has been refered to the government. Your request for further details should be made to the relevant authorities. This sector is a big problem. CASE’s role is under ‘revision’, and rogue institutes are probably getting the ax coming 2009.

Parties you may be interested in would includ:
1. Those who attended Andy Ong’s ‘free’ seminar/pitch;
2. Employees no longer with ERC;
3. Its customers.

If you get to read the emails… that’d be hot. LOL~ There is also this interesting ‘Roy occurence’ (or something) which might interest you as well. Adam Khoo was an associate with ERC; Maybe you should go to him. Check googles, Adam Khoo has a blog.

If you want to know more, I’d need your identity. Do understand that ERC’s Andy Ong has the audacity to threaten his customer with legal action. This becomes a government’s issue since CASE had been exposed to be pretty sleeping. You’d hence need to obtain more details from the relevant authorities if you need them.

Rgds.
Scope.
ScC
January 15th, 2009 at 20:39

What an education HUB! It is quite sad that the government people got associated with them. But waz news?

I read the papers, and I also got shocked.
Scope
January 16th, 2009 at 04:02

Hi ScC!

It’s thus probably best that since government people are involved, government deals with them for us. LOL~

Minister Ng should have the precious chance to do something for Singaporeans. I look forward to his efforts.

This case has been refered to the government for about 1~2 years! Alongside with the Preston storm… It should be optimistic here since we have a talented, wisely chosen, uncorrupted and caring government with great governance… LOL~

Thanks to the MSM, they have provided good cover fire, and the spillover went online.

The rest is now up to the government to prove itself.

Scope.
Benny
April 8th, 2009 at 21:11

Hi,

how is the case now ?
i attend the seminar yest and interested to sign up..

Should i ?
Scope
April 9th, 2009 at 16:03

Hi Benny,

LOL~

You opened a wordpress account just to find out?
MOE is hiring the ‘pros’ to clamp on this sector (They should have done this long long back so people like myself don’t waste money on rubbish). ERC’s issues have been exposed more or less, and we can see the links they have ‘established’ with the Preston issue alone. Do you expect the government to proceed on without tracing them?

You know how long it took for MAS to move on Shine Empire (plus its various overseas activities) and for the government to trace Ren Ci (into its businesses and craps)?

It’s up to you of what your choice would be, but ERC obviously doesn’t care about methods, and we now know this is a rotten apple. This is one institute MOE must definitely have a look on. Since the government states 2009, and indication has it that it’s about towards the end of the year, we’d have to wait for while.

I don’t advocate those people to take up a class action suit against Andy Ong or ERC, because why should they when the government can deal with them? I mean, this is the government’s job, so don’t snatch it from them. I also don’t see why when we have other insitutes such as the more credible and established SIM that you need ERC? Your choice.

I don’t think MAS is allowing itself to go through those ‘get rich’ talks from Andy Ong and his associates to make Temesek even solid. It’s very embarassing for the government but all these do happen under its nose. So… About the case, it’s just let the government has a chance to prove itself.

Actually, you read its past sales documents sent to the Media to publish and those public pitches made… LOL~ You know what is misrepresentation? If MOE gives it and the associates a miss… something will be seriously wrong. Just my personal opinion.

Up to you. For me, I’d never trust that Andy Ong or those associated with him.

So what you sign up? $1680… for what? No pinnacles, a legal threat based on laughable grounds, and… LOL~ I don’t really care who you are, use your common sense. I signed up that time was because of the government agencies’ links to it. Now, I don’t even trust those agencies or government association anymore.

Have a nice day, Benny… or whatever.

Scope.
Lynn
April 12th, 2009 at 16:42

i didn’t sign up for their wealth mgt programme but rather the BBA one and the same you, i was “overpromised and under-delivered”.
contradicting enough, i learnt that phrase in one of the modules which i am applying it in this case.

thought Andy Ong was too busy to bother about such matter. didn’t know he browse blogs too.

read his blog? he ends every entry with “Your Friend, Andy”. looks like it doesn’t apply in your case huh?
Scope
April 12th, 2009 at 17:54

Lynn,

That’d come under misrepresentation. It’s not a phase but a legal offence. As the recent case I’ve encountered at Sim Lim (now notorious for such cases), that owner told me the product would be 10,000:1 for the price I agreed to pay; yet it turned out to be only 700:1. I can’t use 700:1 for the intended purpose, so why buy? It was cheating or over-promised or under-deliver or whatever.

No contract can be based on immoral terms.

I am not sure about you but, maybe you love ‘friends’ who go around ‘over-promising and under-delivering’, and you also take people’s money for ‘over-promised and under-deliver’. Who knows?

Recently, Li Ao is also suing some Singaporeans for over-promising and underdelivering, or simply– cheating.

Read his blog for what? What pinnacles can he deliver other than legal threats? It’s pretty obvious even online that many people are angry with him. The most disturbing thing is with such large scale issue, the government has been idling for years. And it took so long for NKF, Sunshine Empire and even the Ming Yi to be checked. MOE is still hiring the officers for the job… But CASE has been obviously sleeping all those years.

I was pretty agitated by the Preston situation when CASE was around.

Would the government sign up for their wealth programme? This programme has been around before the crisis even starts, and from the Preston doctorate scandal, it has spreaded out into other wealth programmes by the ‘Dr’ who… I am most shocked that the government is allowing this to be happening under its talented nose.

If you take consumers’ money, you deliver properly. He’s not busy… He has the time to email me in his employee’s capacity, yet he has no time to read an email the China’s side sent me which I forwarded to him.

Contradicting enough…

My view on Andy Ong is hence very bad. Not only did this chap who goes around teaching people how to be entrepreneurs threaten to sue, he’s not honorable enough to surrender the fee paid to him. And worst, he can’t even email me in his own capacity but hiding behind his employee’s. Even in the last session with him, I’ve given him chances to ‘help me’ by approaching him, instead he made some ridiculous remarks in the class and left an hour earlier.

Subsequently he even dares to allege that I was finding small faults to want my money back and claimed I disturbed his girls when many times, even beyond lunch times, I couldn’t locate them because ‘they went for lunch’.

Problematic.

After the Preston issue blew, I get to read it after a month and checked ERC’s response… I am so utterly disappointed with this ‘mentor’. If this is how entrepreneurship is, I am not surprised how Diamond Energy Water could have made news in Hong Kong.

I am not surprised so many are angry with this ‘friend’. And I am so disappointed Kenny Yap and others are associated with ERC. Singapore, (eg) according to the Indonesians, was known to be better…

Over-promised and under-delievered… am I in India?

I’d never bother with private education service in Singapore after ERC’s disppointing encounter.

This sector is now well-known to be an infested ground. I seriously doubt 2009 will work wonders but MOE must clean up this sector asap. $1680 of consumers are hard earned money. They obviously paid for results, or they might as well pay those people selling magic stones.

People buy magic stones for the results, no results mean cheating.

Again, I am very disturbed as a consumer that these are happening under the nose of the clean and effective government for so many years to the point that consumers who paid hard-earned monies can be slapped by legal threats.

Is this still Singapore?

Lynn, I don’t expect you to agree with me. If you ask my honest view about this, after such encounter, what do you think?

I am hoping to leave Singapore in a few years, because I am utterly disappointed… It is not the same anymore. Such things are becoming pretty rampant. NKF was like this, Ming Yi that fucker is like this, Sunshine Empire is also like this, and that old cop who started YMCA was also like this! There are so many people starving down there, and this Abbot can still have time to fool around the accounts. Sunshine Empire, it made so much promises, but end up mostly empty… and it took so much money in the form of investments.

Why did I study so hard to get an hons degree when I can get a doctorate from Preston…? Why? Tell me why.

I thought Singapore is about meritocracy…

Lynn, I am very disappointed with Singapore.

Hopefully, I can chance upon some who really love the movies and join me in my course… overseas. You watched ‘Dragonball Evolution’? It’s crap, and it’s a crappy lotsa of investment to produce such crap… Why? Which is why I am looking for people honorable enough to make this industry better.

Have a nice day.

