CAD no longer investigating Yang Yin’s insurance policies

SINGAPORE — The life insurance policies that former tour guide Yang Yin wants liquidated to pay for his legal expenses are no longer being investigated by the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD), and could be released from seizure.

This was revealed in a High Court judge’s written decision explaining why she had allowed the policies, worth about S$98,000, to be liquidated for Yang’s legal expenses while his assets are frozen under a Mareva injunction.

Yang, a Chinese national, is being sued by the niece of wealthy widow Chung Khin Chun for allegedly manipulating the older woman into giving him control of her assets worth an estimated S$40 million.

Justice Judith Prakash did not allow about S$1.1 million from Yang’s bank accounts to be released, but said Yang had an “arguable case” that the money used to buy the policies had been a gift from Mdm Chung.

The money tied up in the policies would only be available on maturity, unless they were surrendered earlier. Therefore, “it was less likely that (Mdm Chung) intended him to use those moneys to look after her”, said Justice Prakash in a written decision made public yesterday.

“I therefore considered that those funds could be more properly released for the purpose of meeting Mr Yang’s legal fees and for that purpose only,” wrote the judge, explaining her order on April 13.

Mdm Chung’s niece Hedy Mok, acting on her behalf, is appealing against the order but a date has not been fixed.

Yang, 41, met Mdm Chung, 88, in Beijing in 2008 and moved into her bungalow here the following year. Mdm Mok took action against Yang last year. He has since lost control of Mdm Chung’s assets with the revocation of her Lasting Power of Attorney. He is also excluded from her new will, but is challenging the move.

Yang is separately facing more than 300 criminal charges for faking receipts of his music and dance school to gain permanent residency status here, among other offences.

The CAD is preparing a report on the seizure of the insurance policies, so that the Magistrates’ Court can decide whether to release the policies to the person entitled to them.

Justice Prakash noted that Yang merely had to show he had an arguable case at this stage, and not that his defence would succeed at trial. “I am cognisant that (Mdm Chung) will cast all these events in a different light at trial,” she wrote.

The strength of his case might also vary from asset to asset, and when they were transferred to him, she added.

Also revealed was how the insurance policies came to be purchased. According to CAD investigations, an OCBC officer servicing Mdm Chung had on Aug 4, 2009, helped to add Yang as an authorised signatory to her OCBC bank account.

The officer, Mr Huang Yi Yao, overheard her telling Yang to use the money to take care of her.

In March 2010, Mr Huang introduced endowment plans to them and two were bought in Yang’s name. One expired and the proceeds were used to buy another in 2013.

Before making her order, Justice Prakash had asked Yang to show he had exhausted other avenues of funds.

Among other things, he had explained that the S$500,000 transferred from Mdm Chung’s account to his father in China in February 2010 was to buy a painting by famous Chinese artist Xu Beihong, which is now in the CAD’s custody.