SINGAPORE: In debts from buying rose garlands for woman artists at” Diao Hua” leagues, a man forged papers to offer his mother’s two vehicles to a car dealer.
Liu Kuei Liang, also known as Kent, was sentenced to 12 months ‘ prison for two charges of forging income and buy contracts.
According to a ruling made on Wednesday ( Mar 27 ), Liu began to owe money around August 2022 from attending clubs and purchasing flower “hua” garlands to hang or “diao” around singers ‘ necks.
A Rolls Royce Dawn 6.6 V12 and a Mini Cooper SE are the two trucks Liu decided to sell because he was desperate for money to pay off his bills.
On Aug 1, 2022, Liu contacted Mr Low Lye Seng, a member of auto dealer Autoart Singapore. He informed Mr. Low that he wanted to sell his mother’s two vehicles.
The pair agreed that the Rolls Royce would be sold for S$ 700, 000 ( US$ 519, 400 ) and the Mini Cooper for S$ 130, 000.
Autoart sent the sales and purchase agreements to Liu via WhatsApp and prepared the contracts for both automobiles.
THE Sits AND Fraud
Liu lied to Mr Low that his family was out of town in Taiwan, when she was in Singapore. He claimed he did receive his mother’s names when she returned.
After receiving the agreements up via WhatsApp, Liu then forged his family’s Chinese signatures.
Another Autoart agent contacted Liu for his mother’s telephone number to ensure the sale of the two vehicles.
Liu requested a friend from Taiwan who would answer a phone, and he provided a range that belonged to him.
When Autoart called the number, the person on the other side backed the price of Liu’s family, believing that the man had been authorized to do so.
Mr. Low finally authorized a loan of S$ 100, 000 for the Rolls Royce and S$ 50, 000 for the Mini Cooper, and sent it to Liu via Pay Today.
On Aug 16, 2022, Liu’s family lodged a policeman statement, saying she believed he had forged her petitions to offer her vehicles without her consent.
The trial requested four to six months of confinement. According to Vice Public Prosecutor Vishnu Menon, the sums involved in the case were very high, and there was planning and preparation, with the Taiwan-based companion assisting in “cementing that lie.”
MOTHER HAS Redeemed HIM: Army
Vijai Dharamdas Parwani of Parwani Law, a defense attorney, otherwise requested a large good.
He claimed Liu’s family had granted him permission to drive the vehicles when necessary.  ,
As Liu had outstanding bills, he thought he could get “temporary financing” by purporting to offer the cars to the auto dealer “in a momentary lapse of judgment”, said the lawyer.
He claimed that the auto dealer had received products that were “far in excess of the loan paid.”  ,
The two cars were returned to Liu’s family in exchange for a payment of the S$ 150, 000 loan, said the lawyer.
The Rolls Royce was eventually sold in April 2023 for S$ 1 million.
” The mom has since reconciled with the accused”, said the army. She has forgiven the accused and wo n’t be requesting his payment of the deposit.
He claimed that the family “in a time of whet” that she had requested the police report.
In reaction, the prosecutors said compensation did not “emanate from the accused” and that the payment of the S$ 150, 000 was made by Liu’s family.
Because there was “nothing stopping” the mummy from paying the fine for Liu, he added, a fine was incorrect.
He continued, noting that Liu’s family may have to take care of Liu’s younger child if Liu went to jail, and that forgiveness is not viewed as a limiting factor.
NO AMENDS OF HIS OWN: Determine
District Judge Brenda Chua argued in punishment that the cars are expensive and high-value items, with the Rolls Royce being a high-end luxury vehicle type.
She found that the auto dealer had suffered damage in terms of the S$ 150, 000 parted with, the time value of money, any interest accrued with the amount of S$ 150, 000 and an opportunity value.
The auto dealer and Liu’s family, who paid the S$ 150, 000 for her child, were the only victims in this case, according to Judge Chua, who also took advantage of her own child.
She noted that Liu himself had never made any compensation and had not settled matters on his own.
” Despite being a victim of the accused’s violence, the family still offered to pay so she could have her own trucks returned. Judge Chua argued that the accused relied on the family to save him from his errors.  ,
I concurred with the trial that the accused did not receive compensation despite their pleas. As the prosecution stated: ( If ) someone else pays for your crime, how can we say that’ you are remorseful'”?
Liu is pending an appeal against his sentence and is not permitted to serve on loan.