Scope.
~Pink Miu Miu~
April 13th, 2009 at 06:08

There’s a lot of things/people that disappoint us coz we paint too nice a picture of them but alas, we fail to realise they are humans too, sometimes when we know the truth, it hurts even more so when the person is viewed as the rest as ‘holy’..
Scope
April 13th, 2009 at 15:08

Hi Pinkmiumiu,

I’ve never seen this guy as ‘holy’, but given all those government agencies’ association with them, I don’t expect so huge and many empty promises. LOL~ You should have gone for his pitch presentation to the public.

This guy is pretty egoistic but not really solid. And I am not talking about Preston, I am talking from my own experience. I seriously need support back then, and it was a regret we paid good monies for nothing of substance, but a complimentary legal threat. Hilariously, he told me when I tried to approach him that those China people cannot be trusted because they always talk big big.

Aiyah~ This guy…

Humans, I am also a human. Why can I be a good guy, and would be a more honorable entrepreneur if needs be, and he must go around doing such things for money? Look at the wave of angry voices online about this ‘arrogant’ chap. That was a description of him I caught online, even his IC number was put online.

To be fair, I am more disappointed about the problem growing so huge and the government actually did nothing for years so that another Scope may end up as victim.

If the government understands that selling magic stones are illegal, it’d be a strange thing why so many are associated in this operation.

Humans… Well, we have given this Andy Ong the chance of trust once. If he likes to do that to fellow Singaporeans, fine… Hopefully he won’t scream when the China counterparts do that to him.

It’s too long a widespread public issue… If this is how money is to be made… what is education to MOE? Why have those agencies even been associated with ERC? That’s my question. I thought the government is very standard. I was deeply disappointed when the ministry said in parliament: Those registered with MOE is not MOE’s problem…

Then whose problem’s that?

Then I am glad Minister Ng comes in, and Minister Lui also made it clear they will start doing something for this sector.

This is not failing to realise they are humans too; I am a human, I don’t do such things. When in MOE’s syllabus educates Singaporeans to do such things? Nowadays, look at Sim Lim and other places… even in the medical sector. They can’t be bothered about quality of services other than the money money money.

Singapore wasn’t like that. And now Indonesians are also complaining… So many craps are happening in Singapore! If this is the truth now, the government will have to do something about it.

Otherwise, don’t blame people for not wanting to stay in a mess.

Scope.
ScC
May 21st, 2009 at 15:32

The government to ‘prove’ itself?
It’s likely to be a pretty long love affair! Haha.

These people are shameless for so long not without a GOOD reason, Scope.

Rgds.
Scope
June 14th, 2009 at 12:47

SCC,

It’s the similar reply here: http://tomorrow.sg/archives/2009/06/07/great_singapore_sale__miracle_la.html#comment

‘…Protecting the interest of the public, protecting their properties (eg. $$$) and ensuring those profiting from such scams are stopped and encourage those who profit from proper activities are all the government’s role.

They do have better things to do, but everything concerning public interests must be taken care appropriately. Or how else can governance work, tell me?‘

There is obviously a good reason why I am leaving this to the government to prove themselves, or the next government or the next… Obviously, Durai, Ming Yi and a whole bunch of social pests are taken out not immediately.

It’s very obvious how the people see of the government, I can understand how people think as in Tomorrow.sg. But the government is not merely SM Goh or MM Lee.

It may well be very long an affair but whatever the GOOD reason it is, wrong means wrong.

Besides, Minister Ng is not reaching 2010 yet. LOL~ In this case, patience is better. You see, the accounts of NKF can be so different under established accounts company before and after. LOL~

This ERC issue is actually a whole string of issues that the government has to handle. It’s pretty big. It will go to show what they are made of. From what I learn of, the ball is starting to roll quietly.

For us, we let the government/s decides, and while people’s attitude on the government’s response is understandable, but in these days, global trade means it’s not just Singapore. It’s a pretty mobile world.

Shameless or not, it all depends on various decision makers’ abilities. We’d just watch the show with a popcorn. LOL~

Scope.
Beetle Ayumi
June 17th, 2009 at 20:02

Here’s one big news. It’s another case with private educators.
http://theonlinecitizen.com/2009/06/report-private-educational-provider-threatens-online-forum-with-defamation/

It’s pretty common nowadays in Singapore. Sounds like this James is a grassroot leader.
Scope
June 25th, 2009 at 10:52

Already know lah~ I am wondering when will the govt still moving… LOL~

Education… once so holy, now so condemned. LOL~
Nini
August 8th, 2009 at 17:25

hi,
nice nice article. i am one of the unhappy ERC student from overseas.

I support you.
Gian
August 13th, 2009 at 15:15

It must be hard on you people to be among such craps. It’s just strange your native govt condemns Denmark administration while ends up with such problems.

Money can corrupt, never fails. 😉

I support you as well. Take care.
Scope
August 18th, 2009 at 12:17

Hi Nini,

My apology on behalf of Singapore for having a problem spreaded overseas then. Regrets, regrets…

But it may be wonderful you can share your experience.

Hi Gian,

Everywhere got craps, the funny thing is when a super duper vacuum cleaner is running around with the pile of crap growing and thriving…

As usual… a lot of room to improve… a lot of room to improve… How ‘strange’ things will become in Singapore is now hardly surprising.

But such large scale issue if now spreaded overseas is still… the government’s problem as I have long put it.

Hopefully, won’t be my problem in a few years time… ^.^

Scope.
Blasta
October 8th, 2009 at 15:36

So what is the latest on the case ? Is there a case or only legal threat (lawyers letter?)

Another private education provider involved as charity sector is also making legal threats to online bloggers who are like unsatisfied customer, so I want to hear your update.
Scope
November 4th, 2009 at 16:42

Blasta,

We have discussed blogging cases in this blog. In a way, in the current regime, ridiculous stores could resort to legal threats in the hope of covering up their poor services or bad customer experiences from the public.

Put it this way, a customer is entitled to grade or comment and express his/her thought on the service providers in personal fashion via blogging. This is particularly so because of the status of Singapore as a tourism city.

And of course, there are other legal implications from blogging discussed already.

Further update may have to wait when the next PM comes by. LOL~

In any case, remember that consumers have their rights, and bloggers have their nature of operations. Special privilege is a principle, not a definite instruction. Lawyers are paid to side with their clients, but that doesn’t mean lawyers are always right. Otherwise, how can there be two lawyers fighting a case?

During my absence from Singapore for the past month, it seems that many are more particular in precedence than to understand that such tort cases are on case by case basis; which means, the merits defer case by case, and what you need to know is to understand the legal implications behind and not what precedence afore suggests.

The reason why I have left ERC’s case with the government is because this case is not so simple. Just as NKF’s case, PM changes, fortune changes. LOL~

Whether it is a legal threat or not, I’d never recommend commercial entities to replace their customer service division with a legal threat department… I mean this is common-sensically nosensical.

No, I don’t even have the lawyer’s letter. Frankly speaking, what do you think the demand from the lawyer should be? I mean, domestic legal framework doesn’t actually apply to blogging, unless everything down to the server and operation are solely contained within a legal framework of any state. This involves the necessity of understanding international laws, of which Singapore cannot dismiss itself from.

No matter, a local court’s conduct may at times… be confusing in itself in any state to at times force a judgement beyond its discretion. So the necessary thing you do is to first acertain your blogging status. If (say) you are blogging in the hope of being a credible news-station, then amitaba to you…

One important basis of defamation is that you must be a credible discreditor doing slandering– which causes effectual damages. Which also means, if you are a customer solely expressing your views, it should be ok in general.

Wrong means wrong, my dear. Even China has recently removed an unpopular Education MINISTER who was known to be involved in private education nosense… Who knows, of cos? But whether you have a case or not, just understand the rights of being a customer and in the legal framework of Singapore as a Singaporean.

And please, right and wrong is not just how you feel… especially in a cultural desert. So… if you are unsure, you may read this blog and decide for yourself.

Rgds.

Scope.
Jeslyn Duc
November 16th, 2009 at 18:49

hi,
i want to add few.
one of my friend told me that his 2yrs degree certificate (from ERC Institute) is not recognised by MOM to apply for EP. Employer is already ready to hire him.
the australian uni/institute is Not even in the recognised university list.

