reporter2
16-01-13, 13:06
http://www.straitstimes.com/archive/tuesday/premium/singapore/story/couple-sue-law-firm-after-losing-100000-bogus-property-deal-20130115
Couple sue law firm after losing $100,000 in bogus property deal
Published on Jan 15, 2013
By Selina Lum
A MARRIED couple who were conned out of more than $100,000 in a property deal are suing a law firm which they blame for their loss.
Mr Chu Said Thong, an oil company executive, and Madam Theresa Theen, a housewife, had paid the money to a man who claimed he held an option to purchase a house in Jalan Berjaya in Bishan.
The option turned out to be bogus - the owner of the property, a bed-ridden woman in her 80s, had not granted anyone an option to buy her house.
The couple claim they would not have entered into the deal had it not been for what they say were misrepresentations by a Vision Law employee.
The couple, represented by Mr Adrian Tan, are seeking compensation of the sum they paid - $105,200 - plus damages. They say that as a result of Vision Law's actions, they could not enter the property market for months and, by the time they got back in, prices had gone up steeply.
But Vision Law, represented by Senior Counsel N. Sreenivasan, contends that the couple did not take sufficient care, such as getting their own lawyers to make checks. The case opened in the High Court yesterday for a three-day hearing.
In September 2010, Madam Theen answered an advertisement offering an old bungalow in Bishan for sale.
After speaking to the advertiser, a man named Steven Sim, who claimed to be a property agent from DTZ Debenham Tie Leung, the couple viewed the house from the outside.
Mr Sim told them the option to purchase was held by one Victor Tan, who bought it from the house owner.
Mr Sim said that Mr Tan wanted $35,200 for the option - 1 per cent of the purchase price of $3.52 million - plus a "goodwill" sum of $70,000.
He added that the house owner had appointed Vision Law to act for her.
The couple met Mr Sim's assistant Lucas Ong, who showed them the purported option, which named Vision Law as the seller's lawyer. Mr Chu phoned Vision Law and spoke to employee Susan Chua. Mr Chu claimed she confirmed that Vision Law acted for the seller and that the seller had issued the option to Mr Tan.
As a result, he said he felt reassured that there would be no problem buying the option from Mr Tan.
However, Ms Chua, said to be a conveyancing secretary, said she merely told Mr Chu that the law firm had received a copy of an option naming it as the seller's lawyer.
After the call, Mr Chu made out a cheque for $105,200 to Mr Tan and the couple later exercised the option at their own lawyer's office.
Two weeks later, their lawyer told them others had seemingly exercised options to buy the property.
A shocked Madam Theen phoned DTZ but was told that neither Mr Sim nor Mr Ong was with the company.
The couple have made a police report but no arrests have been made. The pair eventually bought a house nearby for $8 million.
[email protected]
Couple sue law firm after losing $100,000 in bogus property deal
Published on Jan 15, 2013
By Selina Lum
A MARRIED couple who were conned out of more than $100,000 in a property deal are suing a law firm which they blame for their loss.
Mr Chu Said Thong, an oil company executive, and Madam Theresa Theen, a housewife, had paid the money to a man who claimed he held an option to purchase a house in Jalan Berjaya in Bishan.
The option turned out to be bogus - the owner of the property, a bed-ridden woman in her 80s, had not granted anyone an option to buy her house.
The couple claim they would not have entered into the deal had it not been for what they say were misrepresentations by a Vision Law employee.
The couple, represented by Mr Adrian Tan, are seeking compensation of the sum they paid - $105,200 - plus damages. They say that as a result of Vision Law's actions, they could not enter the property market for months and, by the time they got back in, prices had gone up steeply.
But Vision Law, represented by Senior Counsel N. Sreenivasan, contends that the couple did not take sufficient care, such as getting their own lawyers to make checks. The case opened in the High Court yesterday for a three-day hearing.
In September 2010, Madam Theen answered an advertisement offering an old bungalow in Bishan for sale.
After speaking to the advertiser, a man named Steven Sim, who claimed to be a property agent from DTZ Debenham Tie Leung, the couple viewed the house from the outside.
Mr Sim told them the option to purchase was held by one Victor Tan, who bought it from the house owner.
Mr Sim said that Mr Tan wanted $35,200 for the option - 1 per cent of the purchase price of $3.52 million - plus a "goodwill" sum of $70,000.
He added that the house owner had appointed Vision Law to act for her.
The couple met Mr Sim's assistant Lucas Ong, who showed them the purported option, which named Vision Law as the seller's lawyer. Mr Chu phoned Vision Law and spoke to employee Susan Chua. Mr Chu claimed she confirmed that Vision Law acted for the seller and that the seller had issued the option to Mr Tan.
As a result, he said he felt reassured that there would be no problem buying the option from Mr Tan.
However, Ms Chua, said to be a conveyancing secretary, said she merely told Mr Chu that the law firm had received a copy of an option naming it as the seller's lawyer.
After the call, Mr Chu made out a cheque for $105,200 to Mr Tan and the couple later exercised the option at their own lawyer's office.
Two weeks later, their lawyer told them others had seemingly exercised options to buy the property.
A shocked Madam Theen phoned DTZ but was told that neither Mr Sim nor Mr Ong was with the company.
The couple have made a police report but no arrests have been made. The pair eventually bought a house nearby for $8 million.
[email protected]