I have a close friend who is 40-plus and singe. It really got me thinking as to how this person would take care of his/her future when he/she gets older. One of the issues is if he/she cannot make decisions for himself/herself any more .
For singles who figure they are unlikely to get married at any point in their lives, creating a Lasting Power of Attorney is even more of an imperative than those who are married, or who have children. The issue is that people with spouses and children may have other persons, who medical professionals can turn to, make decisions for them when they are incapacitated or who have the ability to manage their money, via joint accounts, or who can pay for bills first. Singles, especially those without tight-knit family connections, will face huge problems should they become mentally incapacitated. One way to get around it is to create a trust such that it may act while you are mentally incapacitated. That will require drafting of a trust instrument for such an eventuality. It will also mean hiring a professional trustee to handle your affairs. However, another way, which is more cost effective, is to create a Lasting Power of Attorney. You have to find a person ("donee") whom you trust to manage your finances and personal welfare. It can be the same person or two different persons, one for your finances and another for your personal welfare. You can also have more than one donee to care for each of these areas. If you don't have much money or very complex instructions, you only need to fill up Form 1 and pay $50 to have it registered. The real issue is finding a person that you trust to care for your welfare and your money. It could be a close friend, or perhaps a relative (i.e. a cousin or a niece/nephew). Convincing that person to handle your affairs should you become mentally incapacitated is another issue. Also just explaining the concept of a Lasting Power of Attorney could be a hassle too. But it should be done. Especially if you are single and not likely to marry. Something to really think about, otherwise all that prudent saving and investing will come to naught if no one can care for you and your money at the most critical moment. (Inspiration source)
0 Comments
For those of us lucky enough to own landed property, take note that your unobstructed view could be obstructed (if that's something you love about the place).
Disclaimer: I am do not possess a practicing certificate to practice law. This is entirely my own opinion, and does not constitute legal advice. Nor does this establish any client-solicitor relationship between the reader and myself. If you want me to recommend you a lawyer, ask really really nicely. I might have some friends who could render professional legal advice.
This is a rather morbid post. It's all about when we die. Just the other day someone asked me if their template is "correct". It is in the sense that it's a template that could be used, but all the blanks are not filled in, and the devil's in the details. Note: You don't need a lawyer to write wills. You can do it yourself. I recommend you head to the National Library, State Courts' Library or Supreme Court Library and find Probate and Administration in Singapore and Malaysia (Third Edition) [or whatever is the latest] by G Raman. There should be a sample will in the appendixes. Although, if you have a very complex will it would be better to speak to a professional. Here's some points to consider if you want to write a will and reduce the chances of a challenge on its contents. First, be clear. Use clear, simple language. Make sure your intentions are clear. If it is confusing, it will lead to dispute. Second, you could consider a no-contest clause. Basically, an heir in the Will that contests it will be disinherited. It's not clear whether this clause can stand in relation to the Inheritance (Family Provision) Act - in relation to providing for spouses, unmarried daughters, children with physical or mental disabilities, and children under 21 after you pass. Third, talk about it. This is especially for those who you think might be unhappy about the decision. It's tough, but do it because after all it's your decision. There are, of course, lots of other aspects to writing a will. These pointers in the Forbes article are just to cut down on challenges. Hi folks. Thought I'd comment on this seeing as how I have had several encounters with people who were scammed by timeshares. This guide can also work for those who bought packages from beauty or spa companies.
First, not all timeshares are scams, but there are a lot out there that are on the shadier side. I've been to a few just to get an idea. Second, this is merely my opinion, and it may not be a perfect one. So there's been a lot of talk about the Presidential power of clemency and where the decision making powers lie.
Justice S Chong has merely restated what most law students already know (assuming they were paying attention in Constitutional law). The question is whether Singapore's situation is unique or it shares this common heritage with it's Commonwealth brethren. Recently gazetted, the Amendment to the CPFTA, as well as the new Regulations (subsidiary legislation), came into effect on 15 April 2009. It now covers financial products that are regulated by MAS, with the exception of Moneylenders and Pawnbrokers. I suppose for small time investors who may have lost money over the recent financial meltdown, and have not gotten much help from FIDReC, they now have recourse to the Small Claims Tribunal. No lawyers, always a good sign I guess.