He doesn;t want to talk to concerned people, because they can do nothing on it.

what the hell..
Scope
November 18th, 2009 at 15:10

Hi Jeslyn,

In many of the cases in general so far, you can expect to find such ads (or sales promises):

Recognised top school from established Scope Institute Blogosphere that is prestigous bla bla bla, and coached by top lecturers from around the world…

Or…

Our Scope Institute is under what government initiative/cooperation and you can’t find a better degree for your prospects… and other bullshits.

Or in some cases…

Think of working in beautiful and prosperous Singapore by taking up Scope Institute’s prestigous programs and be XXX professionals today! (without telling you you can’t work with Student Permit and the costs of staying in Singapore, plus even rented lodgings are connected to such ‘prestigous institutions’).

Or… other lies or tactics or misleading things to mislead people for the sales. Pls check up the ‘Preston Degree scandal’ and find your clues.

I can only show you general issues with the private education sector in Singapore where students could be (forced) sold into prostitutions. (Check Singapore news reports) Ie. if you think useless or bogus degrees or programs which do not deliver what you are paying for are the only problems. LOL~

People study courses or pay for services for prospects offered, but I am not surprised insititutes in Singapore are offering junks which can’t even be recognised by MOM to obtain the EP, and pitch without limits.

What you can do is to make your unhappiness public so that agencies and other consumers can have a reference. If your case is real, as you have noticed by a simple search online, ERC’s personel details down to NRIC and company registration have been splashed out, your friend should furnish your own experience and rate the service openly and recommend others base on your experience.

You can choose to make a complain to Education ministry, SPRING (many such institutes are, regretably, springing from SPRING/EDB Singapore), but if you are a Singapore citizen, you can make a complain direct to the government.

But you/your friend must understand that inspite of losing hard-earned money and time on useless junks, it doesn’t mean that government will definitely do something now or do nothing forever. The charity fiasco in Singapore had only received major ‘shaking’ after many many years, with a new PM.

It’s quite true. During our time, a couple of us have tried to approach (eg) CASE (check your newspaper and know how useless CASE has been on such issus), we know it can be pretty useless, or else how do you think institutes such as ERC can still sell such degrees and such plus making legal threats on customers under the nose of the ‘talented’ government?

Do you expect such institutes to tell buyers ‘My prestigous degrees are not recognised by MOM, pay me pay me so I can be rich and famous!’ and ‘You can talk to my lawyers about your unhappiness…’. LOL~

Your friend should help everyone by making open the issues he faced, otherwise given this vague scenario, we can only assess on general basis.

Our ministry of education had in Parliament hurrily claimed that they are irresponsible to this sector’s problems in Singapore. Hopefully, they will be responsible soon enough and we can hear something else in the parliament.

Nonetheless, I have heard of things regarding ERC in China as well. It’s seemingly spreading beyond boundaries already. So your friend’d not be alone.

I heard Obama is stepping in to protect consumers. Perhaps Singapore will also learn this, after learning how to charge $2 from savings under $500… LOL~

Well…

My apology to your friend that Singapore has… come to this state. But there are still bargains and honest shops in Singapore on various things. Hopefully the time and money wasted on the program not recognised by MOM won’t affect your friend’s working in Singapore. Well, sincere apology on behalf of Singapore to incur such unhappiness upon your friend.

Best rgds.

Scope.
Donald Tsang
November 18th, 2009 at 18:59

Justice needs to be bought, not brought.
Serve you people right paying for junks!
Scope
November 19th, 2009 at 21:57

Cleaners not working, how then?
dirtyboys
January 21st, 2010 at 22:53

Preston University is a kind of degree mill reported by Sandra Davie under http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_275807.html … and I agree with Scope, it is an injustice towards all the real PhDs out there who worked hard to earn their PhD.

Stories like ERC that you have reported is also double injustice, when the boss presents a fake PhD to offer you a service for payment and then threaten you on top of that.

Businessmen buying a fake PhD for appearance is another matter. Well I do not say it is justified, but they are a more forgivable category in my opinion if they dont explicitly mislead you or offer services flaunting their PhD.

Of course there are other category of Preston University PhDs running education business in Singapore. I think they should be more serious about it. Two cases in public are Dr T. Chandroo already reported running Montessori Kindergartens (http://www.asiaone.com/News/Education/Story/A1Story20080905-86058.html) and Dr Maneesh Tripathi CEO of Global Indian Foundation schools (http://www.globalindian.org.sg/Portals/33/docs/profile_maneesht1.pdf). I don’t think it is correct for them to claim PhD title because the education business they are into. I think MOE should regulate more strictly on this also as the public tend to believe these titles at face value.
Scope
January 31st, 2010 at 19:36

DirtyBoys,

No no no, I didn’t go after ERC for the PHDs; many of us tried the service on the guaranteed promises of fundings, or what sure ideas of being on what next pinnacles.

It’s more like those bankers selling products promising this and that, and resorting to governmmnt agencies’ involvement to gain trust. And most ridiculous is, the suppose call is to ‘nurture entrepreneurs’… LOL~

It’s no wonder Singapore is in a big mess. Can you expect expreneurs ending up in such… pathetic market traits? It’d be good if you can gather those who were there for the pitch. And it was known that civil servants had been unfavorable towards this way of approach to the public but…

Check the background of ERC, should you be interested to know more. LOL~

The education sector, alongside with the charity sector where TT Durai topped the cream, is still a big mess.

Your main point:

“Businessmen buying a fake PhD for appearance is another matter. Well I do not say it is justified, but they are a more forgivable category in my opinion if they dont explicitly mislead you or offer services flaunting their PhD.”

Would you think those businessmen will forgive employees for their fake PHDs? Would you think those very businessmen will support those degree mills for creating those cheats on THEIR pay rolls?

Then why should ANYone respect proper education and institutions and study so hard for?

Is this what the MM is talking about on education? If this is so, fuck MOE and just go get the degrees from degree mills and other crap operators then we’d all be FORGIVEN and Accepted.

Nobody is prosecuting all those craps, and why? Why should your children waste time in MOE schools when you can fork out lesser money and get a PHDs? You know how much money and time is needed for just education to A’levels?

It’s not just injustice, these people are social pests rendering the government idiots. If that category can be forgiven, MOE should just shut down.

Close one eye, and they’d spread wide and deep.

It’s not just the title, it’s the essence of common sense. Andy Ong dragged in a Carrie Ho, now would this lady tell me she’d be forgiven for her fake lawyer’s degree in face of the judge, then we’d talk about this category.

These people just don’t care, they just want money and fame… LOL~

So it’s up to you to think about it. And I welcome anyone to discuss with solid sense.

Nobody is refunding, and nobody is apolgising to those ‘victims’ who lost their monies, and we can’t even talk about forgiving. Got it?
lolcat
February 18th, 2010 at 15:42

@scope – well said: “Would you think those businessmen will forgive employees for their fake PHDs ?”

Cheating whether by education businessmen or so called “normal” business, is no different. For example listed company is accountable to share holders and public.

Dirty Boy – imagine you own a business and your employee is a cheat PHD, and you come to know one day. Or you buy shares of ABC company and he or she is found to be a fake PHD CEO. How do you feel.

But Dirty Boys research was good so I have some more to add.

In April 2009 Dr. T Chandroo is a real PHD. http://www.asiaone.com/Business/SME%2BCentral/Prime%2BMovers/Story/A1Story20090410-134511.html
(Story worth reading).
“Iron man

Profile of Dr T.Chandroo, Chairman and CEO of the Modern Montessori International (MMI) Group. -tabla!

Fri, Apr 10, 2009
tabla!

By Jawharilal Rajendran

HE HAS spent most of his life in the children’s education business even as he pursued his own education.

A fortnight ago, Dr T. Chandroo threw a big party for his many friends to celebrate his doctorate in Business Administration from Australia’s Southern Cross University.

The euphoria had long subsided when we met in his office at the MMI building in the heart of Chinatown and he was in a reflective mood. Asked for his success formula, this self-made millionaire points not to the degrees on the wall, but to the lessons he learnt from the School of Hard Knocks or the University of Life.

