Tourism and investment traps 旅游与投资陷阱

Australian woman gets A$2,664 fine at airport for bringing Subway sandwich from Singapore

Published on Channel NewsAsia on 18 Jul 2022 04:53PM

Now that’s one way to eat fresh: An Australian woman shared the importance of checking and doing immigration declaration forms properly after she was fined for not declaring the contents of her sandwich, which breached Australia’s strict biosecurity laws.

In a TikTok posted on Jul 1, Jessica Lee said: “I just paid $2,600 for my Subway, just from Singapore, you know?” 

She was returning home to Perth after her trip to Europe with a short stopover in Singapore. 

While admitting that it was an oversight on her end, Lee continued: “I bought a footlong Subway at Singapore (Changi) Airport, because I was a hungry girl after my 11-hour flight. 

“I ate six inches before my second flight, and then saved the other six inches for the flight, which they were more than happy with.” 

However, what she didn’t realise was that, in addition to carry-ons and luggage, the declaration form applied to her sandwich as well.  

“I didn’t tick chicken, and I didn’t tick lettuce. Chicken and lettuce!”  

Lee then held up a form with a notice of infringement, showing the A$2,664 (S$2,535) fine she had incurred. 

She concluded that paying the fine within 28 days of the notice wouldn’t be easy: “I quit my job before this trip, and I have rent to pay.” 

The Australian Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry issues fines to travellers who breach the Biosecurity Act by failing to declare or making false declarations on restricted items. 

According to a spokesperson who spoke to, “All airlines play mandatory biosecurity messaging (video/audio) in flight at top of descent (just prior to landing – not mid-flight when passengers might be sleeping) highlighting things of biosecurity risk, and the need to declare food and ingredients, and to leave all food on-board.” 

Similar messages are also available at the arrival areas in Australian airports. 

In a separate TikTok on Jul 17, Lee shared that the authorities discovered her sandwich because her partner wanted to declare cigars that he had bought. She said that the customs officer even joked about how she was saving her sandwich for dinner.  

“I didn’t think I’d done anything wrong,” she added.  

It was only when a biosecurity officer came over and noticed the sandwich did she end up in hot water.

狮城转机买三文治吃剩忘申报 澳洲少女回国被罚2532元

来自 / 新明日报 发布 / 2022年7月17日 2:44 PM


来自澳大利亚珀斯的少女杰西卡·李(Jessica Lee)月初(7月1日)在社交平台TikTok上发布短视频,指她早前搭飞机入境澳洲时,因没有申报她在新加坡转机时购买的一份赛百味(Subway)三文治,结果遭罚款。











Property disputes in Batam make some Singaporeans anxious

Published on Dec 24, 2021 on Straits Times and 8world on Dec 23, 2021.

In the 1990s, the Batam Resort Indah Puri Apartments, which was once a keen investment by Singaporeans, has recently been escalated. There have been rumors recently that the management unit was forced to relocate due to the expiration of the lease. The walls were demolished electrically, and residents gathered to protect the houses, and they were also forcibly pulled away by suspected military and police personnel.

The eviction affected hundreds of families. According to photos circulating locally, since the 13th of this month, relevant units have dispatched heavy machinery to demolish the roofs of houses. According to Tribun Batam, some residents stood in front of their holiday houses and refused to give in.

Last Saturday (18th), serious conflicts occurred on the scene. A video uploaded by netizen ED ED on Facebook showed that someone tried to obstruct the demolition project but was forcibly dragged away from the scene by some people wearing police or camouflage uniforms. The scene was chaotic.

The landlord refused to move and said the contract stated that the lease would be extended.

Batam Resort Indah Puri Apartments was originally developed due to its favorable conditions, which attracted many people, especially foreigners, to invest. There are also many foreigners. It is reported that there are currently 10 to 20 homeowners who are Singaporeans.

A British homeowner who lives here with his Indonesian wife also told reporters that their contract stated that the 30-year lease can be extended for another 20 and 30 years after the expiration, but the management unit stated that it “will not” extend it. They have to rush people.

The location of this resort is a very valuable piece of land, I believe it is because someone wants to buy it. Generally speaking, if they want to take it back, they must file a lawsuit in court in accordance with legal procedures, but this may take several years. “

He also said that the current local water and electricity supply is intermittent, and sometimes the entire community is out of power. As for the power outage, it is the apartment unit that is about to be demolished.

Local homeowner: The homeowner was not notified at all before the demolition.

Ms. Huang, a local homeowner who owns two units in the resort, told 8 Vision that all Singaporean homeowners currently do not live in the resort. In view of the COVID-19 pandemic, they cannot travel to Batam. They can only watch the houses being demolished one by one, feeling very helpless.

“This is a difficult situation. The house they demolished still contains other people’s belongings.”

Ms. Huang pointed out that the relevant units did not notify the owners at all before the demolition, and many people were surprised to see that their houses were demolished. As far as she knows, the houses of three Singaporeans were demolished.

She also complained that as early as last year, the management unit broke into the houses of two Singaporeans, demolished their bathrooms, kitchens, windows, etc., and left all the accessories downstairs, but the owners did not receive any notice at all.

These homeowners originally wanted to call the police, saying that the management unit broke into the private house, but the local staff told the police that they had to go to Batam in person. The local homeowner felt helpless.

Some Singaporean homeowners hire lawyers to prepare complaints

Ms. Huang said that the affected Singaporean homeowner has sent a letter to the Consulate-General of the Republic of Singapore in Batam for help. The other party responded yesterday (22nd) and suggested seeking legal advice. As some homeowners have abandoned their houses, only five or six Singaporean homeowners have hired lawyers to prepare complaints.

Ms. Huang said frankly that it takes time to go through legal procedures, and the house is being demolished day by day, and now she can only prosecute for illegal demolition.

“I want to appeal that it is not safe to invest in real estate in Batam. Singaporeans can go there to enjoy leisure activities, but the local units treat foreigners and their real estate like this. This is the best example of how they handle it.

I advise Singaporeans who are interested in investing and buying properties in Indonesia, please understand the local laws. It is time-consuming and costly to file a lawsuit in Indonesia, and the loss outweighs the gain.


2021 年 12 月 24 日发表于海峡时报和 8视界于 2021 年 12 月 23 日。

1990年代,曾经是新加坡人热衷投资的巴淡岛度假村英达布里公寓,最近又升级了。 近期有传闻称,管理单位因租约到期被迫搬迁。 墙壁被电动拆除,居民们聚集起来保护房屋,也被疑似军警人员强行拉走。

驱逐影响了数百个家庭。 据当地流传的照片,从本月13日起,有关单位已派出重型机械拆除房屋屋顶。 据 Tribun Batam 报道,一些居民站在度假屋前拒绝屈服。

上周六(18日),现场更是发生了严重的冲突。 网友ED ED在脸书上传的视频显示,有人试图阻挠拆除工程,但被一些身穿警察或迷彩服的人员强行拖离现场。 场面一片混乱。


峇淡岛度假村Indah Puri Apartments 最初由于其优越的条件而开发,吸引了许多人,尤其是外国人投资。 也有很多外籍人士。 据悉,目前有10至20名屋主是新加坡人。

一位与印尼妻子住在这里的英国籍屋主也告诉记者,他们的合同上写着30年的租约到期后可以再延长20年和30年,但管理单位表示“不会” 延长”,便要赶人。


他还表示,目前当地水电供应断断续续,有时整个小区都断电了。 至于停电,则是即将被拆除的度假公寓单元。


在度假村拥有两个单位的当地屋主黄女士告诉8视界,所有新加坡房主目前都不住在度假村内。 鉴于 COVID-19 大流行,他们无法前往巴淡岛。 他们只能眼睁睁地看着房屋被一栋栋拆毁,感到很无奈。


黄女士指出,有关单位在拆迁前根本没有通知业主,很多人看到自己的房子被拆了都感到很惊讶。 据她所知,三名新加坡人的房屋被拆除。


这些房主原本想报警,说管理单位闯入了私宅,但当地工作人员告诉警方,他们必须亲自前往巴淡岛。 当地的房主感到无助。


黄女士表示,受影响的新加坡屋主已致函新加坡驻峇淡岛总领事馆寻求帮助,对方昨日(22日)回应,建议寻求法律意见。 由于一些房主已经放弃了他们的房子,只有五六个新加坡房主聘请了律师准备投诉。



我劝告有意在印尼投资和置业的新加坡人,请了解当地法律, 在印尼打官司耗时耗费,得不偿失。

Not only robbery but also abducted women under daylight

Case can refer to Sin Chew Media 事件可以参考星洲网

The case took place at a restaurant in Pandan Perdana, Kuala Lumpur, Selangor at around 8pm on August 23, 2020.

A man and a woman are eating, the man pays and goes to the toilet. At this time, two Malay men seized the opportunity to declare to the lady that they were police officers and asked the lady to show her identification, and tried to intimidate and threaten to ask the lady for money. The panicked woman was about to get up from her seat and flee, but was taken hostage by two Malay men and forcibly dragged her out of her seat. This scene immediately shocked and bewildered everyone. Fortunately, a few Chinese men stepped forward to help, and the lady escaped from the hands of the two Malays.

Subsequently, several Chinese and staff members successfully hunted down and arrested a criminal. After being reported by the citizens present, the police rushed to the scene within 10 minutes and captured the perpetrator and successfully arrested the escaped Malay man.

This robbery is not our usual wallet-robbing case, but the person and the wallet were taken away forcibly. After this, people must always be vigilant. Such rampant robbery occurred in the nearest city. We, we must take precautions before it happens.

I also hope that you can forward this information to your relatives and friends around you to increase your awareness of prevention, thank you.







Misbelief that investment can get 10 times return. Security guards were defrauded of 16 thousand

Oriental Daily News Malaysia published on February 13, 2021

The security staff mistakenly believed that the investment scam that could get 10 times higher returns in one month was eventually defrauded of 16,700 ringgits!

Shunde Lalazhan, director of the Kapang Commercial Crime Investigation Team, issued a statement stating that the victim (56 years old) from Batu Annam received relevant investment information through the mobile app WhatsApp group in October last year.