The Courts have come up with a formula (see AJR v AJS [2010] SGHC 199)
Taken from Singapore Law Watch [Note: This is just a guide] The High Court set out a methodology which it used as a rough check on its exercise of discretion in the division of matrimonial assets. For those interested in the full judgment.
Regarding no Constitutional Challenge: 122 Finally, we would reiterate that, in the light of our constitutional history since Singapore became an independent sovereign republic on 9 August 1965, there is no room for the argument that MDP legislation is unconstitutional because it is not “law” for the purposes of Art 9(1). In our view, whether or not our existing MDP legislation should have been enacted and/or whether such legislation should be modified or repealed are policy issues that are for Parliament to determine in the exercise of its legislative powers under the Singapore Constitution. It is for Parliament, and not the courts, to decide on the appropriateness or suitability of the MDP as a form of punishment for serious criminal offences. In view of the decisive rejection of a constitutional prohibition against inhuman punishment in the evolution of the Singapore Constitution (see [61]–[72] above), any changes in CIL and any foreign constitutional or judicial developments in relation to the MDP as an inhuman punishment will have no effect on the scope of Art 9(1). If any change in relation to the MDP (or the death penalty generally) is to be effected, that has to be done by Parliament and not by the courts under the guise of constitutional interpretation. I think the court meant that there should be no more challenges with regards to the MDP being unconstitutional due to it being inhumane. Having read the judgment, I do think Mr Ravi made a good case, but knowing our judicial attitude to activist Constitutional rulings, it was not going to fly. Using the Mithu case (India) was good since the Indian Constitution is the grandparent of ours. Also many of the cases were older than the Nguyen case, so I did not think the court would take them into account [34] I personally am no fan of the mandatory death penalty. I think there should be a death penalty, but the court should be allowed to decide if the person deserves the penalty or not. Chia Ti Lik in his post "Revelations from Bukit Merah West NPC" seems to indicate that "the Parliamentary statute of the Miscellaneous Offences Act has been arbitrarily expanded by the Singapore Police Force or the AG-C."
I know the case is on-going and I really shouldn't comment on it, so I won't. At least not about the Penal Code section 228 charge.
Rather it is over the issue of freedom of speech. Here's what our constitution states (Article 14): Freedom of speech, assembly and association 14. —(1) Subject to clauses (2) and (3) -- (a) every citizen of Singapore has the right to freedom of speech and expression;(b) all citizens of Singapore have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms; and(c) all citizens of Singapore have the right to form associations. (2) Parliament may by law impose -- (a) on the rights conferred by clause (1) (a), such restrictions as it considers necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of Singapore or any part thereof, friendly relations with other countries, public order or morality and restrictions designed to protect the privileges of Parliament or to provide against contempt of court, defamation or incitement to any offence;(b) on the right conferred by clause (1) (b), such restrictions as it considers necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of Singapore or any part thereof or public order; and(c) on the right conferred by clause (1) (c), such restrictions as it considers necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of Singapore or any part thereof, public order or morality. (3) Restrictions on the right to form associations conferred by clause (1) (c) may also be imposed by any law relating to labour or education. Let's ignore the restricitons imposed. Let's look at the rights with regards to freedom of speech. "every citizen of Singapore has the right to freedom of speech and expression" From what I gather Mr Gopalan Nair is now a US citizen. Which means he doesn't have a right to freedom of speech in Singapore. I know that is not the issue on hand and not what he is being charged under. I am quite sure Mr Nair would not make that argument either, as he has not. But just in case any one you know is make the "right to freedom of speech" argument, you can point out that only citizens have that right. |
AuthorLate 30s. Dad. Thinking about life, family, work, and retirement. Sharing those thoughts with others Categories
All
Archives
May 2018
|