Whatever you call it, a few things are certain as he will tell you – anyone can enrol, there are no fees and graduates don’t receive certificates.

‘Please don’t get me wrong,’ he says, the smile suddenly vanishing from his face.

‘I’m all for getting an education and I firmly believe in lifelong learning. But the hard lessons I learnt knocking on doors as a door-to-door salesman, for example, no university can teach you.

‘People slam the door in your face and they let their dogs loose. But you grow the thickest of thick skins, learn to deal with the disappointments, and move ahead.’

You have to look deep into his past to fully understand what drives this man, the eldest of seven children who grew up poor in a Bukit Gombak kampung house.

‘I would wake up at 6am, wash my father’s taxi, have a quick breakfast and rush to school. My family kept goats and after school I would tie them up – about five to seven of them – and take them to a field nearby to graze. These were my daily chores. On Saturdays I would pluck curry leaves and take them to Bukit Panjang market to sell for one or two dollars to earn some money for the family. It was a tough life and I developed a hunger to do better when I grew up.’

After his O Levels at Boys’ Town (now Assumption English) he worked for a short time as a dumping ground superviser while awaiting enlistment in the army where he became a gunner in a tank unit. He also took up boxing during his National Service, idolised Muhammad Ali and learnt to pick himself off the canvas and continue fighting. Although his boxing days are well behind him, Dr Chandroo, 55, tries to maintain the training regimen of a pugilist in his regular gym workouts.

After NS, he worked as a High Street textile salesman but soon found the job boring and quit after learning the finer points of salesmanship. He continued studying for his A Levels in night school where he met Sheila, who would one day become his partner in both life and business.

After being jobless for three months, he saw an ad in The Straits Times which changed his life. ‘It said: ‘Born Losers Arise’,’ he recalls. ‘I was fascinated and went for the interview. It was for a job to sell Encyclopaedia Brittanica door to door.

There was no salary, only a 12 per cent commission but I decided to give it a try.’

His friends told him there was no future but he was determined to prove them wrong. He diligently worked the phone and spent his nights and weekends trying to convince potential buyers. At $1,750 for a set of 32 volumes, it was not an easy sell in the 1970s. But by then Dr Chandroo had expunged the word failure from his book and grown a thick hide.

Thus armed, he sold six sets in the first month, eight in the second and nine in the third. On a roll, he decided to invest some of his savings in a second hand Ford Escort so that he could make more house calls.

By the fourth month he was promoted to field sales manager with four salesmen reporting to him. Within three years he became regional sales manager and, at its peak, his salary was $35,000 a month.

‘One of my more memorable sales was to SM Goh (Chok Tong) in 1976. He was a young minister. It was so many years ago, I don’t think he will remember me. He bought a set for his children. I closed the deal in just 10 minutes.’

After six years, Dr Chandroo decided to call it a day to start his own company selling encyclopaedias. ‘I wanted to be my own boss. That was my dream from young.’ But with the arrival of CD-Roms, encyclopaedias began to lose their appeal and so he branched out into selling Sesame Street books for kids.

That was when he realised there was a shortage of good pre-school centres and, after some research, contacted the MMI headquarters in London. Montessori is a teaching method for pre-school children and recognises each child’s pace of learning. It was developed by Italian physician Maria Montessori.

After convincing MMI that he would maintain the quality of teachers, he began operations at a small Victoria Street shophouse in 1989. Under his stewardship, MMI has grown into one of the leading pre-school education providers with 32 schools in Singapore and 50 in the Asia-Pacific region.

His time is now divided between MMI and community and charity work aimed primarily at needy children. ‘I want to help disadvantaged children. That’s my way of giving back for everything I have been blessed with,’ says Dr Chandroo who is also chairman of the Sri Mariamman Temple, located a short walk from his South Bridge Road office.

Wife Sheila and older son Sanjey, 27, who has a Masters in investment banking, help him run MMI. Second son Diresh, 23, is in Manchester studying aerospace engineering and daughter Roshini, 19, is pursuing a psychology degree in Sydney.

His idea of relaxation is a Saturday night movie with Sheila followed by a visit to one of the Jalan Kayu prata shops. He may be walking on air these days, but the kampung boy is determined to keep his feet firmly on the ground.”

Another story is about the Singapore taxi driver with real PHD from Stanford U.

http://next-stop-wonderland.blogspot.com/2009/08/taxi-driver-in-singapore-with-stanford.html

Happy New Year 🙂
Scope
February 20th, 2010 at 03:05

Lolcat,

Happy New Year! Is that the link to your blog?

In any case, real Phd or not, his conduct would involve being in associated with whom and what.

It’s his decision, and the public to assess. Honestly, whether his PHD is real or not for this ‘Dr’, now with so much money, will he go the way of the good samaritan, or just become another fucking Durai?

As for the taxi driver with PHD… Well… Qualifications have been too much of a craze in Singapore.

But so?

In Singapore having that PHD has only a few employers who’d be able to reward for such school-results.

If he doesn’t want to drive taxi, then is he going to take another course in NUS???

Sounds nosensical to me… What about those who can’t afford? SO what you have more qualifications? Just sit in the office and wait for taxpayers to pour money on you…?

My bewilderment.

Enjoy the New Year!

Scope.
Cialis
March 6th, 2010 at 10:34

fajKax Excellent article, I will take note. Many thanks for the story!
Talent0
March 16th, 2010 at 18:49

MediaRing (renamed Spice i2i) announced new CEO, it is the above mentioned ex Preston University (degree mill) PHD holder Maneesh Tripathi. Is it like he left International India School just in time… ? Maybe deserves a PHD for quick reflex !!!

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/keyDevelopments?rpc=66&symbol=MRNG.SI
Scope
March 17th, 2010 at 01:08

Hi Talent0,

It probably explains (if you are true) that some counters listed are enjoying astonishing hikes.

Well… no need for any tricks, just *probably* uncover the network and you’d see which counters will go up.

I am all eyes on Osims and such as well. Such degrees are junks, insults to those who really studied hard and will continue to master the field even further.

If we don’t respect education, we don’t respect talents. Many people got rich under the nose of the government with no honor at all. I don’t know why… 😦
Bird
March 28th, 2010 at 03:35

Whatever Preston or no Preston, ERC is having a good time… and so called Preston graduates too.

Dr Jurgen is one of the invited judge for startups competition 2010.. http://startup.org.sg/index.php?q=node/725

Mr Maneesh Tripathi out from Global Indian Montessori plus school and has taken over as Media Ring’s CEO (technology company).

So which Preston or other ERC student is NOT doing well ?
Scope
March 28th, 2010 at 08:50

Hi Bird,

That’s why the big discussion online.

Next day, Jack Neo will be doing very well as well, Durai is making like 5 figures a month, Ming Yi is going to heaven…

See?

Of course they are doing well.

The sun has not risen yet, you can see the ghosts everywhere. Those people are frying the property prices to the skies, they are of course doing very well… saved that the government is having an issue trying to answer for such… doing well. LOL~

Wait till the sun rises.

It seems that the new what education council will have a pretty… tough time. In my view of the situation… sure fail.

LOL~

BTW, check with the ‘other’ ERC ‘students’ and see how. It is the government’s own issue. NKF was also doing very well, Ren Ci was also doing very well…

That’s why I have migrated. After Cat leaves, I’d move out again. This place, before the sun rises… cannot compete like that. If that’s the way you make money… there will be no need to study hard, and be proper.

So which Preston student is not doing well? You actually asked.

MOE can close down… just pay the dirty money, anyone can be PHDs or Doctors… What’s your point, Bird?

Scope.
Fenni23
March 28th, 2010 at 21:37

I like the humor. Why must we go to MOE schools when there is ERC and this Preston thing?

Why do we need MAS when we can get rich quick?

Why do we even need the government in the first place? Those people are doing much better being so shameless and my peers are still studying hard for WHAT?

Doesn’t make ox sense. Why hasn’t the government done anything about these jokers?
Scope
March 29th, 2010 at 02:37

Hi Fenni23,

Why why why?

Like Bird said, all those chaps are doing well… So why parents should waste some many years and money sending their kids to schools?

