Jump to content

Papa and son seek $2.6mil damages for $900k trading loss

Ahtong

By Ahtong,
in Investment & Financial Matters

 Share

Recommended Posts

Ahtong

Ahtong

1st Gear

Wah, like that also can. :blink:

Any experts can comment if they actually stand a chance?

 

He was a 19-year-old full-time national serviceman when he and his businessman father opened a joint investment account at a private bank in July 2006.

 

Two years later, Mr Ian Ow Tuc Yun used the account to trade in futures and racked up losses of close to $900,000 in a space of nine months.

 

Now, the 26-year-old student and his father Ow Weng Fye, 63, are seeking $2.6 million in damages from the Singapore branch of Credit Suisse, in a lawsuit that opened for hearing yesterday in the High Court.

 

They assert that their relationship manager Aaron Chwee Toh Yee - named as the second defendant in the suit - had misled and manipulated the naive son into making the trades, while keeping the father in the dark.

 

dL9gl2U.png

 

fU1qB2z.png

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nlatio

Nlatio

Turbocharged

If they make $$$$.... will they go to court and say they should not make so much...... must give back to the bank??? [laugh]

 

Fark lar...... invest kena burn kpkb blame this blame that except themselve.....

 

They need to do their own homework despite what the bank officer advise them......just like the uncle selling fish ball noodle... will he tell you his noodle not nice, dont buy..... wtf..... loose $$$ calim bank give bad advise..... [rolleyes]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Mockngbrd

Mockngbrd

Supersonic
(edited)

i wan to sue singapore pools also, they mislead me think i can win 1st prize.

 

i also want to sue all the makers of super pushup bras, super misleading.

Edited by Mockngbrd
Link to post
Share on other sites
Altivo

Altivo

3rd Gear
(edited)

Usually no case, unless the RM executed the unauthorised trades without the knowledge of the father/son.

 

In this case, it is more like the transactions were done by the father/son themselves and supposedly on the advice of the trader. But as with all markets, nothing is "bao jiak" one.

 

Reminds me of that incident where the son of the nasi lemak chain refused to pay for his losses at MBS.

Edited by Altivo
Link to post
Share on other sites
Nlatio

Nlatio

Turbocharged

Usually no case, unless the RM executed the unauthorised trades without the knowledge of the father/son.

 

In this case, it is more like the transactions were done by the father/son themselves and supposedly on the advice of the trader. But as with all markets, nothing is "bao jiak" one.

 

Reminds me of that incident where the son of the nasi lemak chain refused to pay for his losses at MBS.

 

 

Agreed bro... even use your Durex also boh 100%... [laugh] .... want 100%, dont have sex... trade lor.... [laugh]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Jman888

Jman888

Moderator
(edited)

anyone above 18 cannot claim to be mislead or mispresented, more so the father even let him be a joint account holder <_<

 

why let him join if the son can't make decision and everything must come to the father?

Edited by Jman888
Link to post
Share on other sites
Scion

Scion

Turbocharged

Wah, like that also can. :blink:

Any experts can comment if they actually stand a chance?

 

He was a 19-year-old full-time national serviceman when he and his businessman father opened a joint investment account at a private bank in July 2006.

 

Two years later, Mr Ian Ow Tuc Yun used the account to trade in futures and racked up losses of close to $900,000 in a space of nine months.

 

Now, the 26-year-old student and his father Ow Weng Fye, 63, are seeking $2.6 million in damages from the Singapore branch of Credit Suisse, in a lawsuit that opened for hearing yesterday in the High Court.

 

They assert that their relationship manager Aaron Chwee Toh Yee - named as the second defendant in the suit - had misled and manipulated the naive son into making the trades, while keeping the father in the dark.

 

 

 

 

well, Oei Hong Leong did this stunt some years ago

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Throttle2

Throttle2

Supersonic

i wan to sue singapore pools also, they mislead me think i can win 1st prize.

 

i also want to sue all the makers of super pushup bras, super misleading.

 

Muayhahaha.... [thumbsup]

Link to post
Share on other sites
Altivo

Altivo

3rd Gear

Agreed bro... even use your Durex also boh 100%... [laugh] .... want 100%, dont have sex... trade lor.... [laugh]

 

And in the management agreement which they signed with CS, there would be legal provisions which will limit the liability of the bank such as the one below

 

 

Except insofar as the same may result from our or our

employees

Link to post
Share on other sites
Kar_lover

Kar_lover

Supercharged

If they make $$$$.... will they go to court and say they should not make so much...... must give back to the bank??? [laugh]

 

Fark lar...... invest kena burn kpkb blame this blame that except themselve.....

 

They need to do their own homework despite what the bank officer advise them......just like the uncle selling fish ball noodle... will he tell you his noodle not nice, dont buy..... wtf..... loose $$$ calim bank give bad advise..... [rolleyes]

 

Many people blame everything on everyone. It's NEVER their own fault.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Neost

Neost

6th Gear

Any kind legal trained soul here can help me to understand why is there a case in the first place?

 

It is not like the bank bring a knife to his throat and force him to sign the investment document. Then this one got case I know. Is called under duress. :D :D

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...