pls help my family!
-
Originally posted by Devil1976:Penny for thoughts. A little too early for that 'conclusion'?
Ok, I realised there was something terribly wrong with my last paragraph, without being clearer on my stand (Was actually trying to end my post because I was super shagged from the day's work, that's why my final paragraph sounded slightly bits and pieces). 
*** What I should have said was the consideration of the new guy shouldn't be around, as long as she has not decided to leave BIL.
She is free to pursue another relationship with anyone else (which includes him) after she has resolved her own plight, when she has come to a conclusion or decision about how she wants walk her path in love. Making a decision gives her the clarity of mind and courage to decide for her own fate.
Being in confusion makes her emotionally infertile to love another man - the substitution factor will always be a unconscious risk for as long as she doesn't make any decision to walk out. If she has decided not to leave BIL, but not find the courage to work through the problems with BIL, the new guy will always be the man to fall back on and that's dangerous because it blurs the lines between love and mere emotional dependency. Over the time, she may not be able to discern the feelings this man is giving her.. Whether she's really in love with him... or just somebody there to tide over the crisis.
In another words, I am suggesting that as long as she has NOT given the cue to wrap up the marriage, even if she has not found a solution to her problem, at the very least, she shouldn't give a chance to somebody else... yet. (As mentioned by two wrong doesn't make a right).
Understanding the credibility of the man doesn't matter as much as my concern for the condition of your sister's emotional state. If she is confused, befuddled and lost - even if this man is of good calibre, the introduction of a new player to this game will create greater complication. These are the moments where time and environment plays a greater part than he himself.
Hope I am clearer this time round.
Cheers -
It's okie. After considering the nice make up post you've gotten us?Originally posted by Yunhaier: Ok, I realised there was something terribly wrong with my last paragraph, without being clearer on my stand (Was actually trying to end my post because I was super shagged from the day's work, that's why my final paragraph sounded slightly bits and pieces).
*** What I should have said was the consideration of the new guy shouldn't be around, as long as she has not decided to leave BIL.
She is free to pursue another relationship with anyone else (which includes him) after she has resolved her own plight, when she has come to a conclusion or decision about how she wants walk her path in love. Making a decision gives her the clarity of mind and courage to decide for her own fate.
Being in confusion makes her emotionally infertile to love another man - the substitution factor will always be a unconscious risk for as long as she doesn't make any decision to walk out. If she has decided not to leave BIL, but not find the courage to work through the problems with BIL, the new guy will always be the man to fall back on and that's dangerous because it blurs the lines between love and mere emotional dependency. Over the time, she may not be able to discern the feelings this man is giving her.. Whether she's really in love with him... or just somebody there to tide over the crisis.
In another words, I am suggesting that as long as she has NOT given the cue to wrap up the marriage, even if she has not found a solution to her problem, at the very least, she shouldn't give a chance to somebody else... yet. (As mentioned by two wrong doesn't make a right).
Understanding the credibility of the man doesn't matter as much as my concern for the condition of your sister's emotional state. If she is confused, befuddled and lost - even if this man is of good calibre, the introduction of a new player to this game will create greater complication. These are the moments where time and environment plays a greater part than he himself.
Hope I am clearer this time round.
Cheers
I think whether her sister can handle a relationship soberly at this very same time would depends on her own control and management... But yeah... I agree with you that given the current situation, it'll be difficult for most people to pull off another relationship well at this point..
-
Even if he does show his statement, so? so what? does it prove that he is trustworthy?Originally posted by apples:The fact that he has NOT shown his brokerage transaction also shows he is big bullshit. I would challenge him to go down to Singapore Stock Exchange to reopen his CDP account and check his records by getting current and past year statements! Any reply is very likely to just show his true colors. The worst truth is that he could really have simply taken ur sisters money. -
post removed
-
Holding back what decision?Originally posted by greenribbons:Thks Yunhaier... and thks to all for all your responses, especially to those who really tried to help me. I am really appreciative.