Easy concept. Perhaps the government still more time to… prove itself. LOL~

Frankly, this is NOT the Singapore I know of ANYMORE. Nowadays, anything Singaporean, I don’t believe.

Play safe.

Scope.
Splinter Siaox
April 10th, 2010 at 00:57

No justice in Singapore, baby. Live wit it, or git out.
Help
April 16th, 2010 at 16:44

Hi Guys stop complaining and start thinking a new site that is effective to allow victims to share their bad experience.

we can name it victim.com.sg. Using simple iphone icon so that all iphone user can share their bad experience. Time shares, travel agency… blar blar.

Case receiving 20,000 case issues each year but 95% will not be solve as they are using paper and pen. We are using model technology to broadcast.
Scope
April 16th, 2010 at 17:45

Hi Splinter and Help,

I suppose getting out more practical… in the current situation when the government is like… needing more time to figure out what to do. LOL~ Sad but true. Good or bad, this is the government.

It’s an idea to have such a site. But have you ever thought of it…

Would most kiasi Singaporeans join your IPhone site when that reportedly useless CASE can’t even handle? It’s like telling Andy Ong to call up each n everyone of them in the name of God to theaten to sue them. Isn’t it? This guy already has 前科 doing such anti-social thing. Rationally speaking, even MOE can’t do anything, what’s the use of a tiny site?

Check the other forums and sites, it’s been at least a year public anger has shown towards this institute’s conduct. So many government people online, think all of them blind? LOL~ You can try, but I doubt will succeed. Those online kiasi only dare to splash out Andy Ong’s coy and private details, but they do so anonymously.

One blog is like calling for class action suit thing, but how many really came together?

Victims… LOL~ That’s Singapore nowadays. What can CASE do? It’s useless.

Just my 2cts.

Scope.
CASE Useless
April 26th, 2010 at 02:34

CASE is useless ‘cos they don’t publish or even allow a complainant to find out how many complaints are there against a company, to see if they are trustworthy or cheats.

CaseTrust/EduTrust is also optional. The biggest private schools are not CaseTrust approved. So then nobody can touch them !
Scope
April 26th, 2010 at 10:18

Case Useless,

Frankly speaking, a couple of us were mulling to report to CASE when one of us check with CASE and suggested it was useless. I won’t even bring up ‘trustworthy’ as a relevant word here.

From Online search, you can gauge the public’s attitude to ERCi. Definitely a lot more victims and more threats… MOE is like sleeping. So let it be. How can there be no complains with such a person operating in such manner going around threatening customers?

Zzz…
BBBs
May 24th, 2010 at 14:56

Thank god i came across this site…
Scope
May 24th, 2010 at 15:37

Hi BBBs,

I am like beginning to worry about this chap:
http://singapore.hotcourses.com.sg/study/singaporean-student/review/truth-acpe-aka-erci/56428/220308/review.html

Most people came in here sharing their own issues. This chap probably never came in here. LOL~

Nowadays, local consumers’ interests are taken for granted.

I read:
Few local lecturers are there just to make $ and use students for personal business motives which the school may not be aware of. Bad

Ignorant. LOL~
Mr Money Face
May 27th, 2010 at 17:32

Live with it. This world is full of scams under the cloak of talented leadership.
People must learn to live with sufferings. Why worry for that anony? Ignorance is bliss, never heard that? 🙂
Pissed Pee
May 30th, 2010 at 22:35

These schools just take money and want you to introduce more students. Why do you people still sign up?
I won’t even bother about these craps. At least a good lesson for all of you!
Scope
June 1st, 2010 at 16:41

Just too bad. Anything new?
Nothing’s going to change in Singapore.
Who’d bother? This place is already amok with craps. So… …

Scope.
Steve
July 9th, 2010 at 16:05

Just too bad. This is the real world. If you want to be rich, cheating is the key. I have seen alot of such people around. People should be alert of such money-suckers.
BBBs
July 21st, 2010 at 16:16

hey i’m back again! 😛
i’m having some disputes with the school now.
and thank god for the new direction given.
cheers!

t
Moe mole
July 29th, 2010 at 21:05

I heard of this before. So many private educators are like that lah. If the Moe won’t do anything now, maybe next Moe will do something. It’s better to let the g’ment handle such horrible people.

Have faith. Not every minister will be that weak! Tomorrow will be a better day!

I always believe good man will be blessed one.
Hello
October 27th, 2010 at 20:14

Regarding GIIS or GIEF / GIF schools http://www.techgoss.com/Story/406S11-CERT-refused-to-ban-3-school-blogs.aspx they will ban blogs.
Scope
October 29th, 2010 at 13:02

Hi Hello,

The Indian situation has always been known to be ‘hellish’ when it comes to social classes. Many powerful Indians are above all class, and they stay too used to that way. And now, they tried international laws obviously with disregards that the world is no India. (The concerned entity has branches in India, but is claimed to be local based, we are touching on general principles here as the ban tussle involves multiple legal frameworks.)

It’s like telling USA that Indian culture where X class of people reign supreme should have their way on (eg) western blogging or culture. Legally speaking, this concerns about international laws that where blogging is concern, it’s still better to erect some ‘rules’ within your own blog to deal with such people who seek to silence unhappy customers.

I don’t see the basis of this whole case when it’s really more of a concerned feedback or after-service review on the part of the parent. If those high class Indians think they can make an India out of the world, why not? (It is said that both entities are Singaporean based. LOL~ Which is really funny.)

But whether those blogs will be banned in this manner will be another issue. After all, blog hosts such as WordPress DON’T NECESSARILY ANSWER TO INDIA, and such bullying stance.

I don’t think that the parent in Singapore even need to bother about the court case. Local court have no real rights in imposing such Indian demands in a local environment, vice versa. There is not within the power of Singapore to enforce, since the site host concern may not even be Singaporean or Indian. There shouldn’t technically speaking a comtempt of the court in such case because this is not an Indian court.

In Singapore, they go by what Private Education Council route first, in India I don’t know. See? So legally speaking, given the difference in the operations of blogs and education situation, this is an interesting issue.

They can ban, it’s just a matter of a few keys and instructions to the system, but if you understand international laws, by right this is not an issue. Firstly, there isn’t a UN Charter on internet regulations, and it’s hard because no governments will want to be responsible to the tons of contents online. So the governments which tried to go nasty will almost certainly tried to define laws in their own manner hoping to justify within their own framework, but unless you want to fool around with justice system, you can’t just impose a sentence where the entity is concerning the rights of many frameworks.

It’s like ‘robbing’ justice or rights, and it’d backfire.

It’s just like Singapore courts using Singaporean evidence and logic on the justification of claiming Pedra Branca. And we know the outcome is, we don’t claim all of Pedra Branca. There will be a conflict of legal system when you try to use a destrict court on international matters. And India society is well-known not for its coherency with… many states. That includes commercial workings.

Where blogging is concerned, in such a case because it involves in Singaporean, it’d be up to the local court to show its understanding of this international issues. If it serves the Indian interest… LOL~ That’d be so funny.

We have to remember, expression via blogging in Singapore was promoted by the state via ministers’ involvement. The Indian school can consider relocating their institute to Singapore… and request the parents to go through the what Private Education Council. Obviously, it doesn’t.

Since PEC is a legal entity as a local channel, it becomes a legal conflict if the local court mismanages this case… by taking it. See? Singaporean court will be knowingly skipping ‘proceedure’ by tending to those Indians.

Since this matter is an issue between Indian interests and a local blogger, by right the Indians should file against the blogger in India courts. There is legal reason, do you know why? LOL~

Actually, what they are attacking is of the materials published on the blog probably with a western host under yet another framework. The ‘misdeed’ concerned is the publication. The Indian chaps should hold the legal tussle (eg) in the USA where the host could be. And there, the court will decide whether this publication is against (USA) laws and hence whether the author is guilty.

You can’t rule one guilty when 10 others clear this same involved entity. It’s the same as you declared divorce in one state, and yet other states insist you are married still. International nosense… Though for marriages, there is an international ‘guide’ in Women’s Charter. See?

Just to help you understand.

