” NO POINT IN STALLING FURTHER”
Mdm Evelyn Wu, whose eldest daughter’s cord blood was among those affected, was one of the kids who accepted Cordlife’s payment. The 46-year-old will receive a refund of the annual fees from 2022 onwards, which amounts to S$ 1,819 ( US$ 1,350 ) inclusive of GST.
” If the test is destroyed or … has been undermined, there’s no place in stalling more,” said the mother-of-three, who is an trainer.
She also pointed to a section in the payment arrangement, where Cordlife stated it may try to find a suit if her baby requires wire blood in future.
The clause reads:” I am also aware that, pursuant to the agreement, ( Cordlife Group Limited ) will uphold their promise to seek a suitable replacement cord blood unit for my child if, at the point a transplant is required, the transplant physician determines that the stored cord blood is not viable for use in an approved cord blood transplant for my child solely due to the stem cells not meeting the viability criteria. “
” So in a way, it ’s ( the ) best of both worlds,” Mdm Wu said. ” I do n’t think suing is possible because they agreed to find me a match … If I ca n’t get anything else, I might as well get the money back. “
She added that her oldest child also has a “lifeline” at Cordlife as Mdm Wu’s next daughter’s cable body is also stored with the lender. The position of the younger child’s cable heart is still under investigation.
Still, Mdm Wu said she is not entirely satisfied with the refund amount, given that she made an upfront payment of S$ 5,630 to store her child’s cord blood for 21 years. She also, like many families, wishes the firm offered full payment.
” But in a way, I’m only cutting my loss shorter because I don’t think many can be done. ”
Mdm Wu added that any penalties or charges imposed on the business would not go to consumers. ” I might as well get back my compensation first,” she said.
Another family was offered the exact compensation amount. Ms Shialey Tan, 50, has been storing her youngest child’s cable heart with Cordlife since 2009.
The 50-year-old, who works in the social services field, said she accepted the payment as it was “better than never having any amount of money up at all”.
” The damage has already been done to the company. The PR is really so terrible. I do n’t think anybody wants to bank with them. So, no point me adding fuel to the fire and … ( filing ) a lawsuit,” said Ms Tan.
The mother-of-three added that she would still have to invest money to pursue legal action against the company, which may cost more than what was refunded to her.
She also pointed out that the payment would not be given to her in dollars as she paid for the costs using her son’s Child Development Account – a special discounts accounts that can be used for child-raising expenses such as medical and school fees. The amount may be transferred to her son’s Post-Secondary Education Account otherwise.
Mr Tan added:” Banking of the rope body is just an insurance that I may need in the future. Who knows? I may truly not need it in the future too. “
” Given this tragedy that has happened, I feel that this is the best position and for me, this is what I want. I’m willing to accept. “