My sister is facing a lot of anguish and I know she is still angry with how things are. There is so little I can do to help. She isn't dragging her foot on things as it might seem because she is waiting for him to bring his transaction records as requested back to the family. However we have been waiting for weeks as he has indicated that the broking firm is taking some time as the relevant person is on year end leave.
We have been waiting only to find out one day that all this while he has been only requesting from the company for 1 piece of paper to state that the warrants he had bought had expired and not the 6 mths transaction accts as he had agreed to as it cost $20 per mth to retrieve the records. So had we continued to wait indefinitely, we would finally have gotten a worthless piece of paper stating he bought X lots of warrants which expired on Y day. This paper would not even state the price he bought at or any other transactions!
My sister is visibly upset as she has held back any decision while waiting for the records. She is hoping to settle the decision before she leaves in February for a business trip. -
... However we have been waiting for weeks as he has indicated that the broking firm is taking some time as the relevant person is on year end leave...
I know u don't need a broker to get those statements. The following will link will help u understand more http://www.cdp.com.sg/faq/create_faq_statements.html#4.
If ur sis really want to see those statements, I would think ur sis should go down with him with his NRIC to get the statements at CDP.
The Central Depository Pte Ltd (CDP)
4 Shenton Way (S) 068807
http://www.streetdirectory.com/asia_travel/travel/travel.php?travel_id=31305&travel_site=2977
In fact, he also probably has a T-Pin and I-pin for internet access and phone access respectively. With I-Pin, he can even show it to u immediately over the Internet.
Do try to accompany ur sis on this. I am just afraid ur sister cannot take the blow once she sees the statements and it just reveals how deep the deceit is. -
this is a prob only she can find the solution to.
my advice for now is to stay away from both guys. live on her own and decide on her future on her own first.
but is she asking for advice, if she's asking, will she take it?
this is not an easy path. it is always tempting, to find someone else to depend upon emotionally and physically after a breakup....
i know, i'm going through this now.
but it is important to stand on your own 2 feet. to survive on your own, heal on your own, before even considering jumping into another relationship.
so this is my advice. stay single first. if support is needed, draw upon it from your family and good platonic friends.
you'll know when you are ready/healed. -
After reading all this the first thought was that there is really nothing you can or are expected to do, because it's your sister's life and her problem!
But I understand you want to help. I suspect your sister knows what to do , it's getting the heart to follow the brain that's difficult. I think you should just be supportive and non-judgemental, & just be there for her. -
It seems no point giving any opinions here forummers. She only wants to hear something she likes, since she already have an answer.Originally posted by greenribbons:Oxford
You are definitely not a lawyer. The house is not a matrimonial asset since it is not bought in both names. The guy will have no claim on it. Your assessment only applies if it is the case where the house is jointly owned.
Niceguy
Are you stupid? Sorry but I am really pissed by your post now. Wtf is this? You mean if someone go become a burglar, sell drugs to give you a comfortable life? then you should accept?
Most of the ppl dabble in stocks, for WHAT??? HUH? Of course to get rich and have comfortable life lah. That's why!! Why they don't go and rob the bank and jewellery shop?
It is not your BIL go and commit crime then kenna bad records. Why you put buying in stocks, lost and selling drugs, burglary together? He is going thru the legal way to make fast bucks oni he failed or he might have lost his own judgement and failed to get out again.
WTF you talking. stupid ? Piss-off? -
green ribbon is right. woman's charter in sg. men dont get nuts from rich wives in Singapore.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:Annulment is difficult to get unless it is on the grounds on non-consumation and the other party does not challenge it.
Upon divorce, which is unlikely to be granted for another few years, the guy gets half the property even though she purchased it. It's the same rule in the case of a divorce involving a housewife...the wife gets half the estate even if she never contributed a cent to the family's finances.