I think the local parent should question the local court on the basis of why local court is taking this case, and where comes the power (from international laws with regards to internet where other states should be involved) to unilaterally judge for all other states.

Unless Singapore can judge Pedra Branca wholly, they cannot take this international issues by themselves. Because we all know the outcome will not necessarily be how Singapore court (The parent should question the police and obtain a public statement for this case) can decide to be. Hence justice.

I hope this answers your concern. In conclusion, where comes the right for a ban, and from who to justify? The power of India, or the power of Singapore? Who should judge that the contents are wrong-doings? And why is the police in Singapore involved prior to malicious state established in the proper framework? It is obviously NOT ONLY the local blogger but 2 others carrying the similar issues the institute is not happy with. It is not even a threat to the state, police may consider not to waste limited resources on such commercial interests.

Scope.

Disclaimer: This is obviously an international case so Scope can only touch on the international aspects on this case. He cannot guarantee local aspects of the approach taken by India or Singapore, or USA. Ie. if a state goes on a rebellion mode, it’s beyond standard approach. Ie. If you are divorced in Spain, but local court insists to rule you still married (assuming there is no Women’s Charter), Scope cannot be responsible for such occurences of jokes. It’s like telling Scope you can’t be arrested for Singaporean joining peaceful protest in France for what human rights and France comes to Singapore to sue the Singaporean because in Singapore you’d need permits to go on street protest. LOL~ This is obviously rubbish. But the legal basis behind in such international cases is about the same.
changer
May 21st, 2011 at 16:23

Money rules, what ish new? Fat hope anything will change. Wayang only! O.o
Scope
May 21st, 2011 at 19:10

Change yeah… … LOL~
Delichicken
June 16th, 2011 at 23:24

Change yaya! Sin city, Wat do yu expect? Stay cool. Alot of such rubbish now in this island.
Scope
June 17th, 2011 at 04:20

Huat lah! Change lah! Tan gu gu lah!

Scope. (Very sianz liao…)
Bullied SM
July 28th, 2011 at 00:20

I am having problem with the school oso. Any advice? Thank you!!!
Scope
July 28th, 2011 at 04:14

Hi Bullied SM~
If you have not raised the issue against ERC, my suggestion is to wait. There issues behind them, just note their ‘tie’ to SPRING, and including their involvement in the what ‘service quality’ decision making unit. We must wait for the ‘right’ govt to raise the issues direct. Note that you are NOT the only one having issues with them.

Just check online, and you’d even see Andy Ong’s NRIC splashed out in a forum and other ‘involvements’ of them and their ‘usual tactics’ (“I am disappointed with you…” this sort of bullshits.).

If you have already confronted them, just know that going to CASE won’t work (we have explored this option, so I can tell you direct here). IF they threaten you with legal threats, kindly email me a copy of written piece and IGNORE all oral presentations by phone and such, INSIST on black and white for such threats. Remember, as a consumer, you have a case.

Keep the sales docs and note their ads. It goes the same for future complains. I have no wish to repeat and repeat the same thing. I do not think the current situation is suitable for direct confrontation, but the issue has been filed with the state.

I wish you all the best.

What is wrong, will never right. Remember TT Durai? LOL~ Take it easy, also for future complains.

Scope.
dIck45
March 25th, 2012 at 21:39

I know this Andy big nose. Egoistic jerk who blames his previous employer all the time! Any more news?
Scope
March 25th, 2012 at 23:42

That’s right. He always tell everyone how he was BULLIED by his ex-employer and bla bla bla. Yeah, his nosetrils very big. LOL~ He is also well known to be egoistic, and he calls himself titan. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha…

Scope.
Jason P.H.
August 21st, 2012 at 06:53

I guess course like this (investment) which teaches you how to get rich, even if its a genuine and good course, not everyone will really get rich. Some people see and learn from it, some don’t, and some sees it, but do not have the funds to carry out.

I was reading through an ad which which is promoting the course, seriously thinking of joining, and I did a search on Mr Andy Ong, I came across your blog. It really does affect my decision, to join his talk / lesson or not. Will I be wasting my time and money? Will I get scammed? So my different thoughts in my head now after I read through your blog. I think this was the reason why he threatened to sue you.

Look, this is the problem with blogs. Your own comments and decisions, be it true or false, good or bad, it creates an impact to your followers and whoever reads it.

Put yourself in Andy’s shoe. You set up a company, there’s a few guys out of many who thinks that what you are preaching is a total crap and one of these guys blogged it and telling the whole world you sucks, affecting many many more people not to believe in you. How do you feel?

This kind of blog entry can linger in the internet for many many years. How would you feel if you are him? Its like an uncomfortable needle pricking your heart, and you can’t put it out.

I was thinking, if you are not happy with his course, why don’t you send him a personal/company email asking for refund before you blog the whole thing out and asking people to avoid it? Maybe you already did, I don’t know.

I know blogging is legal, and you got your freaking rights to blog anything and everything. I am just trying to see this in another point of view. No bad feelings.

By the way, I don’t this is a non serious blog. Your posted this entry on 2007, and its 2012 now. After 5 years you are still talking about it. FIVE YEARS!!! omfg, really cannot offend you.
“Scope
March 25th, 2012 at 23:42
That’s right. He always tell everyone how he was BULLIED by his ex-employer and bla bla bla.”

If I am Andy, I would really hate you : )
Anyway, still thinking if I should join his speech tomorrow or not.
Just want to ask, in the end, he didn’t really try to sue you, am I right?
Scope
August 21st, 2012 at 14:52

If he has not misrepresented (in his ad and pitching) nothing of this will happen. And he dares to threaten an unhappy ‘customer’ despite using the banner of teaching entrepreneurship. And what makes you think I (and the others) have not asked for a refund? He even accused me of harassing ‘his girls’ for it. LOL!!!

There are alot of things you don’t know about this chap who went around complaining or defaming his ex-employer on how he was ill-treated and so on, and how much he adores money telling the class if you got money you can have any girl you want.

You should seriously check his ‘success rate’, his claims, his old ads… He claimed I am the only one not happy… when it’s obviously not only me. Instead of admitting he’s not doing well and refunding, he chose to attack me! And he ‘teaches’ entrepreneurship! LOL!!! I still have old emails… He didn’t even read certain materials I sent him.

I am not here to stop people from going to him. But obviously, it’s basic rights of unhappy customer to ‘feedback’ and ‘COMPLAIN’ about someone who persistently gave you craps.

If that is how you become an entrepreneur and become rich… Argh, you should check with that chap he hired to teach ‘marketing’, he told me something very interesting… LOL!

I am not after Andy’s love. Why do you think I or WE paid the money for? You go to a shop for a purpose promised, if the shop took your money and couldn’t deliver as pitched, you expect me to pay the money for its love?

Got it straight, we are the customers, we should hate him instead. What right does he have to hate us? Why don’t he pay me and make me happy? The choice of your point of view is totally wrong. I am the customer, I paid to be made happy not to make him happy and me unhappy.

He chose to threaten, after he boasted of this and that. He claimes himself to be a titan… The point is, what he did were unacceptable. After he took the effort to call me and made the threat, I blogged about it. Why didn’t he make the effort to make me happy? To deliver the success he promised? Titan?

Yeah right…

He was behaving like that TT Durai, not happy, people exposed him, he threatened to sue. And I am sick of Durai myself.

Seriously, whenever people encounter this sort of craps, if you keep quiet… are you trying to make Andy Ong happy? LOL!

It’s my blog, I have my views about people ‘I came across’, about services I came across, about my personal experience, and how I see things, and some stories, anything…

You can choose to read, you can choose to go. But from the start, I NEVER claimed credibility. I don’t blog to make people happy. Your view, no matter what stand you take or offensive, as long as it’s not duplicated, it won’t be deleted.

As Lee Kuan Yew said… I stand corrected.
Eee
December 16th, 2012 at 02:52

Can’t believe such things happened under the clean and efficient PAP government.

