You know very well that these are never given in writing. I was actually surprised that you asked. This forum hopes and helps to break down the wall of obscurity, obtuse policies and the great unknown to the next of one ability. If it was in writing, I would have saved my keystrokes and pasted the link.
You cite personal knowledge from a friend's personal application. The assumption is that some of us must then have pulled it out from thin air. Don't take it the wrong way. We are all doing this for the right reason. There is a body of work accumulated over the years and there are 2 forums that track this. One is SBf and the other is an Expat forum for Singaporeans.
7 years is the first time I heard about it ever. I am also aware that ICA have advised people wrongly in the past. Only CMPB has the authority to advice. ICA spends a lot time handling FTs that they mix things up. The last major policy revisions in this area occurred after the pianist affair where custodial sentence is now mandatory in the sentencing guideline but in not in the law. The other is the de-linking of passport to NS liability which occurred in April 2006 and came into effect in Aug 2006.
You cite personal knowledge from a friend's personal application. The assumption is that some of us must then have pulled it out from thin air. Don't take it the wrong way. We are all doing this for the right reason. There is a body of work accumulated over the years and there are 2 forums that track this. One is SBf and the other is an Expat forum for Singaporeans.
7 years is the first time I heard about it ever. I am also aware that ICA have advised people wrongly in the past. Only CMPB has the authority to advice. ICA spends a lot time handling FTs that they mix things up. The last major policy revisions in this area occurred after the pianist affair where custodial sentence is now mandatory in the sentencing guideline but in not in the law. The other is the de-linking of passport to NS liability which occurred in April 2006 and came into effect in Aug 2006.
pls lah bro...when i said "in writing" i meant actual formal written correspondence wif respect to a formal appln...tot is was obvious, then again guess my assumption ..
Last edited: