Cross-Examination of How Weng Fan


Cross-Examination of How Weng Fan
           
(1)        How told the Court that Sylvia was a “hopeless chairman” who would “just do things to protect herself only” such that “the town council is going to die”.
            “hopeless chairman”
Q:         “Aiyah, at the end of the day, she’s a hopeless chairman”.
                        Who is the “she”?
            A:         Sylvia.

Will “just do things to protect herself only”
Q:         …
"(Sighs) She was the councillor before at Hougang Town Council. She is so scared of everything, she just cannot be the Chairman. She will just do things to protect herself only. Then I told chairman she, I told Low Thia Khiang she cannot be the chairman; you have to replace her. You have to come back and be the chairman for at least the first two years. Straighten up the town council first! He doesn't want to listen."

            “the town council is going to die”
Q:         Ms How, let's go to the last-but-one mention of your name.
"You think (inaudible) is not going to be the chairman. That's where I say, oh, dear, the town council is going to die."
Laughs.
            …
Q:         And who was that person?
A:         At that point, it was Sylvia.

(2)        Mr Singh charged How with destroying evidence just before she left AHTC – including on her last day at AHTC – because she and Loh had a great deal to be concerned about.
Q:         This is KPMG saying this:
"During our forensic technology procedures, we observed the following ..."
Look at the second item:
"Email archives pertaining to How Weng Fan were not present on the electronic device that we were informed was assigned to her."
You destroyed the evidence, didn't you, Ms How?
A:         No.
Q:         Look down further:
"23 documents and two email archives were deleted from the profile of JC, a former FMSS employee, on 14 July 2015."
Just look one more down:
"17 documents and four email archives were deleted from the profile of Danny Loh on 2 June 2015."
You left AHTC when?
A:         I think I left -- officially it was 14 July, but by May, early June, I was no longer reporting to the town council's office.
Q:         So you see, Ms How, in the days leading up to your departure, including on your last day, documents and emails belonging to your husband and you, documents and archives of FMSS's former employee JC, were being actively deleted?
A:         I won't know about the IT. I'm not an IT person. But I know that before Danny left, he has actually all his emails handed over to the chairman.
Q:         Ms How, you don't have to delete archives to forward them on to someone else.
A:         I did not delete anything.
Q:         Who is JC?
A:         I actually do not know who is JC.
Q:         Right. I suggest to you, Ms How, that you … and your husband had a great deal to be concerned about, which explains the convenient and sudden disappearance of evidence.
A:         I don't think so, because I definitely do not handle IT, and I'm not an IT person who knows how to delete something from the servers.
And I do recall, in the handing over, Danny has passed on all his emails information to the chairman.

(3)        Secretly recorded conversation disclosed in Court: How says it was Sylvia who did not want to extend the AIM system.
[Background: Sylvia claimed that AIM had terminated the computer system instead.]
Q:         "... in the early years, you already had problems?
Ms How: 2011, because she cannot make firm decision. And that is where, like the first audit, there was no computer system, right?"
So, you see, you blamed her, not AIM or NCS, for the troubles in the town council; correct?
A:         For the -- no. There's no computer system -
Q:         Let's move on.
A:         -- and that is where we have to be firm in handling this, because of the political reasons why the TCMS was removed that has caused this, and you need someone experienced to deal with this politically with the parties that sold this system away that has caused the town council to face all these problems, starting with the first audit.
Q:         Really? Let's turn to -
A:         Yes, of course.
Q:         -- page 21927. At the top:
"Chin Chin: Why didn't you extend the AIM system?"
Answer, Ms How -
…
Q:        "She doesn't want to extend. It's not that we do not want."
Who is the "she"?
A:         Sylvia.


Popular posts from this blog

KEY POINTS MADE BY THE PLAINTIFFS IN CLOSING

KEY POINTS MADE BY THE PLAINTIFFS IN CLOSING 1. Starting position : (a)    Starting position is that all payments made to FMSS / FMSI – S$33.7m – were entirely illegal and improper. (b)    All of these payments were made under a payment system which has no accountability whatsoever. 2. KPMG’s findings : (a)    KPMG was severely critical of the entire payment system that TC has put in place. (b)    KPMG found the system to be “ seriously flawed ” where “ [a]n unacceptably high degree of financial responsibility was relinquished by the Town Councillors to the Conflicted Persons, in a control environment in which meaningful oversight by the Town Councillors was absent ”. 3. Sylvia Lim and Low Thia Khiang (Low) acted for collateral purposes : (a)    Set out to favour How Weng Fang and Loh Thia Khiang (their friends) and let them profit from the TC. (b)    This is a wholly unacceptable purpose, and is dishonest. (c)    They did so by appoin
Read more

FMSS’ PROFITS VS AHTC’S DEFICITS

Image
FMSS’ PROFITS VS AHTC’S DEFICITS FMSS’ How Weng Fan (How) was cross-examined by Mr Davinder Singh (DS) today. For those unfamiliar with FMSS, this was a start-up MA company started by How and her late husband, Danny Loh (Loh), both WP supporters, in May 2011. FMSS was awarded two MA contracts by the WP-controlled AHTC despite lacking experience running a GRC. The first 1-year MA contract with a value of about S$5 million was awarded to FMSS by waiver of tender.   The second 3-year MA contract with a value of about S$16 million was awarded by tender to FMSS, though FMSS was the sole bidder.   These figures exclude separate (and additional) project management fees paid by AHTC to FMSS. During the earlier part of the TC trial, we learnt from the WP MPs that FMSS charged more than CPG, the incumbent MA, even though the FMSS contract was stated to be “ at the prevailing Managing Agent’s fees and fees structure as per the existing Managing Agent contract ” .
Read more

Cross Examination of Pritam Singh and Kenneth Foo

Day 15 – Cross Examination of Pritam Singh (1)         Pritam agreed there was a conflict of interest with the appointment of Loh/How. And admitted that their shareholding interests in FMSS had to be disclosed to all Town Councillors who did not know. Pritam also admitted: (a)         Loh/How’s shareholdings were not declared at the 4 Aug meeting (b)         He did not know how many shares Loh/How owned in FMSS on 4 Aug (c)         He did not know who else (other than Loh/How) owned FMSS shares on 4 Aug             [Background: In reality, FMSS was 100% owned by employees of AHTC.] Q:          Assume that the town councillors, or not all of them, knew that they were shareholders. That would have been a material thing to disclose?             A:          On that assumption, yes . … Q:          Leaving aside that, it would have been relevant for the town councillors, again, on the premise that they did not know, to know that the managing agent was actua
Read more