By Tiffany Gwee
This is a follow-up to an article. Read the 1st article here.
A 2nd letter had been sent to lifestyle blogger Ms. Grace Tan on 19 June following her refusal to put up a public apology online after her blog post “Singapore Company Register – Business Owners BEWARE!” was put up to raise awareness about the company.
Company Continues to Refute Claims
In the 2nd letter sent to Ms. Tan, the lawyers stated that since the issues that Ms. Tan raised “are presently pending investigations by the relevant authorities”, it would be “inappropriate” for them to discuss about the issues.
However, the company has “wholly (denied) and (refuted)” her statements about them in her website, claiming that they “are plainly defamatory in nature”.
“Deflecting Blame”?
The lawyers noted that Ms. Tan had apparently “made reference to other parties to justify (her) actions”. They mentioned that anything else that other parties have done is “not relevant to the issue of culpability for (her) own actions”.
“We further note that you denied that the statements in your website are defamatory. Instead, you have simply sought to deflect all blame to others.”
Demand has no Basis
Ms. Tan had wrote to the lawyers explaining that she did not want to put up an apology partially because she felt “criminally intimidated”. In the letter, the lawyers felt that the “allegation that (their) client’s letter and letter of demand constitute criminal intimidation has no basis in fact or in law”.
Towards the end of the letter, it clearly stated that if Ms. Tan continues to “act on (her) written threats”, they will be “vigorously defended against”.
Firm Stance Against Lawyers
In a reply to the law firm, Ms. Tan asked for them to prove that her statements are “defamatory in nature”. “I maintain that they are not,” she writes in the reply.
She also listed down credible news sources to prove that the company had been in the news for all the wrong reasons.
Data Register Pte Ltd is now currently being investigated and is facing a total of 104 charges in court brought against it by ACRA. ACRA has also issued 4 public alerts about the company, warning businesses not to sign up with them.
According to Ms. Tan, the Commercial Affairs Department had “seized the monies from the company’s bank account” as well.
“All my rights are expressly reserved, including my right to not receive letters of harassment from legal firms. I advise you to cease and desist.”
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...ding-blog-post-about-misrepresenting-company/
This is a follow-up to an article. Read the 1st article here.
A 2nd letter had been sent to lifestyle blogger Ms. Grace Tan on 19 June following her refusal to put up a public apology online after her blog post “Singapore Company Register – Business Owners BEWARE!” was put up to raise awareness about the company.
Company Continues to Refute Claims
In the 2nd letter sent to Ms. Tan, the lawyers stated that since the issues that Ms. Tan raised “are presently pending investigations by the relevant authorities”, it would be “inappropriate” for them to discuss about the issues.
However, the company has “wholly (denied) and (refuted)” her statements about them in her website, claiming that they “are plainly defamatory in nature”.
“Deflecting Blame”?
The lawyers noted that Ms. Tan had apparently “made reference to other parties to justify (her) actions”. They mentioned that anything else that other parties have done is “not relevant to the issue of culpability for (her) own actions”.
“We further note that you denied that the statements in your website are defamatory. Instead, you have simply sought to deflect all blame to others.”
Demand has no Basis
Ms. Tan had wrote to the lawyers explaining that she did not want to put up an apology partially because she felt “criminally intimidated”. In the letter, the lawyers felt that the “allegation that (their) client’s letter and letter of demand constitute criminal intimidation has no basis in fact or in law”.
Towards the end of the letter, it clearly stated that if Ms. Tan continues to “act on (her) written threats”, they will be “vigorously defended against”.
Firm Stance Against Lawyers
In a reply to the law firm, Ms. Tan asked for them to prove that her statements are “defamatory in nature”. “I maintain that they are not,” she writes in the reply.
She also listed down credible news sources to prove that the company had been in the news for all the wrong reasons.
Data Register Pte Ltd is now currently being investigated and is facing a total of 104 charges in court brought against it by ACRA. ACRA has also issued 4 public alerts about the company, warning businesses not to sign up with them.
According to Ms. Tan, the Commercial Affairs Department had “seized the monies from the company’s bank account” as well.
“All my rights are expressly reserved, including my right to not receive letters of harassment from legal firms. I advise you to cease and desist.”
http://www.theonlinecitizen.com/201...ding-blog-post-about-misrepresenting-company/
