Any private investigator to recommended?

QIANX2

Member
Ex-wife awarded over half of $13.8m in assets

Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 21 Dec 2019
Author: Dominic Low

The man and his ex-wife, both 62, had been married for 35 years and have four adult children. In 2017, she filed for divorce after discovering that he had been having an affair.

The High Court has awarded the former wife of a business executive in divorce proceedings more than half of their matrimonial assets worth $13.8 million, stating that she had prioritised their children over her career.
In his judgment published on Thursday, Judicial Commissioner Tan Puay Boon said that in dividing the assets, he also took into consideration the duration of the marriage and the man's failure to make full disclosure of his income and assets.
Among other things, the man did not submit income tax statements for his employment in China, or supporting documentation of his insurance policies, Chinese bank accounts and overseas investments.
He also took $1.25 million of proceeds from the sale of a property which the couple had held jointly, but failed to account for such withdrawal.
The man and his ex-wife, both 62, had been married for 35 years and have four adult children.
In 2017, she filed for divorce after discovering that he had been having an affair. An interim judgment was granted in February last year, with issues of matrimonial asset division and maintenance left for the High Court to decide on Thursday.
In distributing the assets between the parties, the judicial commissioner eventually determined the ex-wife's share of the assets to be about $7.3 million.
As the portion of the assets currently held by the former wife amounts to about $3.3 million, he ordered the man to transfer the shortfall of about $4 million to her.
However, he did not award the ex-wife any maintenance. Rejecting her proposal for a lump-sum maintenance of $270,000, he stated that she already had a substantial share of the matrimonial assets, including property at Robertson Quay which she was receiving rental income from.
She was also receiving financial support from her three older children.
He pointed out that she would be receiving an additional $4 million from the man as a result of the division of the matrimonial assets.
In relation to their youngest child, who is 21 years old, the judicial commissioner noted that both parties were willing to financially support the child's overseas university education.
He ordered them to collectively maintain the child and share the costs of her university expenses, but left it to the parties to determine the proportions of such maintenance.
Good article. That why when look for lawyer get a few opinion before you decide on one. As there are many outside not even familiar with family laws
 


wendy_reborn

Active Member
Most women seeking maintenance in Family Courts are married, not divorced

Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 11 Jan 2020
Author: Theresa Tan
Family lawyers note that many people assume that maintenance can only be claimed after a divorce, but this is not true.

Figures released for the first time by the Family Justice Courts (FJC) show that the bulk of applicants seeking maintenance orders are women still married to their husbands.

In fact, two in three of the 1,315 applications filed, on average, each year between 2016 and 2018 were by wives against their husbands for financial support for themselves or their children.

The remaining one third of applications were filed by other family members such as ex-wives, the child's grandparents and the child's legal guardians. They were asking for financial support for the children, an FJC spokesman told The Sunday Times.

Family lawyers note that many people assume that maintenance can only be claimed after a divorce, but this is not true.

Under the Women's Charter, the wife can apply for maintenance against her husband during their marriage if he has "neglected or refused to provide reasonable maintenance for her", the FJC spokesman said.

Even though many women work and have their own incomes, the legal provision for husbands to provide for their families is still necessary, say family lawyers who were interviewed.

Lawyer Gloria James-Civetta said: "The fact that many women work today does not make this provision less necessary than before. Women who work may still earn relatively less income than her spouse - inadequate to fully support themselves and the household. They may also be working part-time while raising children."

Another lawyer, Shone Aye Cheng, said that filing a maintenance application is often the "last resort" for these women who need their husbands to contribute to make ends meet at home.

By the time they go to court, the marital relationship would have been very strained, the lawyers note.

Lawyer Lim Chong Boon said: "Even if the women have a job, it is natural for a woman to feel that their husband should also contribute. They feel how can the husband abdicate financial responsibility and leave it to the woman?"

Some women may also have put up with the bad behaviour of their husbands for years and would turn to the court only because they stumbled upon their husband's infidelity, for instance, said lawyer Ellen Lee.

Ms Lee said: "Then they feel they can't tolerate it anymore. So by then, they think about divorce but some do not divorce their husbands for various considerations, like they are afraid it would affect their children."

Mr Lim said that errant husbands claim they have no money when asked by lawyers why they have not provided adequately for their families.

Some of the husbands are not working but most are employed. Dig deeper and often there are underlying reasons behind their actions, lawyers say.

