Please read hightlighted bold and does it make sense

[Scb11980]

Bankrupts' CPF inheritance goes first to...

 

Court of Appeals ruled that money must first be used to pay off debts.

 

Tue, Nov 15, 2011

AsiaOne

 

Any inheritance money from the Central Provident Fund (CPF) willed to a bankrupt, whether discharged or not, will go towards settling the bankrupt's debt, reported the Straits Times.

 

The Court of Appeal ruled that any money left after paying off creditors will be held in trust. This means it will be managed on behalf of the bankrupt.

 

The court also ruled that even if the information on the bequeathed sum surfaces after the bankrupt has been discharged from his or her debts, the money will still go to the Official Assignee (OA), who will hold it in trust.

 

The court set these rulings in a judgment released last week in a case where a discharged bankrupt tried to keep $102,000 left to her by her late sister in CPF money and SingTel shares.

 

The woman involved in the test case, 52-year-old kitchen helper Madam Lim Lye Kiang, had been a bankrupt for 11 years with debts amounting to $1.18 million to 13 creditors when her sister Lye Keow died of cancer in March 2008.

 

When Madam Lim Lye Keow died, her bequest should have been transferred to the OA, as under the law, all assets belonging to a bankrupt are held by the OA for distribution to his creditors.

 

However, the OA was not aware of the inheritance. The paper reported that in October 2009, the OA asked the court to discharge Madam Lim as a bankrupt, as she had been one for more than ten years with no further realisable estate. She had also paid up to $150 for her monthly contributions to her bankruptcy estate.

 

She was then discharged in November of that year after each of her creditors received $11,664 in a final dividend declared by the OA.

 

However, two months later, she tried to claim her inheritance from the CPF. The CPF Board instead transferred the money to the OA, who applied to the court for an order to distribute the money among Madam Lim's creditors.

 

In October 2010, the High Court sided with the OA. Madam Lim had argued that since the CPF authorised the release of the money after she was discharged as a bankrupt, the money belonged to her. According to the paper, the court said that 'the protection extended to the money of CPF account holders did not extend to nominees like Madam Lim, and that the money could thus go to the OA to settle debts'.

 

When she appealed, the appeal court ruled that as she was a bankrupt at the time of her sister's death, the money had to go to the OA. It rejected the argument of her lawyer, Foo Soon Yien, who said that her discharge 'had the effect of revesting the entitlement to the money in her'.

 

The court, made up of Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, Andrew Phang and V. K. Rajah, instead agreed with the OA's lawyer Lim Yew Jin, who argued that the discharge did not reinstate Madam Lim's right to the money.

 

Bankruptcy laws that rule the administration of a bankrupt's estate may continue after his discharge were upheld by the court. The court said that while a bankruptcy discharge releases him from debts, it does not affect the debts themselves. Thus, any assets that surface after a final dividend is paid to creditors will be held in trust by the OA for the discharged bankrupt

 

 

so what is the point of being discharged as a bankrupt and after 10 years still have to mari kita

[Piyopico]

Hmmmn.

 

Before we discuss the discharge of debt per se. It was my understanding that up to $600K of monies in our CPF account was protected from creditors. I am pretty sure this is the case.

 

 

[Nightsky]

How does one incur 1.18m in debt?

[Vid]

In effect they are saying that after being discharge, you better stay poor. Any riches you gain after that will still be used to service your debt.

[Joseph22]

In effect they are saying that after being discharge, you better stay poor. Any riches you gain after that will still be used to service your debt.

yap, but it is only fair that you pay back all you had loan.

[Galantspeedz]

I think it means that the bankrupt did not declare she had received additional assets during her time as bankrupt. So if the OA come to realize about it after discharge, they still can claim it.

 

This will bankrupts from hiding their assets till they are discharged.

[Kusje]

so what is the point of being discharged as a bankrupt and after 10 years still have to mari kita

 

It looks like she was dishonest and did not declare her inheritance to the OA. She was discharged because the OA thought she didnt have any more $.

[Galantspeedz]

Hmmmn.

 

Before we discuss the discharge of debt per se. It was my understanding that up to $600K of monies in our CPF account was protected from creditors. I am pretty sure this is the case.

 

It was willed to her I dun think cpf can claim it

[Joseph22]

It was willed to her I dun think cpf can claim it

dont think it was cpf who claimed it.

 

this OA is not ordinary account

[Mecontle]

bankrupt then use wife name to open new biz, seen it too often garmen here is truly tongue licking its own a-----e , in china the entire string of relatives will get jailed till someone pays up , in ancient china the entire family and relatives get beheaded from one's undoing

[Vid]

bankrupt then use wife name to open new biz, seen it too often garmen here is truly tongue licking its own a-----e , in china the entire string of relatives will get jailed till someone pays up , in ancient china the entire family and relatives get beheaded from one's undoing

 

eh... u want that to happen ah?

[Galantspeedz]

dont think it was cpf who claimed it.

 

this OA is not ordinary account

 

Go read again lar the fella say cpf money protected.. Trying tell him it is not under cpf already

 

 

[Achtung]

Very suay indeed.....

