M
Mdm Tang
Guest
IT WAS a case that had it all - sex, money, allegations of blackmail and even a Thai fortune-teller.
Yesterday, it came to an end after the unfaithful wife at the centre of the saga lost a legal bid to recover more than $650,000 from her former lover.
Financial consultant Sarah Tee embarked on a long-running fling with the man she hired to renovate her Balestier Road apartment, at times going away with him to Malacca and Bangkok.
But the relationship soured, allegedly after she discovered that he was also having an affair with the Thai clairvoyant.
Ms Tee went to the High Court, claiming she had given him over $608,000 to invest on her behalf so her husband would not get a share if they divorced.
She also said she handed him another $50,000 after he blackmailed her by threatening to expose her affair.
But Justice Steven Chong threw out her case after finding that both payments were actually gifts.
In his judgment grounds yesterday, he quoted intimate text messages showing that she and Mr Andy Pang were lovers, rather than blackmailer and victim. The judge added that the way she confided in him about her breast implant showed how close their relationship was.
Ms Tee claimed she had given her boyfriend the $608,700 in 2005 so he could invest it in property and land in Shenyang, China. This would mean that there was no paper trail for her husband to follow if he tried to claim a share of her assets in a divorce.
She argued that Mr Pang held the money for her on trust and that she had the right to ask for it back.
But Justice Chong found she had no documentary evidence 'whatsoever' to support her claim that the funds were meant to buy properties in China.
The judge added that her allegation that Mr Pang was blackmailing her was not credible because the evidence did not show she felt threatened when she handed him the $50,000 in 2009.
The following July, Ms Tee said in a report to the Commercial Affairs Department that she had given him the money to jump-start his business.
Justice Chong also pointed to one of her text messages which read: 'Pls do not say I love u to me again. Just find any man who will give me 700k w no strings attach n I will say I love u...So don't say I love u again w me.'
He wrote: '....the language adopted by Sarah in her SMS messages is, in my view, more consistent with the existence of a prior intimate relationship rather than that of blackmailer and victim.'
The judge said her lawsuit could have been triggered by allegations that her lover was also having an affair with the Thai fortune-teller, Ms Poh Saipin, although these claims were contested in court.
During the hearing, Mr Pang produced evidence to show that he and Ms Tee were intimate. The renovation contractor, who was defending himself, testified he did not charge her for the work in Balestier. To prove this, he produced a torn cheque that he had ripped up.
Ms Tee claimed that she had paid him in cash to help him settle his Malaysian workers' wages in time for the Chinese New Year holidays. But the judge found that this explanation was 'not credible', adding: 'It made no sense for Sarah to have taken the effort to arrange for cash for Andy's needs if he was just a contractor to her.'
THE CASE
The financial consultant: Ms Sarah Tee sued her ex-contractor and lover, after their affair soured, claiming he blackmailed her. She wanted back some $650,000 that she had given him.
The lover: Mr Andy Pang proved he was more than just a contractor with intimate SMSes and evidence that she had gone away with him to Malacca and Bangkok.
The verdict: Justice Steven Chong threw out Ms Tee's bid after finding that the money had been gifts.
Yesterday, it came to an end after the unfaithful wife at the centre of the saga lost a legal bid to recover more than $650,000 from her former lover.
Financial consultant Sarah Tee embarked on a long-running fling with the man she hired to renovate her Balestier Road apartment, at times going away with him to Malacca and Bangkok.
But the relationship soured, allegedly after she discovered that he was also having an affair with the Thai clairvoyant.
Ms Tee went to the High Court, claiming she had given him over $608,000 to invest on her behalf so her husband would not get a share if they divorced.
She also said she handed him another $50,000 after he blackmailed her by threatening to expose her affair.
But Justice Steven Chong threw out her case after finding that both payments were actually gifts.
In his judgment grounds yesterday, he quoted intimate text messages showing that she and Mr Andy Pang were lovers, rather than blackmailer and victim. The judge added that the way she confided in him about her breast implant showed how close their relationship was.
Ms Tee claimed she had given her boyfriend the $608,700 in 2005 so he could invest it in property and land in Shenyang, China. This would mean that there was no paper trail for her husband to follow if he tried to claim a share of her assets in a divorce.
She argued that Mr Pang held the money for her on trust and that she had the right to ask for it back.
But Justice Chong found she had no documentary evidence 'whatsoever' to support her claim that the funds were meant to buy properties in China.
The judge added that her allegation that Mr Pang was blackmailing her was not credible because the evidence did not show she felt threatened when she handed him the $50,000 in 2009.
The following July, Ms Tee said in a report to the Commercial Affairs Department that she had given him the money to jump-start his business.
Justice Chong also pointed to one of her text messages which read: 'Pls do not say I love u to me again. Just find any man who will give me 700k w no strings attach n I will say I love u...So don't say I love u again w me.'
He wrote: '....the language adopted by Sarah in her SMS messages is, in my view, more consistent with the existence of a prior intimate relationship rather than that of blackmailer and victim.'
The judge said her lawsuit could have been triggered by allegations that her lover was also having an affair with the Thai fortune-teller, Ms Poh Saipin, although these claims were contested in court.
During the hearing, Mr Pang produced evidence to show that he and Ms Tee were intimate. The renovation contractor, who was defending himself, testified he did not charge her for the work in Balestier. To prove this, he produced a torn cheque that he had ripped up.
Ms Tee claimed that she had paid him in cash to help him settle his Malaysian workers' wages in time for the Chinese New Year holidays. But the judge found that this explanation was 'not credible', adding: 'It made no sense for Sarah to have taken the effort to arrange for cash for Andy's needs if he was just a contractor to her.'
THE CASE
The financial consultant: Ms Sarah Tee sued her ex-contractor and lover, after their affair soured, claiming he blackmailed her. She wanted back some $650,000 that she had given him.
The lover: Mr Andy Pang proved he was more than just a contractor with intimate SMSes and evidence that she had gone away with him to Malacca and Bangkok.
The verdict: Justice Steven Chong threw out Ms Tee's bid after finding that the money had been gifts.