For example, some men have found another woman and they intend to divorce their wives, Ms James-Civetta said. Or the marital relationship is so strained that they do not want to support their wives.

Take for example, Alice, 40, who has a 10-year-old daughter. When her daughter was a toddler, her husband, an engineer, moved out of the marital home to live with his mistress. He stopped providing for his family.

Alice (not her real name) - who was then a home-maker - had to work as a clinic assistant to pay the bills but it was insufficient to make ends meet on less than $2,000 a month.

She filed for maintenance and the court ordered her husband to pay $1,100 a month - $1,000 for their daughter and $100 for Alice.

Her husband later pleaded for forgiveness. She forgave him, they got back together and she cancelled her maintenance claims.

But her misery continued.

He started to become abusive, even once putting a knife to her neck, and she found out he was still seeing his mistress. Last year (2019), she divorced her husband of over 10 years.

"I tried my best to save this marriage and I have forgiven him so many times," she said. "He hit me until there are bruises all over my face. I felt so ashamed."

The amount in maintenance ordered ranges from a few hundred dollars a month to about $20,000 a month, lawyers interviewed say about the cases they have handled.

A spokesman from the Maintenance Support Central Committee run by the Singapore Council of Women's Organisations said: "Many people don't have basic legal knowledge. I would imagine that many wives, ignorant of this fact (that they could apply for maintenance while still married), would only think of divorce as a means of getting maintenance."
 

margret

Active Member
Messy divorce: Woman jailed for contempt after coaching daughter to hurl false sexual allegations against ex-husband

Source: TODAY
Article Date: 14 Jan 2020
Author: Ng Jun Sen

Justice Debbie Ong said that it was important for children to be shielded from acrimonious legal disputes as much as possible.

A judge who sentenced a mother to a week in jail for contempt of court amid a messy divorce case has condemned the "especially troubling" effect it had on her two children. This is due to the way she embroiled the children in the conflict by exposing them to the acrimonious proceedings.
The divorced mother who has a son, nine, and a daughter, 15, was ordered to serve the jail term after she allowed her daughter to access divorce documents and use the material against her father in social media posts, during the several years when the legal proceedings took place.
She also allowed at least one news reporter to interview her children about their father after the social media posts that called him a “sexual fetishist womanising pervert” went viral last year.
Now, the wife is appealing against the order to jail her issued by Justice Debbie Ong, who is also the Presiding Judge of the Family Justice Courts.
In setting out the grounds for the decision in the divorce proceedings released on Friday (Jan 10), Justice Ong said that she was also seeking to provide guidance for such cases of “high-conflict family disputes involving children”.
The names of all the parties have been withheld in order to protect the identities of the children.
A MESSY DIVORCE
In 2016, the wife began divorce proceedings after 18 years of marriage, with both parties claiming that the other had been unfaithful. The wife contested the claim that she had been in an adulterous relationship with her colleague and friend R.
The divorce was granted when the husband failed to prove the adultery. Nevertheless, Justice Ong noted that R had been a key figure to the proceedings — having assisted the wife in preparing affidavits, even as he was reminded that he was not involved. He was also close to the wife and children after the husband moved out.
“The extent to which he appeared to be involved in the family was deeply troubling. In fact, the present state of affairs may to a large extent be traced back to R’s role in the family,” the judge said, noting that the initial separation had been “relatively peaceable”.
Family counsellors said in 2017 that the children had a good relationship with their father initially, and equally enjoyed spending time with both parents. Both sides agreed on joint custody, with care and control to the wife and reasonable access to the husband.
The wife was also diagnosed with breast cancer, and the children preferred to live with her after her diagnosis.
But goodwill began to fray in 2018 after details emerged of R — who has no medical training — performing a “home mastectomy” on the wife in her matrimonial home. She showed pictures to the court of large wounds on her chest and pieces of what she claimed were tumours.
There were suggestions that the children were present or at least aware of these “operations”, Justice Ong said.
The wife hired R as her “executive personal assistant” for S$8,500 a month at first, which increased to S$15,000 a month in 2018 when she hired him to “remove (her) tumours”.
The husband, concerned over the children’s safety, applied for a personal protection order (PPO) on the children’s behalf, while the wife filed her own PPO. Both were dismissed, but this significantly worsened the breakdown of relations.
R began to appear at several of the scheduled handover sessions for the husband’s access, Justice Ong noted, adding that the children grew resistant to spending time with the husband.
CHILDREN IN THE CROSSFIRE
In 2018, a district judge grew concerned about how the children were exposed to the “home surgeries” and R’s influence over them, and awarded interim care and control to the husband.
“What was especially troubling was the extent to which the wife and R embroiled the children in the conflict. The district judge found that the wife did not appreciate the adverse effects of exposing the children to the ongoing litigation. The wife even stated that she saw nothing wrong with the children being aware of what was happening, Justice Ong said.
The wife made a failed appeal against that decision, and both children filed affidavits that repeated her allegations against the husband.
The contents were “greatly disturbing”, Justice Ong said. They echoed Biblical references and phrases used by the wife and R in their affidavits and calling their father a “mega-evolved sexual fetishist womanising pervert”.
This was in stark contrast to their attitudes towards the husband just seven months earlier, the judge noted.
After a difficult handover of the children to the husband, the children found their own way back to the wife the next day.
They were later placed in a children’s home due to a court order to put them in a neutral environment, but once again, they returned to the wife’s home after school and have remained there since, the judge said.
Justice Ong wrote: “I was deeply concerned about the wellbeing of the children. While I was of the view that the wife’s influence over the children towards rejecting their father was adverse to their welfare, I was also aware that repeatedly removing them from her care was a highly distressing experience for them.”
CONTEMPT OF COURT
What came next ratcheted up the already fraught tensions, when the daughter posted allegations on Facebook in June and July last year that her father had sexually abused her and her brother — claims that Justice Ong said were part of the wife’s affidavits and were proven to be false.
Investigators found no concerns relating to abuse by the husband. Instead, there were “indications” of coaching and parental alienation by the wife. The posts were replete with details that could only have come from the wife’s affidavits.
The daughter’s posts were made public anyway and various news outlets published reports about them. Later, the wife allowed a news reporter to interview the children to talk about “their frustrations, their hatred, their bitterness” against their father, with the wife present.
The husband received online and phone threats, while the wife sent a letter of complaint to the husband’s employer.
In response, the husband filed an order of committal against the wife over the media storm against him, stating that she had breached a court order requiring all parties to “not make disparaging remarks about the other party to the children”.
Justice Ong found the wife liable for contempt of court and sentenced her to a week in jail, which has been deferred pending the appeal.
“Court orders such as those involved in these committal proceedings, which were aimed at preventing further damage to the children, must never be taken lightly.”
Calling this an “extremely disappointing” turn of events, the judge said that the divorce proceedings have been highly traumatic for the children.
“If the wife is of the view that she is acting in her children’s welfare by instigating and encouraging such behaviour, then she has not acquired the necessary insight into the effects of her damaging behaviour on the children,” Justice Ong said.
RESPONSIBILITY OF PARENTHOOD
Among several things, the wife had undermined her children’s emotional and psychological wellbeing by informing them of the divorce proceedings, involving them in the conflict in inappropriate ways, burdening them emotionally and “failing entirely to co-operate with the husband to enable the children to maintain the healthy relationship that they previously enjoyed with their father”, the judge said.
Facilitating the child’s relationship with the other parent is an important aspect of parental responsibility, she stressed. “This is especially important in the light of the wife’s ill-health — the children should be able to rely on the other parent in their lives.”
Concluding her judgement, Justice Ong said that the courts, counsellors and schools have done their best to help the children, “but ultimately it is the parents above all who must protect and promote their children’s welfare".
“It is my hope that, in time, the children will appreciate the importance of having both parents in their lives and that their relationship with the husband will be repaired.
“Children do grow up and with newly gained maturity and understanding… they may then be able to see how their father had tried to care for them, and remember the times when they enjoyed spending time with their father,” she wrote.
 

BabyJJ16

New Member
Actually, you don’t need PI to prove a guy has committed adultery. You can just list instances or the other party’s name in the court documents. That’s what I did.

And... most guys cannot handle emotional pressure. After consistent questioning, they usually confess.
 
Actually, you don’t need PI to prove a guy has committed adultery. You can just list instances or the other party’s name in the court documents. That’s what I did.

And... most guys cannot handle emotional pressure. After consistent questioning, they usually confess.
Have his lawyer reply? Any lawyer will reply to ask you to show prove. You need PI report for evidence of adultery.
 

BabyJJ16

New Member
Have his lawyer reply? Any lawyer will reply to ask you to show prove. You need PI report for evidence of adultery.
Mine was settled years ago. My reason was in the end listed as unreasonable behaviour with the various instances of what I felt was unreasonable instead of adultery as it was easier to explain to my child. I didn’t want to tarnish the dad’s reputation as he is actually quite a hands on dad n close to my child.
 

Fated

New Member
Hi ,

anyone had any reviews on this PI co? Are they reliable ?

AK Global Investigation Pte Ltd

Thanks
AK Global is not good. I engaged the company few years back. The PI is not experience and my case was exposed on the very first day I engaged them. I asked for refunded and they refused. I was afriad they will expose me, hence didnt follow up.


I cant reveal too much here as I dont wan my identity to be know.
 

spongebox08

New Member
AK Global is not good. I engaged the company few years back. The PI is not experience and my case was exposed on the very first day I engaged them. I asked for refunded and they refused. I was afriad they will expose me, hence didnt follow up.


I cant reveal too much here as I dont wan my identity to be know.
Hi hi , thanks for the comments ! I was also wondering if they were really good Cos the price is cheap when they quote me. And I was afraid too that services will be compromised ! Haiz... so tough to get a good pi at reasonable price .
 

Fated

New Member
Hi hi , thanks for the comments ! I was also wondering if they were really good Cos the price is cheap when they quote me. And I was afraid too that services will be compromised ! Haiz... so tough to get a good pi at reasonable price .
how cheap they charged you?
 

wendy_reborn

Active Member
A good read for many.

Custody fight: Lawyers urged to be sensitive over mental illness claims

Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 30 Mar 2020
Author: K.C. Vijayan
A lawyer should not claim that a spouse has a mental disorder to boost his own client's case, noting that a wife's mental condition in itself does not disqualify her right to care and control of the child: DJ Kathryn Thong

A district judge has urged lawyers to be sensitive about casting allegations of mental illness against a party in their litigation strategy.

The plea came in a rare postscript to a ruling on a custody tug-of-war between a split couple over their toddler son.

District Judge Kathryn Thong said a lawyer should not claim that a spouse has a mental disorder to boost his own client's case, noting that a wife's mental condition in itself does not disqualify her right to care and control of the child.

"Rather, it is the effect of such mental conditions and how it correlates to a child's welfare," said District Judge Thong.

She added in judgment grounds earlier this month that if a party argues that his spouse has a mental disorder or is pre-disposed towards one, then he should take extra care to avoid worsening or triggering the condition.

"Waging litigation upon litigation under the banner of 'best interests of the child' might actually undercut the (father's) case, for how does it advance a child's interests for a parent's mental health to suffer through unending and tedious litigation?" she added.

The case involved a 49-year-old senior executive on a $25,000-a-month salary who had married a now unemployed 36-year-old bankrupt in October 2016 after a whirlwind romance.

Their son was born in March 2017 but trouble brewed early in the marriage and the mother showed unusual behaviour such as cutting up photo albums, smashing crockery and wielding a pair of scissors in front of the father.

It later emerged that the father "had some inkling then that the mother could be extreme in her behaviour and was on medication", the court heard.

He was aware that the woman did not have a stable family background or any social network, but his desire to have a child did not let him act on those warning signs, noted a court-appointed psychiatrist.

Matters escalated and on Jan 11, 2018, the father suggested to the mother that she have a shower and then go for a family walk.

But while she was in the bathroom, the father, the child and the domestic helper left the matrimonial home for good.

That day, the father's then lawyers wrote to the mother stating that in the interim both parties could have joint custody of the son with sole care and control going to the father. She could see the boy only on a supervised basis.

Both parents that same month took out individual applications under the Guardianship of Infants Act in relation to custody, care and control of the now three-year-old boy.

The father, represented by lawyers Foo Soon Yien and Brenda Kong, argued that the mother had a mental condition - borderline personality disorder (BPD) - that needed to be assessed.

After having uncovered her patient history and how many psychiatrists she had been visiting and the medications she obtained, the father demanded that the mother be allowed supervised access only.

He argued that the boy could be in danger as the mother was not only emotionally unstable but the large doses of medications also suggested side effects.

The mother through her lawyers, Mr Imran Khwaja and two others, countered that she merely had BPD traits and it was a leap to suggest that she had BPD itself.

All she had was social anxiety, they added, and not a mental condition that would prevent her from caring for the child. They said her ability to withstand the constant pressure of the legal proceedings was reason enough for the court to find that nothing was impairing her ability to care for the boy.

District Judge Thong ruled that the couple should have joint custody of the child, but care and control should go to the father.

She held that the boy's best interests would be served with the father, who had a domestic helper.

The judge found, among other things, the mother's dependency on medication suggested that she could not manage herself, despite being an "intelligent and resourceful woman". She also noted that the mother did not follow up on the interim court orders granting her supervised access.

District Judge Thong added that without her lawyers, it would have been much harder for the mother to "withstand the pressure of litigation". "As divorce proceedings are afoot and contested, I hope good sense can prevail on both sides and parties can soon move on with their lives, whilst co-parenting the boy."

The father is appealing against joint custody and the mother is cross-appealing against care and control for the man.
 

Selenlyn

New Member
Hi ,

anyone had any reviews on this PI co? Are they reliable ?

AK Global Investigation Pte Ltd

Thanks
Please dont hired AK Global Investigation Pte Ltd.

they are worthless and very very lousy.
they follow the wrong person and also does not use technology to do investigation.
Most of the time you ask them to do a case they say have no manpower.
when i threaten to go case then they do for me. but in the end lost the person.
 

margret

Active Member
Many lawyer always say reason is strong evidence. but go court will be rejected.
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 13 Apr 2020
Author: K.C. Vijayan

Judge dismisses husband's claims of unreasonable behaviour by his wife, including no physical intimacy.

A judge refused a man's bid to get a divorce so he can marry another woman, rejecting his claims of unreasonable behaviour by his wife, including no physical intimacy.
In a rare case, the judge said he was not convinced by the 47-year-old man's claims against his wife, 49.
"I accepted the (wife's) submission that (she) is not the unreasonable person the (husband) has made her out to be, and this was even taking into consideration the cumulative effect of her alleged behaviour," said District Judge Eugene Tay.
"(His) testimony that he is in love with (another woman) and is in a relationship with her, that he is renting an apartment with her at the material time, and that if he does not divorce the (wife) he cannot marry another woman speaks for itself," added the judge in decision grounds issued last month.
Lawyers said a divorce case that goes all the way to court to be contested and rejected is rare, noting that such cases mostly involve post-divorce issues such as child custody and division of matrimonial assets.
The couple were married in 1999 and have a son, born in 2005. The man works in a management position while his spouse is a housewife. They lived together until end-2018, when the man moved out.
Two months later, he filed for divorce under the Women's Charter, claiming the wife behaved in such a way that he could not be reasonably expected to live with her.
He claimed she was short-tempered, verbally abusive to him and very disrespectful to his family.
According to him, she had also failed to show sufficient care, affection and appreciation for him during the course of the marriage.
He claimed that over the last few years, she had increasingly declined to be physically intimate with him, and this had completely ceased since June 2018.
The wife, who contested the divorce, conceded that she had found difficulty in being physically intimate with him since June 2018, but the judge noted the man had testified he did not do anything to help with their intimacy, including seeking counselling or medical treatment for the wife.
The judge found "considerable doubt" over the extent to which the husband was genuinely concerned about it, "but more importantly, for the purpose of this case, whether the decline in physical intimacy between them actually made it unreasonable to expect him to live with her".
The husband further claimed his wife emotionally blackmailed him when he told her he wanted a divorce. She also attempted suicide on two occasions in December 2018, and asked their son to confront him about his affair.
The judge noted the wife did not deny the incidents and said he did not condone her actions.
"However, her overall behaviour and actions should be seen in the context of her being told by the (husband) that he was having an extramarital affair, and that he intended to divorce her and abandon her and the child, all of which would invariably have deeply hurt and affected her, such that she became emotionally unstable," said the judge.
The wife's lawyer, Ms Nancy Thio, argued that her behaviour "should be viewed from the lenses of a woman who is about to lose her marriage... which she had given everything for, and that it is not intentional behaviour of blackmail and manipulation".
Rejecting the man's divorce bid, District Judge Tay said: "I accepted the (wife's) submission that the (husband) had failed to make out his case that (she) had behaved in such a way that he cannot reasonably be expected to live with her."
He also ordered the man to pay $11,000 in costs.
The husband, represented by lawyer Low Jin Liang, is appealing the decision.
NOT UNREASONABLE
I accepted the (wife's) submission that (she) is not the unreasonable person the (husband) has made her out to be, and this was even taking into consideration the cumulative effect of her alleged behaviour. (His) testimony that he is in love with (another woman) and is in a relationship with her, that he is renting an apartment with her at the material time, and that if he does not divorce the (wife) he cannot marry another woman speaks for itself.
 

janey09

Active Member
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 13 Apr 2020
Author: K.C. Vijayan

Judge dismisses husband's claims of unreasonable behaviour by his wife, including no physical intimacy.

A judge refused a man's bid to get a divorce so he can marry another woman, rejecting his claims of unreasonable behaviour by his wife, including no physical intimacy.
In a rare case, the judge said he was not convinced by the 47-year-old man's claims against his wife, 49.
"I accepted the (wife's) submission that (she) is not the unreasonable person the (husband) has made her out to be, and this was even taking into consideration the cumulative effect of her alleged behaviour," said District Judge Eugene Tay.
"(His) testimony that he is in love with (another woman) and is in a relationship with her, that he is renting an apartment with her at the material time, and that if he does not divorce the (wife) he cannot marry another woman speaks for itself," added the judge in decision grounds issued last month.
Lawyers said a divorce case that goes all the way to court to be contested and rejected is rare, noting that such cases mostly involve post-divorce issues such as child custody and division of matrimonial assets.
The couple were married in 1999 and have a son, born in 2005. The man works in a management position while his spouse is a housewife. They lived together until end-2018, when the man moved out.
Two months later, he filed for divorce under the Women's Charter, claiming the wife behaved in such a way that he could not be reasonably expected to live with her.
He claimed she was short-tempered, verbally abusive to him and very disrespectful to his family.
According to him, she had also failed to show sufficient care, affection and appreciation for him during the course of the marriage.
He claimed that over the last few years, she had increasingly declined to be physically intimate with him, and this had completely ceased since June 2018.
The wife, who contested the divorce, conceded that she had found difficulty in being physically intimate with him since June 2018, but the judge noted the man had testified he did not do anything to help with their intimacy, including seeking counselling or medical treatment for the wife.
The judge found "considerable doubt" over the extent to which the husband was genuinely concerned about it, "but more importantly, for the purpose of this case, whether the decline in physical intimacy between them actually made it unreasonable to expect him to live with her".
The husband further claimed his wife emotionally blackmailed him when he told her he wanted a divorce. She also attempted suicide on two occasions in December 2018, and asked their son to confront him about his affair.
The judge noted the wife did not deny the incidents and said he did not condone her actions.
"However, her overall behaviour and actions should be seen in the context of her being told by the (husband) that he was having an extramarital affair, and that he intended to divorce her and abandon her and the child, all of which would invariably have deeply hurt and affected her, such that she became emotionally unstable," said the judge.
The wife's lawyer, Ms Nancy Thio, argued that her behaviour "should be viewed from the lenses of a woman who is about to lose her marriage... which she had given everything for, and that it is not intentional behaviour of blackmail and manipulation".
Rejecting the man's divorce bid, District Judge Tay said: "I accepted the (wife's) submission that the (husband) had failed to make out his case that (she) had behaved in such a way that he cannot reasonably be expected to live with her."
He also ordered the man to pay $11,000 in costs.
The husband, represented by lawyer Low Jin Liang, is appealing the decision.
NOT UNREASONABLE
I accepted the (wife's) submission that (she) is not the unreasonable person the (husband) has made her out to be, and this was even taking into consideration the cumulative effect of her alleged behaviour. (His) testimony that he is in love with (another woman) and is in a relationship with her, that he is renting an apartment with her at the material time, and that if he does not divorce the (wife) he cannot marry another woman speaks for itself.
This is a good read.
There are many who put their trust in the lawyers when the lawyers told them they could get a divorce based on the slightest or the more stupid excuses. But when it go court, it’s rejected.
Hence we have to do our homework before we really take any action to file a divorce
 

wendy_reborn

Active Member
This is a good read.
There are many who put their trust in the lawyers when the lawyers told them they could get a divorce based on the slightest or the more stupid excuses. But when it go court, it’s rejected.
Hence we have to do our homework before we really take any action to file a divorce
Yup I agree. Not all lawyers are truthful. Before you engage them, everything also can, after you engage them everything also must pay!
 

Selenlyn

New Member
anyone have a good and reliable Private Investigator.

