Multiple People Charged for Telling HDB Households That Fire Extinguishers Are Compulsory in HDB Flats

By
Goh Yi Ling
-

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Or at least that is what you might say when you hear about what these three people did to sell some fire extinguishers.

In short, they lied that there was a Housing Development Board (HDB) requirement for fire extinguishers in HDB flats.

Here is what happened.

Three Men Lied About HDB Requirements to Sell Fire Extinguishers

In what appears to be sales tactics carried too far, three men have found themselves in hot water due to their lies when selling fire extinguishers.

The three men charged with cheating are Adrian Tan Wei Liang (25 years old), Chai Ri Jou (27 years old) and Isaac Ang Shi Ming (28 years old).

The trio were employed by Fire Safety Prevention SG (FSP) at the time of the incidents, a company which sells products including fire extinguishers.

They allegedly did door-to-door sales to promote their company’s products, including fire extinguishers.

To convince the residents they approached to buy their products, the three men spun a web of lies, including that FSP and a community centre collaborated to sell the fire extinguisher.

Some other misrepresentations the men told included that FSP had the support of the police and the Members of Parliament (MP).

They also mentioned all HDB flats needed to have their own fire extinguishers.

Other fibs told included that Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) would take action against households without the device, such as by issuing summonses.

These lies led a total of five victims to spend a total of $835 on FSP products from 2018 to 2020.

Indeed, there are no such HDB requirements requiring the purchase of a fire extinguisher.

If anything, the HDB’s fire safety guidelines focus on not obstructing common spaces, such as corridors with clothing racks and other items.

Then-Firm Director Told Them to Cover Things Up

While the three men were the ones who sold the products by telling lies, their superior was also implicated in this fraudulent incident.

More specifically, the then-director, Kelvin Tan Yaosheng (42 years old), allegedly obstructed justice by telling two of the men to corroborate their statements given to the authorities.

Tan had told the two men to give identical statements when questioned by the police and officers of the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS).

The CCCS is a statutory board under the Ministry of Trade and Industry, focusing on the administration and enforcement of the Competition Act.

As of now, the cases for all four men have been adjourned to August.

Watch this for a complete summary of what REALLY happened to Qoo10, and why it's like a K-drama:

Read Also:

Advertisements
 
Goh Yi Ling
Email: [email protected]