Bankrupts' CPF inheritance goes first to...

 

Court of Appeals ruled that money must first be used to pay off debts.

 

Tue, Nov 15, 2011

AsiaOne

 

Any inheritance money from the Central Provident Fund (CPF) willed to a bankrupt, whether discharged or not, will go towards settling the bankrupt's debt, reported the Straits Times.

 

The Court of Appeal ruled that any money left after paying off creditors will be held in trust. This means it will be managed on behalf of the bankrupt.

 

The court also ruled that even if the information on the bequeathed sum surfaces after the bankrupt has been discharged from his or her debts, the money will still go to the Official Assignee (OA), who will hold it in trust.

 

The court set these rulings in a judgment released last week in a case where a discharged bankrupt tried to keep $102,000 left to her by her late sister in CPF money and SingTel shares.

 

The woman involved in the test case, 52-year-old kitchen helper Madam Lim Lye Kiang, had been a bankrupt for 11 years with debts amounting to $1.18 million to 13 creditors when her sister Lye Keow died of cancer in March 2008.

 

When Madam Lim Lye Keow died, her bequest should have been transferred to the OA, as under the law, all assets belonging to a bankrupt are held by the OA for distribution to his creditors.

 

However, the OA was not aware of the inheritance. The paper reported that in October 2009, the OA asked the court to discharge Madam Lim as a bankrupt, as she had been one for more than ten years with no further realisable estate. She had also paid up to $150 for her monthly contributions to her bankruptcy estate.

 

She was then discharged in November of that year after each of her creditors received $11,664 in a final dividend declared by the OA.

 

However, two months later, she tried to claim her inheritance from the CPF. The CPF Board instead transferred the money to the OA, who applied to the court for an order to distribute the money among Madam Lim's creditors.

 

In October 2010, the High Court sided with the OA. Madam Lim had argued that since the CPF authorised the release of the money after she was discharged as a bankrupt, the money belonged to her. According to the paper, the court said that 'the protection extended to the money of CPF account holders did not extend to nominees like Madam Lim, and that the money could thus go to the OA to settle debts'.

 

When she appealed, the appeal court ruled that as she was a bankrupt at the time of her sister's death, the money had to go to the OA. It rejected the argument of her lawyer, Foo Soon Yien, who said that her discharge 'had the effect of revesting the entitlement to the money in her'.

 

The court, made up of Judges of Appeal Chao Hick Tin, Andrew Phang and V. K. Rajah, instead agreed with the OA's lawyer Lim Yew Jin, who argued that the discharge did not reinstate Madam Lim's right to the money.

 

Bankruptcy laws that rule the administration of a bankrupt's estate may continue after his discharge were upheld by the court. The court said that while a bankruptcy discharge releases him from debts, it does not affect the debts themselves. Thus, any assets that surface after a final dividend is paid to creditors will be held in trust by the OA for the discharged bankrupt

 

 

so what is the point of being discharged as a bankrupt and after 10 years still have to mari kita

 

[Scb11980]

Hmmmn.

 

Before we discuss the discharge of debt per se. It was my understanding that up to $600K of monies in our CPF account was protected from creditors. I am pretty sure this is the case.

exactly that is what i thought

CPF is suppose to be safe from creditors that is why banks cannot claim money from CPF if house mortgage default

[Scb11980]

In effect they are saying that after being discharge, you better stay poor. Any riches you gain after that will still be used to service your debt.

then where is the impetus to try and try again if you fail

as an enterpreneur

[Happily1986]

I think it means that the bankrupt did not declare she had received additional assets during her time as bankrupt. So if the OA come to realize about it after discharge, they still can claim it.

 

This will bankrupts from hiding their assets till they are discharged.

 

this is also how i interpret of the whole situation. however if i were the judge, i wouldn't try to define bankruptcy discharge as such. why do i have to do that when i can simply void the defendant's bankruptcy discharge for wilful omission of information? Definitely alot of people are left scratching their heads after this hearing.

[Vid]

then where is the impetus to try and try again if you fail

as an enterpreneur

 

So better be dead when bankrupt, else the banks will haunt you for the rest of your life.

[Galantspeedz]

this is also how i interpret of the whole situation. however if i were the judge, i wouldn't try to define bankruptcy discharge as such. why do i have to do that when i can simply void the defendant's bankruptcy discharge for wilful omission of information? Definitely alot of people are left scratching their heads after this hearing.

 

I dunno if they are trying to be kind or not... In my dealings with the OAs, the feeling i get is what matters to them is to discharge the bankrupt. Regardless of the bankrupt's circumstances, amount of dividend received n creditors objection.

 

I know of a case, the OA wants to discharge a bankrupt, even though they know the bankrupt has been traveling in n out of SG. What is worse is this info was provided by the creditors. The OA still insist on discharging the bankrupt and the creditors had to attend hearing to appeal to the judge.

 

What was worse is, the OA said 'surely you dun expect us to hold the case forever'

 

Debt was in millions