Easy. Crooks are everywhere with all sort of ‘justifications’ to enrich themselves and suck blood from society when the top turns blind conveniently.
Scope
February 3rd, 2013 at 01:33

SINGAPORE – Just three days after external auditors of Kingsmen Creatives flagged financial irregularities involving its subsidiary, another company, Griffin Real Estate Investment Holdings, an associate firm of Sakae Holdings Ltd which owns the Sakae Sushi chain, is in the spotlight for possible violations of the Singapore Companies Act.

In a filing to the Singapore Exchange on Monday, Sakae disclosed that a confidential report on Griffin Real Estate had been submitted to the Minister of Finance.

Under Section 207(9A) of the Companies Act, an auditor of a public company or a subsidiary of a public company, has a legal duty to report to the Minister of Finance immediately if he has reason to believe that a serious offence involving fraud or other dishonesty has been committed against the company by officers or employees of the company.

Public records show that Aric Loh, a partner with Deloitte & Touche, is the audit partner of Sakae. Deloitte & Touche is also the external auditor of Griffin Real Estate.

When contacted, Mr Loh declined to comment, citing confidentiality issues.

Concerns over several transactions undertaken by Griffin Real Estate came to the notice of Douglas Foo Peow Yong, Sakae’s executive chairman and chief executive, prompting him to commission an inspection of Griffin’s accounting records and a report from an international accounting firm, according to the filing.

Sakae holds a 24.69 per cent equity stake in the real estate investment company. Sakae and other companies, including a company owned by a non-executive director of Sakae, are parties to a subscription and joint-venture agreement with Griffin Real Estate dated Sept 3, 2010.

Andy Ong Siew Kwee appears to be the controlling shareholder of Griffin Real Estate, according to a Sept 3, 2010 announcement by Sakae. His controlling stake in Griffin Real Estate appears to be held through various companies.

Mr Ong is also a non-executive director of Sakae and CEO of ERC Holdings. According to ERC’s website, he is a sought-after financial authority and appears frequently on CNBC, Bloomberg and Channel News Asia to speak on financial management issues.

Sakae said the accountants’ report stated that various financial transactions undertaken in Griffin Real Estate “may appear to be irregular and in breach of the Singapore Companies Act (Cap 50)”.
According to Sakae, the suspicious transactions may also be in breach of the Sept 3, 2010 subscription and joint venture agreement, and “may also adversely affect (Sakae’s) interests and the value of its investments” in the company.

Sakae invested $4 million and $2.64 million in Griffin Real Estate in January 2011 and June 2012 respectively.

According to the filing, the suspicious transactions include payments of substantial sums of monies that have been made by Griffin Real Estate.

They also include “apparent contracts which purport to oblige (Griffin Real Estate) to make substantial payments to companies related to senior management of (Griffin Real Estate) that had not been properly disclosed to (Sakae) or to (Sakae’s) representative in the board of (Griffin Real Estate) in breach of the (subscription and joint venture agreement.)”

Mr Ong did not return calls for comment.

After getting the accountants’ report, Mr Foo immediately notified Sakae’s audit committee and its external auditors. Sakae said its board, through its lawyers, had notified the Commercial Affairs Department.

The board said it will “take firm and decisive action against all relevant persons who may have acted against (Sakae’s) interests, including commencing legal proceedings to recover any loss or damage (Sakae) suffered in connection with any irregularity in Griffin Real Estate”.

Under Section 207 (9A), a “serious offence involving fraud or dishonesty” refers to an offence that is punishable by imprisonment for a term that is not less than two years; and the value of the property obtained or likely to be obtained from the commission of such an offence is not less than $20,000.

Accounting experts say this provision is seldom invoked by auditors as a normal audit is not designed to uncover fraud. http://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Business/Story/A1Story20130122-397111/2.html

*********** ************
Andy Ong asked to resign. If he goes to jail, people should celebrate. But after release, he’d still be a rich dick.
*********** ************

TWO weeks after external auditors of Sakae Holdings Ltd flagged financial irregularities at an associate firm, Andy Ong Siew Kwee, a non-executive director of Sakae, which owns the Sakae Sushi chain, has been asked to resign from its board. In a filing with the Singapore Exchange last night, Sakae revealed that Mr Ong, who managed Griffin Real Estate Investment Holdings, had been identified as the person responsible for “various undisclosed irregular financial transactions . . . undertaken in (Griffin)” that may be in breach of the Companies Act.
The board has asked Mr Ong to tender his resignation within seven days from Feb 1. If it does not receive his resignation in 14 days, it will convene an extraordinary general meeting to remove him from his position, Sakae said.
Mr Ong could not be reached for comment.
Sakae said in an earlier statement that the suspicious transactions were also in breach of a Sept 3, 2010, subscription and joint-venture agreement, and “may adversely affect (Sakae’s) interests and the value of its investments” in the company.
http://www.businesstimes.com.sg/premium/top-stories/sakae-non-exec-director-asked-resign-20130202
——————-
似乎成了黑吃黑……呵呵呵~

Scope.
Scope
February 12th, 2013 at 15:13

http://www.singaporelawwatch.sg/slw/index.php/headlines/20503-sakae-applies-for-receivers-for-certain-assets-at-griffin?utm_source=web%20subscription&utm_medium=web

SAKAE Holdings Ltd has mounted a two-prong legal attack against its non-executive director Andy Ong Siew Kwee, who was asked to resign after he was identified as the person responsible for financial irregularities in an associate firm.

Sakae, which owns the Sakae Sushi chain, has applied to the High Court for receivers to be appointed on an ex-parte basis for certain assets at Griffin Real Estate Investment Holdings on suspicions that Mr Ong, its main authorised bank signatory, has misappropriated at least $34 million.

It has also filed breach of fiduciary duties claims against Mr Ong.

The assets include funds from bank accounts and proceeds from the sale of Bugis Cube, a six-storey commercial property at 470 North Bridge Road.

The first to fifth storeys of Bugis Cube were sold for $142.8 million between June and October last year.

In its application, Sakae also cited concerns that the remaining sixth storey of Bugis Cube (market value estimated at about $27 million) is “at risk of being sold at an undervalue” to Mr Ong and his companies under the ERC Group.

Other concerns include Mr Ong’s “inconsistent explanations” to Sakae about Griffin’s financial position and “previous deliberate attempts to prevent meaningful inquiries” into its financial affairs.

For example, when Sakae asked for details about the marketing of Bugis Cube as part of its accounting process, Mr Ong allegedly replied: “I am not revealing any more info!!!!!” via e-mail to Sakae chief financial officer Voon Sze Yin, court papers said.

In a filing with the Singapore Exchange yesterday, Sakae and its executive chairman and chief executive officer, Douglas Foo Peow Yong, said that they have applied for leave under Section 216A of the Companies Act to bring a statutory derivative action on behalf of Griffin against Mr Ong and Ho Yew Kong, its statutory directors, for breaches of their duties.

Section 216A sets out a procedure that allows a minority shareholder to apply to the courts to bring a claim, especially where there has been an abuse of power, or where the majority or those in control have stifled legitimate claims being brought against them.

Concerns over several transactions undertaken by Griffin came to the notice of Mr Foo last year, prompting him to commission an inspection of its accounting records and a report from PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Sakae, which owns 24.69 per cent of Griffin, and another company, Gryphon Real Estate Investment Corporation, are parties to a Sept 3, 2010, subscription and joint venture agreement with Griffin to invest in Bugis Cube.

The purchase of Bugis Cube was funded with a $34.5 million 10-year term loan from United Overseas Bank to Griffin.

According to court papers, Mr Foo became suspicious when Mr Ong tried to rush him to sign documents including board resolutions needed to approve the grant of additional loans from UOB purportedly to finance retrofitting works at Bugis Cube. But Mr Foo said that that contradicted Mr Ong’s earlier claims that it was for an extension of a loan from UOB which was expiring soon.

Mr Foo said that the loan turned out to be not for Griffin but for ERC Unicampus Pte Ltd, which is part of Mr Ong’s ERC Group.

“When Andy realised that I had read and understood the import of the 4 May 2012 resolution, Andy asked me to ‘pretend I did not see it’. I could not ignore the fact that Andy caused (Griffin) to make . . . unauthorised loans to Unicampus. As this was a significant intercompany loan that had not been approved by Sakae . . . it was an irregularity that I felt compelled to report to the audit committee of Sakae.”