-
Not true...if it's a matrimonial house you will not lose it if you go bankrupt in certain circumstances (even that is not strictly true now)...in divorce, the courts are taking a different view towards asset separation:Originally posted by greenribbons:Oxford
You are definitely not a lawyer. The house is not a matrimonial asset since it is not bought in both names. The guy will have no claim on it. Your assessment only applies if it is the case where the house is jointly owned.
English divorce law in turmoil
by Jeremy D. Morley
England is now a forum of choice for spouses with less assets to sue their internationally-connected wealthier spouses for divorce.
Until 2000 the English courts divided a married couple’s assets in a way that would ensure that the “reasonable needs” of the financially weaker party — usually the wife — were met. It meant that the spouse who had more assets in his name than his wife was able to keep most of them.
Everything changed in the famous case of White v. White. England’s top court, the House of Lords, ruled that the lower appeal court, the Court of Appeal, had got it all wrong for 25 years. The House of Lords ruled that it was wrong to limit a wife leaving a long marriage to no more than was needed for her “reasonable needs.” From now on, everything was to be determined by “fairness.” The problem is that “fairness” is an elusive term.
Then a famous soccer star, Ray Parlour, was ordered to pay his wife one-third of his future earnings for at least four years, plus a large lump sum, two valuable mortgage-free houses and a large annual sum for child support.
And in a case that has caused an outcry in England, an (American) woman who earned a good salary before marrying an English multi-millionaire, received a payoff of £5m for less than three years of a childless marriage in her divorce last year. The House of Lords will hear that case, Miller v. Miller, on January 30th.
The surprising situation in England results from several peculiarities of the English system.
The first is that in England the “pot” of assets that is to be divided includes everything that the spouses own, including everything that they each had before they got married. This is in sharp contrast with most legal systems which say that whatever you have on the date of the marriage stays yours unless you take specific steps to give it to the marital partnership.
The second difference is that the English courts place one partyÂ’s inherited assets into the marital pot.
Third, the English courts allow fault to govern the fairness issue. This allows each party to assert that the other party was the “wrongdoer” who should be financially punished for breaking up the marriage.
Fourth, England is one of the few places where lifetime spousal maintenance (alimony) payments are routinely ordered by the courts in favor of the spouse with fewer assets or less earning capacity.
Fifth, England uses the concept of the ‘clean break’ as an ideal way to resolve financial matters. It is intended to mean that one ex should not have to continuously chase the other ex for money. It’s a very nice theory, but well nigh impossible to put into practice.
Finally, to make matters even more unpredictable, prenuptial agreements are not legally binding in England, so that it is difficult or even impossible for a wealthy person to provide himself with predictable protection if he is considering marriage.
Unfortunately, the House of Lords in the recent Miller/ McFarlane cases has failed to provide clarification. the Court has made it clear that the standard is "fairness" and that "needs", "compensation" and "sharing" are the three "strands" to be considered in applying the concept, but it is unclear how those strands will work together in any particular case.
Miller/McFarlane has resolved certain issues such as the relevance of conduct and special contribution but it has raised and left unclear and unresolved several critical issues such as whether equality of division should apply to all matrimonial property or only to "family assets" as opposed to "business and investment assets" and how assets generated by dual career marriages should be resolved.
Obviously you have to consult your lawyer, but as a common law jurisdiction as well and not having alternative legislation on this matter, the Singapore courts may well follow British precedents. -
ribbon, bring your sister home.
and annulment is possible.
and since your sister expressed doubts in her 3rd party guy. and that he might be waiting for a chance to control her. best to at least bring her home and provide her a security against being too vunerable and abused later.
there is plenty of those 3rd party guys around. your sister is probably new to this kind of predators.
and whether or not she is holding back her decisions. She will come to her decisions soon. But advise her to listen to more other opinions and make her decisions herself. Maybe you can invite her to this forum to read? -
The Singapore court decisions tend to favour women...no wonder why so few marriages nowadaysOriginally posted by viciouskitty74:green ribbon is right. woman's charter in sg. men dont get nuts from rich wives in Singapore.
