SINGAPORE, Jan 18 — An elderly woman who sought to have her eldest daughter removed as a joint tenant of their HDB flat — claiming she had been misled and didn’t fully understand what she was signing — had her claim dismissed by the High Court.
In 2016, the couple had turned to their eldest daughter, Ain, for help with their mortgage payments for the flat jointly owned jointly by them, after the man’s health began to decline.
The couple had bought the flat in 1996 for S$218,000, with the husband paying S$51,000 upfront and the rest financed through a joint mortgage.
When the husband could no longer work after his health worsened in 2018, Ain, a property agent, was asked to help with the mortgage and moved back into the flat after her second divorce as her mother, Che’som, was a housewife since they married.
In January 2017, Ain applied for a housing loan to help with the payments, which HDB approved.
The loan was for up to S$42,900, and in February 2017, all three signed documents making Ain a joint tenant.
In May 2017, they attended another meeting with HDB to sign additional paperwork, including the transfer of ownership and refinancing the mortgage.
The HDB officers explained everything in Malay as the couple mainly spoke the language.
After the husband’s death in 2018, Ain remarried, and her new husband moved into the flat.
The couple’s eldest son, Is Haans, soon moved in as well after his marriage ended.
In May 2021, Che’som asked Ain to add Is Haans as a joint tenant, but Ain refused, leading to an argument.
Ain moved out of the flat, claiming she feared for her safety, and later filed a police report alleging that her brother had forced her out.
Attempts to get a protection order were denied.
Che’som argued that she did not understand the documents when they were signed, believing that Ain was simply helping with the mortgage and that there had been no intention for Ain to become a co-owner.
She also claimed she was distracted during the meetings because her husband had an asthma attack. Ain, however, insisted that her mother had understood the documents and that her father had planned for her to take over the flat.
The judge, Justice Thean, ruled that Che’som had understood the documents.
She pointed out that the HDB officers had explained everything clearly in Malay, and Che’som had confirmed her understanding.
The judge also found the testimony of a family friend, Norlina, credible, as she confirmed that Che’som had been relieved that Ain had taken over the mortgage.
The judge noted that Che’som had failed to mention the asthma attacks in her statements, which weakened her credibility.
In the end, the court dismissed Che’som’s claims, concluding that Ain had not misled her mother and had not acted under undue influence. The transfer of ownership stands, and Ain remains a joint tenant of the flat.