I wrote a cheque for ABC Property for $1,000. There was a mistake in the name - as it should be ABC Properties. The bank refused to bank in the cheque. They refused to call me to verify if I had intended it to be for ABC Properties. They just returned the cheque for correction. It had to be sent to the payee who has to mail it to me. And I have to mail it back.
Wow - this is Singapore! All this hassle for a relatively small sum. The bank is so rigid and so unthinking; the staff prefer to avoid responsibility and stick to the rules blindly. Do you wonder why life is so stressful and costly in Singapore? The reason is found all over the place!
Wow - this is Singapore! All this hassle for a relatively small sum. The bank is so rigid and so unthinking; the staff prefer to avoid responsibility and stick to the rules blindly. Do you wonder why life is so stressful and costly in Singapore? The reason is found all over the place!
16 comments:
If someone send you a cheque meant for you and made it payable to "Tan Kin Liam", would you accept it?
Sometimes, Mr Tan, we would have to put ourselves into the other person's shoes, especially if he or she is only an employee and cannot change the rules.
If I were to write a cheque to ABC property but intended for ABC properties, even if it is for $1000, thereotically, the cheque cannot be honored. This is to minimise the opportunity for fraud. If the employee were to accept when there are strict rules against it for obvious reasons, then we should play our part in accepting the need to comply. I would be afraid if the cheque meant for ABC properties is accepted when I wrote ABC property. Please do not fault the employee for her diligence.
Well, understand the situation from the administration officer's point of view:
As instructed by the manager, all cheques must have:
A) correct signature as recorded
B) Payee must be clearly stated.
C) No post dated cheques
D) No alterations
Now, here is the tricky part:
"Any cheques that are cleared and later found to be in error, the staff involved will have to pay the entire sum and face termination after a disciplinary hearing."
Such punitive measures will surely retard any attempt at "being flexible"... this is Singapore.
Find the staff ( managers are not staff, remember that ) and sack them. ( just ask anyone who works in a GLC.. SQ/Kep/etc
Actually it is not blind following of rules. Rather it is interpreting of the rules in such a way so that the person has to do the least amount of work. The bank could have done what was written in the posting. It is however a lot more work than doing what the bank did under the guise that they are just following rules.
Reply to 1:54 pm
If the cheque was meant for me, and there was a mistake in the name, I would accept it - and I would ask my bank to accept it.
The trouble is - the bank will not accept it because of the Singapore mindset, i.e. do not take responsibility, blind adherence to rules. So, our life will to face a lot of unnecessary hassle.
Reply to financialray
I am not blaming the staff. The problem is with the Singapore environment. We are doomed to a stressful and complicated life.
Dun understand why Mr. Tan could be so careless, either 2 cents less or got the singular or plural noun wrong on the cheque.
This time round I'm on the bank's side.
Hi Mr Tan,
This routine check and strict regulation cannot be derailed. I don't work in a bank.
If the bank can accept to deposit a cheque with "Tan Kin Liam" into an account held by yourself, can you imagine how chaotic things will become. Brothers will be intercepting each other's cheques to deposit into their own account,just by telling the bank the cheque is "meant for me".
Soon, Tan Kin Liat, Tan Kin Liam, Tan Kin Liao etc will try to work in a bank and see if they can intercept your cheque. Then you will face more stress.
Hope you can understand the rationale for the rule now.
I think,no one wants to take responsibility.They follow the rules rigidly. Why not, just a call to the issuer will to clarify the matter and save all the hassle of returning, rectifying, re-signing,etc,etc. it is jsut a phone call away.
It is quite easy for the bank to call me and ask if I intended to pay to ABC Property or ABC Properties. I can even fax a letter of confirmation to them.
This is customer service, and it saves a lot of unnecessary work all round. Of course, it is the culture in Singapore not to take any responsibility - so it is easier for the bank to reject the cheque, and let somebody else carry the hassle.
Sometimes, they take this as an excuse to impose a fee (penalty) on the customer.
To be fair it's your responsibility to write the correct payee name. U can't just blame the world when u are careless
Mr Tan, with all respect, you're mistakened. A cheque is a negotiable instrument, and there are laws governing negotiable instruments. That's why the payee on the cheque needs to be correct.
Hi Mr Tan,
It is very easy to fake a letter of confirmation and then fax it over.
A little inconvenience to prevent fraud is not too much to ask for.
It is not about customer service or whether the bank or their employees are shirking their responsibility.
The bank, your bank, has the responsibilty and duty to protect your funds.
You will not be so kind to them if they had cleared the cheque only for you to accuse them of not carrying out due care.
They could call you, but are they absolutely sure its you that they are speaking to? Who should be repsonsible beyond this?
Perhaps you could craft a letter to instruct your bankers to clear all cheques as long as the signature corresponds to the specimen on records.
Reply to financialray
It is a crime to fake a document. And who would want to commit a fraud in such for $1,000 under such circumstances. I find your argument to be absurd. But it does reflect the mindset that is quite prevailing in Singapore.
Reply to 10:18 am
When the cheque is banked in by ABC Properties, it does not become a negotiable instrument any more. It is a question of whether the money is intended to be paid to another party call ABC Property.
I find your argument to be quite thereotical.
Post a Comment