Here's a quote I read from one of Bernard Cornwell's novels:
"The chief attraction of women can be obtained more cheaply by the hour..."
*running away from the feminists* -
I strongly agree.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:The Singapore court decisions tend to favour women...no wonder why so few marriages nowadays
Here's a quote I read from one of Bernard Cornwell's novels:
"The chief attraction of women can be obtained more cheaply by the hour..."
*running away from the feminists*
Its reversible for males too.
Am I a feminists? I was told on a lot more occasions that I am more male then female.
*Shows Oxford the size 35 Magnum Elite Hi-Tech Stealth Side Zip Boots & Metal Toe Caps. I wont chase...I believe in stomping some balls flat*
*Taking bets on whether Oxford can runs faster then the barrages of flying stillettos heels.* -
Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
Very chim...i read 1 sentence.....i yawned.
Not true...if it's a matrimonial house you will not lose it if you go bankrupt in certain circumstances (even that is not strictly true now)...in divorce, the courts are taking a different view towards asset separation:
English divorce law in turmoil
by Jeremy D. Morley
England is now a forum of choice for spouses with less assets to sue their internationally-connected wealthier spouses for divorce.
Until 2000 the English courts divided a married couple’s assets in a way that would ensure that the “reasonable needs” of the financially weaker party — usually the wife — were met. It meant that the spouse who had more assets in his name than his wife was able to keep most of them.
Everything changed in the famous case of White v. White. England’s top court, the House of Lords, ruled that the lower appeal court, the Court of Appeal, had got it all wrong for 25 years. The House of Lords ruled that it was wrong to limit a wife leaving a long marriage to no more than was needed for her “reasonable needs.” From now on, everything was to be determined by “fairness.” The problem is that “fairness” is an elusive term.
Then a famous soccer star, Ray Parlour, was ordered to pay his wife one-third of his future earnings for at least four years, plus a large lump sum, two valuable mortgage-free houses and a large annual sum for child support.
And in a case that has caused an outcry in England, an (American) woman who earned a good salary before marrying an English multi-millionaire, received a payoff of £5m for less than three years of a childless marriage in her divorce last year. The House of Lords will hear that case, Miller v. Miller, on January 30th.
The surprising situation in England results from several peculiarities of the English system.
[b]The first is that in England the “pot” of assets that is to be divided includes everything that the spouses own, including everything that they each had before they got married. This is in sharp contrast with most legal systems which say that whatever you have on the date of the marriage stays yours unless you take specific steps to give it to the marital partnership.
The second difference is that the English courts place one partyÂ’s inherited assets into the marital pot.
Third, the English courts allow fault to govern the fairness issue. This allows each party to assert that the other party was the “wrongdoer” who should be financially punished for breaking up the marriage.
Fourth, England is one of the few places where lifetime spousal maintenance (alimony) payments are routinely ordered by the courts in favor of the spouse with fewer assets or less earning capacity.
Fifth, England uses the concept of the ‘clean break’ as an ideal way to resolve financial matters. It is intended to mean that one ex should not have to continuously chase the other ex for money. It’s a very nice theory, but well nigh impossible to put into practice.
Finally, to make matters even more unpredictable, prenuptial agreements are not legally binding in England, so that it is difficult or even impossible for a wealthy person to provide himself with predictable protection if he is considering marriage.
Unfortunately, the House of Lords in the recent Miller/ McFarlane cases has failed to provide clarification. the Court has made it clear that the standard is "fairness" and that "needs", "compensation" and "sharing" are the three "strands" to be considered in applying the concept, but it is unclear how those strands will work together in any particular case.
Miller/McFarlane has resolved certain issues such as the relevance of conduct and special contribution but it has raised and left unclear and unresolved several critical issues such as whether equality of division should apply to all matrimonial property or only to "family assets" as opposed to "business and investment assets" and how assets generated by dual career marriages should be resolved.