I have a friend. who need it urgently.
husband has a 3rd party.
in the beginning he want to divorce amicably but later start to bargain to give lesser maintenance and doesn't wan to give more share of the house.
 

margret

Active Member
anyone have a good and reliable Private Investigator.

I have a friend. who need it urgently.
husband has a 3rd party.
in the beginning he want to divorce amicably but later start to bargain to give lesser maintenance and doesn't wan to give more share of the house.
I have just PM you my Private Investigator contact
 

wendy_reborn

Active Member
anyone have a good and reliable Private Investigator.

I have a friend. who need it urgently.
husband has a 3rd party.
in the beginning he want to divorce amicably but later start to bargain to give lesser maintenance and doesn't wan to give more share of the house.
I have pm you my PI contact
 

QIANX2

Member
thank you. can share some experience?
What kind of experience?
Try as much as possible, don’t hired Private Investigator from Kukosai, catch cheating spouse, SK, international investigator and Privateeye.
Feedback from mummy here not very good.

Also don’t bother to ask PI to hack HP, email and computer. It’s illegal and evidence cannot be use in court
 

Sam771

Member
I have a friend who hired this PI. KOKUSAI, CHEATING SPOUSE, when ask to see the photographs that he takes, he told my friend to go to the website to give a good review of his service then he will show her.
My frend went in n wrote a very good review, he then turn his word and ask for payment to get the full set of photographs. Super unprofessional n unethical.
super fraud
 

Freely now

New Member
I have a friend who hired this PI. KOKUSAI, CHEATING SPOUSE, when ask to see the photographs that he takes, he told my friend to go to the website to give a good review of his service then he will show her.
My frend went in n wrote a very good review, he then turn his word and ask for payment to get the full set of photographs. Super unprofessional n unethical.
looking at Google review. to my surprise all very good review 5 stars. but all call him uncle magnum and claim he is very good.
either is fake review or they have being force into it.
really big scammer!
 

Stansy

Member
looking at Google review. to my surprise all very good review 5 stars. but all call him uncle magnum and claim he is very good.
either is fake review or they have being force into it.
really big scammer!
The old Indian man who’s the owner claims the he has superb natural power... lol
 
I saw in the google review. A lady also wrote that Kukosai refuse to give him the photos unless she pay her. Then Kukosai claimed it’s not true and threaten to make a report!

Really this kind of dirty businessman must blacklist them. The lawyer also told us that Kukosai is notorious and there are many client complaint he is unethical and the investigation carry out is lousy
 
I saw in the google review. A lady also wrote that Kukosai refuse to give him the photos unless she pay her. Then Kukosai claimed it’s not true and threaten to make a report!

Really this kind of dirty businessman must blacklist them. The lawyer also told us that Kukosai is notorious and there are many client complaint he is unethical and the investigation carry out is lousy
Yes we have to highlight all those unethical Private Investigator so that no more people will be cheated by them
 

Sam771

Member
but I cannot understand why the people cannot change review if they felt intimidated earlier to help others not get misguided
 
but I cannot understand why the people cannot change review if they felt intimidated earlier to help others not get misguided
Some people might not wan to create trouble for themselves as those are confidential matters.
I saw in their Facebook, they even posted the video of their cases with the face masked, to show how good they are. But I feel this is very bad
 

Stansy

Member
There always such thing call... RETRIBUTION it may not be on oneself but the ones that dearest to you. So do think hard before u intend to cheat or harm anyone
 

wendy_reborn

Active Member
Yes I heard before from lawyer who share this n not clear to prove as Evidence . If they go hotel must have evidence both in bed nake pic then ok not not cannot nail him
Then your lawyer is lying to you.
Cannot take pictures off anyone naked even if it your husband.its a offense.
Just need to take pictures of them going or coming out from hotel as evidence. And I have successfully used it to file for divorce
 

Stansy

Member
Then your lawyer is lying to you.
Cannot take pictures off anyone naked even if it your husband.its a offense.
Just need to take pictures of them going or coming out from hotel as evidence. And I have successfully used it to file for divorce
Just out of curiosity, how would the judge accepts these pics as an evident as is debated that it could be there for meeting & etc but not having affair
 

Sam771

Member
I suggest talk openly to your husband without fear and aim for mutual divorce ..and look ahead..ofcourse if he is abusive or physical then can file a police report
 

Top