Just yesterday (8 March), the High Court handled a case of the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board refusing to release the funds that a man named Mr Toh Kim Hiang had in his CPF account to his daughter after his passing.

Before Mr Toh, a single father, passed away in 2022, he had intended for his CPF funds to go to his only daughter.

He also tried to change the nominee from his ex-wife, whom he divorced in 1985, to his daughter twice, but encountered errors both times when he tried to do so.

However, the judge eventually ruled in favour of his daughter, Ms Adeline Toh, and ordered the CPF Board to release the money in her father’s CPF account to her.

Here’s what happened.

Father Tried to Switch CPF Nominee to Daughter Twice

According to the court hearing yesterday (8 March), Mr Toh passed away from illness on 4 January 2022 at the age of 80.

Prior to that, he was married to Ms Toh’s mother, a lady named Ms Yee, but divorced his ex-wife in 1985.

The couple did not keep in contact after their divorce, and their daughter, Ms Toh, was brought up by her father.

Ms Toh also added that she only met her mother once in 2009 after her parents’ divorce.

Around two months before his passing, he was at his 80th birthday celebration with his family members when he brought up the topic of his CPF account nominee.

He had thought that the nominee would be automatically changed from his ex-wife to his daughter since he had gotten a divorce.

However, Ms Toh’s husband, Mr Ng Chye Aik, explained to him that this isn’t the case. He would have to submit an application to change his nominee before it would be officially changed by the CPF Board.

A few weeks later, Mr Toh submitted his daughter’s name as the nominee to receive the funds in his CPF account.

At that time, Mr Ng and his sister also submitted attestations, which proved that they had witnessed Mr Toh’s nomination.

Error Due to Accidentally Submitting Wrong Information, Ms Ng Couldn’t Submit Attestation

However, Mr Toh received a notice from the CPF Board that he was unsuccessful in submitting his nomination when it expired on 29 November 2021.

He then filed another online application on 30 November 2021 to try and submit Ms Toh as his nominee but failed again.

Afterwards, it was discovered that Mr Toh had keyed in the wrong particulars of Mr Ng’s sister twice.

Instead of her NRIC number, he had accidentally keyed in the NRIC number of Mr Ng’s mother.

This resulted in Mr Ng’s sister, Ms Ng Bee Kien, being unable to submit her attestation.

Regarding this, Ms Ng recalled how the CPF Board sent her text messages and prompted her to log on to the portal to submit her attestation.

However, there was nothing on the portal which prompted her for further actions, such as a message or notification, appeared when she logged in.

This was why she thought logging into the portal would be sufficient.

CPF Board Refused to Release Monies as Nomination Was Not Successful

After Mr Toh passed away, Ms Toh requested that the CPF Board release the funds in her father’s CPF account to her.

However, CPF responded by saying that they could not do so as Mr Toh did not successfully submit her name as his nominee before his passing.

This led Ms Toh, who was represented by Mr Goh Hui Hua of Covenant Chambers, to seek a declaration in the High Court proving that her father’s second nomination was valid.

Apart from that, Ms Toh was also able to stop the CPF Board from distributing the funds in her father’s CPF account before her case was heard.

Judge’s Comments

In court, Justice Lee Seiu Kin noted that even though Mr Toh did not successfully submit his application to change his nominee to Ms Toh, the evidence proved that he had intended to do so.

He specifically pointed out how Mr Toh voluntarily tried to submit his nomination twice.

He also noted that Mr Toh had divorced his ex-wife for over 36 years at the time of his passing and that they were “essentially [like] strangers”.

As such, he had no reason to leave his CPF monies to her.

Mr Toh had also left his property to his daughter in his will, which Justice Lee also pointed out.

Hence, Justice Lee ruled that Mr Toh’s nomination on 30 November 2021 was valid and ordered the CPF Board to release the funds to Ms Toh.

The judge pointed out that one intention of the CPF Board’s regulations regarding nominees is to prevent fraud.

However, he added, this was clearly not the case here.

Justice Lee then brought up how the CPF Board immediately changes the nominee of an individual’s account to their spouse once they get married, meaning that their previous nominee would be automatically revoked.

However, an individual’s nominee does not change after they get a divorce, and Justice Lee said that this was “puzzling”.

“This case raised questions with respect to the legislative purpose behind the formality requirements for CPF nominations and how nominations not made in accordance with the required formalities are viewed by the court,” he commented.

He then suggested that the CPF Board could consider this issue.

However, he did not order costs against the CPF Board as the board was entitled not to recognise the nomination until the case was heard since the formalities of changing Mr Toh’s nominee were unsuccessful.