Shundra Lazhan said that after receiving the information, the victim was very interested, and the first transfer of 2580 ringgits into a bank account; one month later, the victim was instructed to click on the website and get it. I checked my personal account and password and found that I had earned 25,000 ringgits, so I was pleasantly surprised!

He said that after the victim discovered that the investment was indeed “profitable”, he increased the investment again, so he transferred 14,000 ringgits to the same account. It was not until January 23 that the victim wanted to withdraw the funds and transferred the euro to ringgit but failed.!

He pointed out that the victim had previously required RM120 to the same account as the fee for raising the relevant funds, but afterwards the victim could not successfully withdraw the funds and could not contact the website administrator.

Shunde Lalazhan stated that the victim reported to the Malin Police Station on the 11th of this month, and the police will invoke section 420 (deception) of the Criminal Code to initiate an investigation.

误信投资可获10倍回酬 保安员被骗1.6万

馬來西亞東方日報 发布于 2021年02月13日







Singaporeans victims in Australian Ponzi scam

Published by Straits Times on Aug 14, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT

One victim lost $20,000, another more than $300,000, while a third pulled out his $43,000 when he suspected something was amiss.

They were among more than 950 Singapore-based investors of a A$100 million (S$107 million) Ponzi scheme in Australia, involving 18 firms controlled by Australian Veronica Macpherson that were ordered to wind up last month.

Justice Michael Barker of the Australian Federal Court said: “The evidence points strongly to the conclusion that the defendants form part of a group of companies which have raised in excess of A$100 million from private investors by way of an apparent Ponzi scheme.”

The judge, in decision grounds issued last month, added that the companies’ methods showed “there is a need to ensure investor protection, and a real risk to the public interest that warrants protection”.

The scheme urged investors to put money into property developments in Western Australia’s Pilbara area, including Newman Estate.

Ponzi schemes usually have little or no real investments or assets, with investor returns financed by money from later investors.

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission, which led the winding-up move in court, alleged that more than 1,700 investors lent Macro Group firms almost A$110 million between July 2014 and March last year, and received interest payments – almost all of which were made using the money from new investors.

When Macro did not have enough new investors to meet its expenses, including interest bills, it stopped the payments to investors, leading to the collapse of the Ponzi scheme, according to court documents.

The scheme had 981 investors from Singapore, 651 from Malaysia, 58 from Britain, 17 from continental Europe and 31 from Australia

Many Singapore victims The Straits Times spoke to were retirees, like Mr. Chan, who declined to have their identities disclosed.

Mr. Chan had put in $20,000 in 2015 through Singapore-based Macro Realty Developments. Funds were collected from investors over four payments in 2015.

He said interest payable for the 12-month tenure varied between 14 per cent a year for sums up to $49,000 and 16 per cent for $50,000 and above.

“Those who invested $100,000 or more were given free trips to the site area in Australia,” he added. He lodged a police report in March last year after Macro defaulted.

Police declined comment as investigations are ongoing.

Said a female corporate executive who had invested in the scheme for long-term gain: “I am distressed and devastated and trusted too much in the system.”

Yet, others pulled out their sums in time. One investor named Mr. Ho parked A$40,000 with Macro Realty Developments after hearing Ms. Macpherson promote the Newman Estate investment in 2013.

He told ST: “Macro Realty Developments guaranteed monthly returns in the project. For a few months, I got my money. And then the hiccups came.”

Red flags were raised when the company told him anti-money laundering requirements by the Australian government would delay returns.

By 2015, he had opted out, pressing Macro Realty Developments to return his money. And it did.

“Unfortunately, other Singaporean investors who faced the same problems as I did were encouraged to reinvest their money on more pricey property developments for larger monthly returns,” said Mr. Ho.


翻译自海峡时报 发布 / AUG 14, 2017, 5:00 AM SGT


他们是超过950名新加坡投资者在澳大利亚进行的一项总额达1亿澳元(1.07亿新元)的庞氏骗局的投资者之一,该计划涉及上个月被澳大利亚Veronica Macpherson控制的18家公司清盘。





澳大利亚证券和投资委员会(Australian Securities and Investment Commission)牵头进行了法院的清算程序,指控超过1,700名投资者在2014年7月至去年3月之间向Macro Group公司贷款了近1.1亿澳元,并收到了利息支付-几乎所有利息均已支付用新投资者的钱。




陈先生在2015年通过总部位于新加坡的Macro Realty Developments投入了20,000美元。 2015年,我们从投资者那里收取了四笔款项。





但是,其他人却及时拨出了他们的款项。一位名叫何先生的投资者在听到麦克弗森女士在2013年推动纽曼房地产投资后,向Macro Realty Developments投入了40,000澳元。

他告诉ST:“ Macro Realty Developments保证了该项目的每月收益。几个月后,我拿到了我的钱。然后出现了麻烦。”


到2015年,他选择退出,向Macro Realty Developments要求退还他的钱。它做到了。


Common scams tricks 常用咋骗技俩

Home 主页