Obviously you have to consult your lawyer, but as a common law jurisdiction as well and not having alternative legislation on this matter, the Singapore courts may well follow British precedents. [/b]
You please stop diverting attention can or not.
married 1 month nia...what assets are we separating for the couple in sg? Especially for this thread? -
Originally posted by apples:I know u don't need a broker to get those statements. The following will link will help u understand more http://www.cdp.com.sg/faq/create_faq_statements.html#4.
If ur sis really want to see those statements, I would think ur sis should go down with him with his NRIC to get the statements at CDP.
The Central Depository Pte Ltd (CDP)
4 Shenton Way (S) 068807
http://www.streetdirectory.com/asia_travel/travel/travel.php?travel_id=31305&travel_site=2977
In fact, he also probably has a T-Pin and I-pin for internet access and phone access respectively. With I-Pin, he can even show it to u immediately over the Internet.
Do try to accompany ur sis on this. I am just afraid ur sister cannot take the blow once she sees the statements and it just reveals how deep the deceit is.
....
Then why bother to let her find out? since things are already bad enough...?
Why the 'extra blow' on her head? -
CHILL.Originally posted by niceguy_123:It seems no point giving any opinions here forummers. She only wants to hear something she likes, since she already have an answer.
Most of the ppl dabble in stocks, for WHAT??? HUH? Of course to get rich and have comfortable life lah. That's why!! Why they don't go and rob the bank and jewellery shop?
It is not your BIL go and commit crime then kenna bad records. Why you put buying in stocks, lost and selling drugs, burglary together? He is going thru the legal way to make fast bucks oni he failed or he might have lost his own judgement and failed to get out again.
WTF you talking. stupid ? Piss-off? -
-
I agree.Originally posted by greenribbons:
Thks Yunhaier... and thks to all for all your responses, especially to those who really tried to help me. I am really appreciative.
My sister is facing a lot of anguish and I know she is still angry with how things are. There is so little I can do to help. She isn't dragging her foot on things as it might seem because she is waiting for him to bring his transaction records as requested back to the family. However we have been waiting for weeks as he has indicated that the broking firm is taking some time as the relevant person is on year end leave.
We have been waiting only to find out one day that all this while he has been only requesting from the company for 1 piece of paper to state that the warrants he had bought had expired and not the 6 mths transaction accts as he had agreed to as it cost $20 per mth to retrieve the records. So had we continued to wait indefinitely, we would finally have gotten a worthless piece of paper stating he bought X lots of warrants which expired on Y day. This paper would not even state the price he bought at or any other transactions! My sister is visibly upset as she has held back any decision while waiting for the records. She is hoping to settle the decision before she leaves in February for a business trip.
[/quote]
Excuses. Excuses. Excuses.
I'm sorry for this one-liner but IMHO:
Just leave that SOB. He's just wasting your time.Originally posted by niceguy_123:
And Mr nice guy, if your name is as nice as you put it, I guess you should be able to understand how much stress someone like her is going thru to overlook that little outburst.
It seems no point giving any opinions here forummers. She only wants to hear something she likes, since she already have an answer.
Most of the ppl dabble in stocks, for WHAT??? HUH? Of course to get rich and have comfortable life lah. That's why!! Why they don't go and rob the bank and jewellery shop?
It is not your BIL go and commit crime then kenna bad records. Why you put buying in stocks, lost and selling drugs, burglary together? He is going thru the legal way to make fast bucks oni he failed or he might have lost his own judgement and failed to get out again.
WTF you talking. stupid ? Piss-off?Originally posted by oxford mushroom:
What oxford mushroomÂ’s said is true. Perhaps not in the case of condominium but in the case of HDB. I came to know that even if the HDB flat is under a sole personÂ’s name, it will still be viewed as a matrimonial asset. That means, if you own a HDB flat, your spouse still has a chance to fight for it even though he has not made much contribution.
Upon divorce, which is unlikely to be granted for another few years, the guy gets half the property even though she purchased it. It's the same rule in the case of a divorce involving a housewife...the wife gets half the estate even if she never contributed a cent to the family's finances.
Not true...if it's a matrimonial house you will not lose it if you go bankrupt in certain circumstances (even that is not strictly true now)...
[quote]Originally posted by viciouskitty74:
there is plenty of those 3rd party guys around.
Do you know a feminist can be a guy too? Feminism means the doctrine advocating social, political, and all other rights of women equal to those of men. It does not refer to any particular gender.Originally posted by oxford mushroom:*running away from the feminists* -
Originally posted by apples:
Sigh... why are some people so deceitful up to even the point of declaring their deceits as the truth and saying outright to your face with an air of righteousness, without bashfulness. How dare they?!
Do try to accompany ur sis on this. I am just afraid ur sister cannot take the blow once she sees the statements and it just reveals how deep the deceit is
Let me not get acquainted with any of such people in future. -
By the way, I chanced by this thread in this forum here. Hv yet to read it in details but it may interest you as it has caught my eyes.
http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_display&thread_id=213948 -
The long drag shows that her sis is still trying to grapple onto some hope. I merely just wanted to provide her the understanding that her BIL is obviously lying and if they wish to probe further, that's the means.Originally posted by Devil1976: ....
Then why bother to let her find out? since things are already bad enough...?
Why the 'extra blow' on her head?
I also believe that the truth is also a very important part of waking her sis into the sense of reality otherwise which she would just dabble in half hope and drag on with the pain. Even after separation, such truths are also important in reinforcing her decision back then and her sis will in the future be able to stand better and stronger.
Lastly, short pain is better than long pain. -
I agree. The long drag could be because she is trying to grapple onto some hope. After all, they had been together for so many years, been thru so much things and even marriage.Originally posted by apples:The long drag shows that her sis is still trying to grapple onto some hope. I merely just wanted to provide her the understanding that her BIL is obviously lying and if they wish to probe further, that's the means.
I also believe that the truth is also a very important part of waking her sis into the sense of reality otherwise which she would just dabble in half hope and drag on with the pain. Even after separation, such truths are also important in reinforcing her decision back then and her sis will in the future be able to stand better and stronger.
Lastly, short pain is better than long pain.
Knowing the truth is good, if she can take it, cos it will help her make a more informative decision.
Such decisions are difficult to make. Give her some time, and be there for her, greenribbon. -
Hope from BIL? Then why the existence of the BF? Remember it's the BF who helped her pulled through things, not the BIL.Originally posted by apples:The long drag shows that her sis is still trying to grapple onto some hope. I merely just wanted to provide her the understanding that her BIL is obviously lying and if they wish to probe further, that's the means.
I also believe that the truth is also a very important part of waking her sis into the sense of reality otherwise which she would just dabble in half hope and drag on with the pain. Even after separation, such truths are also important in reinforcing her decision back then and her sis will in the future be able to stand better and stronger.
Lastly, short pain is better than long pain.
I personally feel that any 'hope' that might exist in her in this point would be more into other people around her other than BIL... The 'extra blow' MIGHT just shows to be too fatal for her...? But of course in any case I won't know for sure...
I feel that if the current situation is enough for her to leave BIL, the ULTIMATE TRUTH would only risk prolong and deepens the pain on the contradictary to what you've suggested... Unless she's a VERY STONG woman who would EMBRACE the TRUTH and fear not to stand up and CHALLENGE life... At this point of the current discussions, I think she would be nowhere near that stage...
Instead, yes.. That 'blow' might 'help' her diminish the 'hope'... The 'hope' for possible future relationship and to trust in a partner perhaps? -
You could be right and greenribbon surely have to judge carefully.Originally posted by Devil1976:Hope from BIL? Then why the existence of the BF? Remember it's the BF who helped her pulled through things, not the BIL.
...
Nonetheless, half truths are just sometimes not enough for some ppl to make a critical decision. Such half hearted decisions can falter later and also can be used by the deceiver to try with new tricks.
I shall comment no further.
Poster, take care.