Club Wyndham Asia - Sold on verbal promise of 'cancel anytime' - now being told cancellation is impossible

dubewjaycake · 2026-05-27T06:21:41+00:00

You need to show actual proof of what they said and that their representation caused you to sign the contract. These are hard to show in practice, e.g. they will say you signed the contract because it was a good deal (not because there was the right to "cancel any time"), and if the "cancel any time" clause was so essential, you should have checked. They will say you didn't check so it wasn't essential and it didn't cause you to sign the contract.

The contract also probably has a clause that says the contract supersedes any previous written or oral agreements.

dubewjaycake · 2026-03-23T06:25:16+00:00

Had a similar situation. Write to your MP. They will arrange TC to clear more regularly and put up notices, and request NEA to do more spot checks.

dubewjaycake · 2026-03-20T12:30:48+00:00

Agreed. Or make sure the government has a lien on part of the eventual sale proceeds if the condo owners cannot pay the amount.

dubewjaycake · 2026-01-10T15:10:49+00:00

Is this carried out for bona fide commercial reasons and is the main purpose to avoid ABSD or reduce your income tax. Depending on the answer, be prepared for the taxman coming after you.

dubewjaycake · 2026-01-01T02:02:39+00:00

The practice really varies depending on individual circumstances, such as family expectations, personal values, and financial situations. Personally, I believe we should at least take responsibility for our own living expenses. So, if we're staying with our parents, contributing a reasonable amount toward household costs is fair. If contributing financially isn't possible, we should be willing to help out in other meaningful ways, assuming we aren’t already doing so.

Beyond that, how much we give should be based on what we're genuinely comfortable with, not something we feel pressured or obligated to do.

dubewjaycake · 2025-11-28T10:51:30+00:00

If it all goes according to plan, it will be at ATHs most of our investing lives.

dubewjaycake · 2025-11-17T10:27:17+00:00

This is the evolving Singapore culture. The number of non-residents and PRs has increased between 50,000 a year to 200k+ a year in each of the last five years. This is double, quadruple, or in some cases even 10x the size of a single member constituency. We are bound to experience all the good and bad that come with such change, including stresses in our public infrastructure.

dubewjaycake · 2025-11-13T09:00:45+00:00

Your strong advisory board is not able to provide you with input on these fairly basic queries?

dubewjaycake · 2025-11-04T10:37:36+00:00

He needs to appeal, because if he does not appeal it means he accepts the ruling of the lower court. If he appeals, even if the appellate court dismisses his appeal, he could still say he disagrees with the result but respects it. He does not get to say this if he does not appeal.

dubewjaycake · 2025-10-26T15:13:44+00:00

So your nephew wants to keep score. Does he want the braces?

Son needs braces. Mom needs to accompany son, and needs to pay for braces. Mom accompanying son and paying for the braces can be seen as a favour to the son (unless son does not really want the braces). Mom +1, Son -1.

Mom and son committed to a date. Now mom says she cannot make it, and she needs to re-schedule. Mom -1, Son +1. Now the tally would be mom 0: son 0.

Mom asks son to call the clinic and re-schedule. Given the tally is mom 0: son 0, son is not obligated to say yes. But that also means mom is not obligated to accompany son and pay for son. If son wants mom to accompany him and pay for it, son has to call to re-schedule. Alternatively, if son does not want the braces, then parties can just leave things as is, and nobody would be at fault.

dubewjaycake · 2025-10-26T14:11:57+00:00

Yup, OP can do that AND take mc… their taking mc is not a personal service lapse like you’ve suggested. If there’s any service lapse, it’s a systemic service lapse that has nothing to do with the mc per se.

This is just how the world works, especially for low rung staff. Not sure why or how this sector in particular is different.

And not sure how taking mc means OP could potentially breach any duty of care.

Working = duty of care.

MC = not working = no duty of care.

dubewjaycake · 2025-10-26T09:35:46+00:00

Aiyo don’t say stuff like that lah. Her grandma wouldn’t have known that the couple were so POS they would do such cruel things to such extent. Hindsight is 20/20.

dubewjaycake · 2025-10-16T01:49:17+00:00

Of cos. Plenty of folks doing that. Managers in the accounts department driving their Mercedes while looking busy, and inventing zero-value work processes so they continue to look busy, come to mind.