In addition, just four days after $8 million was paid to Mr Ong on May 28, 2012, $8.8 million was paid to Griffin by his company, ERC Holdings, in exercise of a share option purportedly granted to ERC by Griffin.

Mr Foo quoted the PwC report as saying that “it is possible that the receipt of the $8.8 million from ERC . . . was partly funded by the $8 million paid to Mr Ong”.

On another occasion, on Sept 13, 2012, $1.5 million and $14.3 million were paid respectively to Unicampus and ERC International purportedly as part of a $16 million compensation for early termination of a lease agreement between Griffin and ERC Institute.

But the lease agreement was not approved by Griffin’s board and “the underlying basis for the computation of the $16 million is also questionable and inconsistent”, the PwC report said.

The report added that it has “not obtained any satisfactory explanation” why Griffin decided to engage ERC Consulting to market Bugis Cube, given that Knight Frank is the sole marketing agent for the strata units.

ERC Consulting is supposedly owed $160,500 for consultancy fees.

“We also have not sighted any approval from the board of directors for such consulting agreement,” the report said.

Mr Ong could not be reached for comment.
———————————————————-
For illustrative and social cum discussion purpose.
Scope
January 2nd, 2014 at 15:08

Source
Business Times
Date
04 Dec 2013
AuthorGrace Leong
SAKAE Holdings chief executive Douglas Foo has fired another legal salvo at the company’s former director Andy Ong Siew Kwee and others, in relation to funds used in the purchase of the House of Tan Yeok Nee and Big Hotel, among other things.

Sakae, a minority shareholder in Griffin Real Estate Investment Holdings (GREIH) and Gryphon Capital Management (GCM), in an SGX statement yesterday, said it has filed two new lawsuits alleging that the affairs of both companies were conducted in a manner that is oppressive and prejudicial to its interests.

According to court documents inspected by The Business Times, Mr Andy Ong, founder and CEO of ERC Holdings, the holding company of the ERC group of companies, and his two associates, Ong Han Boon and Ho Yew Kong, are accused of treating the funds of GREIH as their personal funds and diverting these for the benefit of the ERC group of companies, including ERC Unicampus, ERC Institute and ERC Consulting.

ERC Holdings is an 80 per cent shareholder of GCM, which manages GREIH’s real estate investments, including Bugis Cube, a six-storey commercial property at 470 North Bridge Road. Mr Ong Han Boon is a director of ERC Holdings and GCM, while Mr Ho is the sole director of Gryphon Real Estate Investment Corp (GREIC).

The suit alleges, among other things, that the monies were used by ERC group to fund the purchase of the House of Tan Yeok Nee, a gazetted national monument along Penang Road, and Big Hotel.

In one instance, GREIH monies were allegedly diverted to GCM and then assigned to DBS so that ERC International, a former subsidiary of ERC Holdings, could obtain a $48.6 million loan to partially fund the purchase of the House of Tan Yeok Nee, the suit said.

To obtain the $48.6 million loan, GCM’s rights to receive management fees from GREIH were allegedly assigned to DBS, the suit said.

“Such conduct is oppressive to Sakae and is in disregard of Sakae’s interests as a minority shareholder of GREIH,” Sakae said in a 131-page suit filed on its behalf by Senior Counsel Davinder Singh and Jaikanth Shankar of Drew & Napier LLC. Sakae is a 24.69 per cent shareholder of GREIH.

Mr Andy Ong had bought the two-storey freehold property at slightly over $60 million in September 2012 from German fund manager Union Investment Real Estate AG, and sold it three months ago to Pua Seck Guan’s Perennial Real Estate Holdings for under $90 million.

ERC International was recently renamed TYN Investment after ERC Holdings sold all of its shares in the unit to TYN Investment Group, whose directors include Perennial’s Mr Pua, Tong Ka-Pin and Goh Hwee Peng.

Another $16 million of GREIH monies are believed to have been diverted to the ERC group of companies for the purchase of the House of Tan Yeok Nee, the suit said. The defendants, purportedly acting on behalf of GREIH, agreed to pay a $16 million compensation fee for early termination of a lease agreement with ERC Institute – a lease that was not approved by GREIH’s board, according to the suit.

The suit added that Mr Andy Ong, Mr Ong Han Boon and Mr Ho were in breach of their fiduciary duties to GREIH when they allegedly diverted the business opportunity to buy the House of Tan Yeok Nee to ERC International.

In addition, a $10 million loan from UOB that was meant for GREIH’s working capital requirements was used, allegedly at Mr Andy Ong and Mr Ong Han Boon’s directions, to fund ERC Unicampus’s purchase of Prime Centre, now known as Big Hotel, at 200 Middle Road.

The suit cited media reports as saying that Big Hotel has been placed for sale on a tender basis, and that offers for its purchase have been invited.

But Mr Andy Ong disputed the allegations. In a statement to BT yesterday, he said: “All the allegations are baseless and are subject matter of two previous suits that have already been withdrawn by Sakae, and costs were paid to me. We will study the two suits before making an appropriate response.”

Mr Ong Han Boon and Mr Ho did not return calls for comment.

In a previous round, Sakae dropped the two suits it filed earlier this year against Mr Andy Ong after it secured rights to jointly control a special bank account holding tens of millions of dollars in proceeds from the sale of Bugis Cube.

It also settled a defamation case against his public relations firm, Financial PR, but is proceeding with one other suit against him for breach of fiduciary duties when he was Sakae’s independent director.

Among reliefs sought in the new suits, Sakae is seeking a declaration that the ERC group of companies are liable to account to GREIH for the proceeds from the sale of the two properties and other monies as a constructive trustee.

Other reliefs sought include declarations that certain agreements and transactions are void, repayment of various monies to GREIH and GCM, an account of all unauthorised profits and gains the defendants have made as a result of a number of transactions Sakae said were “not properly authorised”, according to the SGX statement.

Sakae is also seeking an order that GREIC and ERC Holdings buy Sakae’s entire shareholding in GREIH at a price to be fixed by a court-appointed independent expert, or alternatively, for GREIH to be wound up.

Sakae also wants an order for ERC Holdings to buy Sakae’s 20 per cent stake in GCM at a price fixed by a court-appointed expert, or alternatively, for GCM to be wound up.
————————
For relevant reference to social cum discussion purpose.
No permission is required for reproduction. (Source: Singapore Law Watch)
Dirty Dancing
June 1st, 2014 at 02:09

Thankfully I read your very helpful post before I signed up any course. No wonder Bugis Cube is now rotting away.
Scope
June 1st, 2014 at 02:21

Do a research yourself on his way of ‘grabbing’ in Douglas Foo’s own words.

Sharing my experience only.

And he seems to be a Christian… LOL~!!!

MOE is a major failure.

Scope.
wanmaimunah
March 18th, 2016 at 04:09

We are a group of investors taking action against ERC. Would you be interested to know more. Pm me.
聚星娱乐APP
May 13th, 2017 at 16:08

聚星娱乐成立于2013年，是面向全球华人提供高端线上娱乐的24小时在线博彩娱乐城，聚星娱乐在菲律宾取得合法博彩执照，与多个国际知名投注平台合作。聚星娱乐，您的信息保密性对我们来说是最重要的，我们将提供128位SSL加密传输与MD5加密密码，在最大程度上保障您的信息安全。

聚星娱乐作为与多个国际知名游戏平台合作的在线娱乐运营商，我们对接入的所有平台均经过严格的筛选，只选用国际知名在线娱乐平台。保证让每位玩家在一个公平、公正的环境下进行游戏。同时菲律宾政府First Cagayan leisure and Resort Corporation会对游戏平台的数据进行监控最终确保游戏的公平性和真实性。

	Energy on The Trenchant Treaty.
	ullu movies on 说个三道个四，唱没准儿胡扯。
	Kay on Make Love Not War: Sin All You…
	Jed Seraille on Scope And Theft Of Athena…
	聚星娱乐APP on ERC Is Taking Legal Action On…
	Scope on The Mighty Hole By Erecti…

Ministry Of Love And Justice