Once you have won an order from the Tribunal for payment by the other party, you still have to worry about getting payment. Sometimes, you have to apply more pressure on the other party in order to actually get money.
Enforcement or execution refers to the steps that you take to get payment. They are -
a) examination of judgment debtor,
b) writ of seizure and sale,
c) garnishee order, and
d) winding up or bankruptcy.
(A lawyer may quibble with some of the above being classified as enforcement, but this post is intended to be a general guide only).
Later posts will elaborate on these.
Point to note however is that usually these steps will require hiring a lawyer, and therefore incurring more costs.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Call to action
To a great extent, we depend on the government to do everything for us.
It is a good time for us to use the law where necessary. If a dishonest or over-promising seller or service provider breaches a contract, we should consider using the Small Claims Tribunal to take action. For some persons, they may weigh the costs against the benefits and decide that it is not worth the effort. This is especially so where the amount involved is relatively small compared to their wealth. For example, if I earn $10,000 a month, it may not be worth my while to spend 5-10 hours are the Tribunal for a defective product costing "only" $100.
However understandable this view may be, I hope that more persons will look at the bigger picture. If more consumers take their rights seriously, vendors will "wake up" and realise that they had better conform to the higher expectations of Singaporeans or face the legal consequences.
INVITATION -If you have filed a claim against any vendor, and wish to let the world know about it, send me your email contact and particulars of your claim including the case number.
It is a good time for us to use the law where necessary. If a dishonest or over-promising seller or service provider breaches a contract, we should consider using the Small Claims Tribunal to take action. For some persons, they may weigh the costs against the benefits and decide that it is not worth the effort. This is especially so where the amount involved is relatively small compared to their wealth. For example, if I earn $10,000 a month, it may not be worth my while to spend 5-10 hours are the Tribunal for a defective product costing "only" $100.
However understandable this view may be, I hope that more persons will look at the bigger picture. If more consumers take their rights seriously, vendors will "wake up" and realise that they had better conform to the higher expectations of Singaporeans or face the legal consequences.
INVITATION -If you have filed a claim against any vendor, and wish to let the world know about it, send me your email contact and particulars of your claim including the case number.
Rental scam - Eric Heng Jit Siang jailed
Some good news for unfortunate victims of rental scams - Eric Heng Jit Siang who cheated 127 persons for over $240,000 in his rental scam was jailed for 6 years and 3 months. However, if he behaves well while in jail, he could be released after serving only 2/3 of his sentence. He made no restitution to his victims.
His method of cheating was to rent the same residences to more than one person for the same period. Therefore he obviously he could not perform his contract obligations even when he signed the relevant contracts. This was proof of his intent to cheat. Remember - cheating is shown when you can prove the criminal had no intention of carrying out the contract right at the start (not easy to show in most cases).
Sadly, his jail time will not get the victims there money back. However, if he owns any property, there is a chance to sue him later but this may well cost more money.
For the very poor, contact the Legal Aid Bureau under the Ministry of Law at http://app.minlaw.gov.sg/lab/default.asp
for legal advice.
His method of cheating was to rent the same residences to more than one person for the same period. Therefore he obviously he could not perform his contract obligations even when he signed the relevant contracts. This was proof of his intent to cheat. Remember - cheating is shown when you can prove the criminal had no intention of carrying out the contract right at the start (not easy to show in most cases).
Sadly, his jail time will not get the victims there money back. However, if he owns any property, there is a chance to sue him later but this may well cost more money.
For the very poor, contact the Legal Aid Bureau under the Ministry of Law at http://app.minlaw.gov.sg/lab/default.asp
for legal advice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)