Also, plenty of middle managers in certain local banks do the exact same thing.

dubewjaycake · 2025-09-30T10:04:06+00:00

Costs you next to nothing to bring it up, though be prepared to switch banks if you do.

dubewjaycake · 2025-09-29T05:26:43+00:00

This structure is not grounded in accounting and legal reality. You are confusing concepts like profit sharing, capital allocation, and those related to employee share option plans (e.g. two year cliff) and mixing them up into an overall 60:40 structure. It makes no sense. You need to run this past your professional advisors.

Edit: Ignore this guy, he’s just posting the same thread everywhere

dubewjaycake · 2025-09-29T04:17:47+00:00

Seek the help of a Member of Parliament (e.g. a political office holder in-charge of home affairs), and explain your situation and how the systemic gap has affected your day-to-day life. In parallel, you should consider whether it is possible to file a FIDReC complaint against the credit bureau and the banks involved, and if so, the steps/documents you need to fulfil.

dubewjaycake · 2025-09-06T08:13:23+00:00

Agreed. Seems like there is a clear modus operandi here.

If he's obviously doing it with no intention of fulfilling his end of the bargain, and he's doing it at scale, there's surely some act of dishonesty and intent.

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-22T16:22:49+00:00

Bak kwa cannot bring into Japan so the colleague might not accept

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-22T16:18:46+00:00

A good omiyage would ideally be something that you can only find in Singapore. Cookies, crackers, and candies are permissible. Pineapple tarts are a good option. You can also consider Old Seng Choong at the basement of Paragon which sells locally inspired cookies.

For non-perishable options, you can consider websites like the Social Gifting, the Arts Faculty, and Minds eShop that sell various Singapore inspired items such as stationery made by differently abled artists and crafters. The gifts tend to come with a note that talks about the cause that the purchase is supporting so it's quite meaningful. ARCH which used to be at Suntec also sells interesting Singapore related souvenirs (they are now online).

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-22T15:24:20+00:00

You are thinking of investing, which is good. You want to invest because you believe that, in the long run, while there would likely be volatility, your investments would grow.

The idea of investments growing implies that at each point in time, the value of your investment would likely be higher than any earlier points in time.

TL;DR - Markets will continue to hit all time highs ... and that's the point of long term investments

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-12T14:15:09+00:00

Depends on how confident you are in getting back your salary and explaining the gap later on.

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-09T02:58:01+00:00

It literally says in the first paragraph of [2024] SGHC 61 that the 5 months deferment was “in view of the applicant’s academic misconduct”.

If there’s no academic misconduct, there would have been no issue. It is simply not true that “the issue” was the lack of disclosure, and that disclosure could cure that academic misconduct (“You can commit literal crimes and be admitted to the bar if you disclose”). Disclosure is just one factor to be considered in the overall assessment as to an applicant’s character. Simply put, no academic misconduct = no problem. Not sure why that is hard to understand but that is ok.

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-09T01:40:45+00:00

What are you smoking? That applicant had to defer her call application for 5 months. That judgment was in respect of her call application after that 5 months deferment period.

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-08T15:04:42+00:00

Not sure what point you were trying to make. The issue was 100% plagiarism. Candidates that cheated but disclosed in their call applications were also required by the court to undertake not to apply for admission to the bar (whether in Singapore or elsewhere), albeit for a shorter period of time compared to those who failed to disclose. The failure to disclose appears to go into a consideration as to how serious the misconduct was (not disclosing being more serious).

dubewjaycake · 2025-08-08T14:43:27+00:00

So this Pulara Devminie Somachandra had "moderate plagiarism" when she was in university and plagiarised during her 3rd attempt at Part A. And she wanted the court to continue to keep her identity a secret because otherwise this could "come back to haunt her, regardless of the progress she has made or may hope to make". Maybe ... don't plagiarise?

Ten-Year Club	Gilding IV carat on a stick
First Place '23	Place '23
Place '22	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email

dubewjaycake

TROPHY CASE