Pasir Ris- Punggol Town Council Appendices to Past Payments … to Past... · 2019. 1. 18. ·...

Pasir Ris- Punggol Town Council Appendices to Past Payments Review Report

30 April 2017

of 83

Appendices Appendix A: Letters to AHTC and the replies received

of 83

Appendix B: Scope of Work Set Out in Judgment

Extract from Judgment (Refer to paragraphs 119 and 131 of Judgment):

(a) AHPETC must take steps to comply with s 35(c) of the TCA;

(b) To this end, AHPETC shall:

i. appoint accountant(s) to (A) assist in identifying the outstanding non-compliances

with s 35(c) of the TCA and (B) advise on the steps that must be taken to remedy

those outstanding non-compliances;

ii. require the accountant(s) to produce monthly progress reports until the

accountant(s) is or are reasonably satisfied that AHPETC is fully compliant with s

35(c) of the TCA;

iii. ensure that the monthly progress reports, which are to be submitted to the HDB,

which in turn may make these publicly available on the first day of every month

(starting on 1 January 2016), provide sufficient details of (A) the outstanding non-

compliances with s 35(c) of the TCA, and (B) the steps that AHPETC is taking to

remedy those outstanding non-compliances.

(c) Without prejudice to the generality of (b) above, the terms of reference of the

accountant(s) who is/are appointed should extend to establishing whether any past

payments made by AHPETC were improper and ought therefore to be recovered.

(d) To ensure transparency and efficacy in the execution of these duties, the identity and, if

necessary, the terms of reference of the accountant(s) to be so appointed shall be subject

to the consent of the HDB, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld and in

respect of which there shall be liberty to apply.

of 83

Appendix C: Terms of Reference

i. Assist in identifying all of PE’s outstanding non-compliances with Section 35(c) of the

Town Councils Act (Cap 329A, 2000 Ed) (“TCA”) (including, if applicable, the provisions

under the Town Councils Financial Rules (Cap 329A, R 1, 1998 Rev Ed) (“TCFR”));

ii. Advise on the steps that must be taken to remedy PE’s outstanding non-compliances;

iii. Produce monthly progress reports until the Accountant is reasonably satisfied that PE is

fully compliant with Section 35(c) of the TCA;

iv. Ensure that the monthly progress reports, which are submitted to the Housing

Development Board (“HDB”) (starting 15 April 2016 or such date as the Court may

otherwise direct) provide sufficient details of PE’s outstanding non-compliances with

Section 35(c) of the TCA and steps that PRPTC is taking to remedy the outstanding non-

compliances; and

v. Without prejudice to the generality of the matters stated in items (i) to (iv) above,

establish whether any of the past payment made by AHPETC and Aljunied-Hougang

Town Council (“AHTC”) (in so far as the payments relate to or affect PE) were improper

and ought therefore to be recovered, and submit a report to the HDB by 31 August 2016

or by such time as notified by PRPTC.

of 83

Appendix D: List of Town Councillors During Review Period FY2013

S/N Name Position Period 1 Ms Sylvia Lim Swee Lian Chairman 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 2 Mr Png Eng Huat Vice-Chairman 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 3 Mr Pritam Singh Vice-Chairman 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 4 Mr Chen Show Mao Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 5 Mr Muhamed Faisal Bin Abdul Manap Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 6 Mr Low Thia Khiang Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 7 Ms Lee Li Lian Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 8 Mr Teo Xiang Ping Anthony Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 9 Mr Chua Zhi Hon Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 10 Mr John Chua Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 11 Mr Foo Seck Guan Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 12 Ms Ng Swee Bee Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 13 Mr Mahfuz Bin Wan Abdullah Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 14 Mr Goh Anthony Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 15 Mr David Ong Sin Gee Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 16 Mr Johnny Lim Joo Eng Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 17 Mr Han Joon Kwang Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 18 Mr Azman Bin Mohamed Osman Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015

FY2014

S/N Name Position Period 1 Ms Sylvia Lim Swee Lian Chairman 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 2 Mr Png Eng Huat Vice-Chairman 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 3 Mr Pritam Singh Vice-Chairman 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 4 Mr Chen Show Mao Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 5 Mr Muhamed Faisal Bin Abdul Manap Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 6 Mr Low Thia Khiang Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 7 Ms Lee Li Lian Members Ex Officio 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 8 Mr Teo Xiang Ping Anthony Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 9 Mr Chua Zhi Hon Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 10 Mr John Chua Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 11 Mr Foo Seck Guan Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 12 Ms Ng Swee Bee Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 13 Mr Mahfuz Bin Wan Abdullah Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 14 Mr Goh Anthony Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 15 Mr David Ong Sin Gee Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 16 Mr Johnny Lim Joo Eng Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 17 Mr Han Joon Kwang Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 18 Mr Azman Bin Mohamed Osman Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 19 Mr Muhammad Fadli Bin Mohamed Fawzi Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 20 Mr Yip Tai Ann Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015 21 Ms Rebecca Chin Lan Ping Appointed Members 1 May 2013 to 30 April 2015

of 83

FY2015

S/N Name Position Period 1 Mr Pritam Singh Chairman 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 2 Ms Lim Swee Lian Sylvia Vice Chairman 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 3 Mr Png Eng Huat Vice Chairman 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 4 Mr Chen Show Mao Elected Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 5 Mr Low Thia Khiang Elected Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 6 Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap Elected Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 7 Mr Koh Weng Kong Secretary 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 8 Mr Anthony Teo Xiang Ping Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 9 Mr John Chua Zhi Hon Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 10 Mr David Ong Sin Gee Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 11 Mr Francis Seet Yiew Chong Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 12 Mr Goh Anthony Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 13 Mr John Chua Chong Tze Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 14 Mr Johnny Lim Joo Eng Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 15 Mr Joseph Lim Tee Tee Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 16 Mr Kenneth Foo Seck Guan Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 17 Mr Mahfuz Bin Wan Abdullah Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 18 Mr Muhammad Fadli Bin Mohammed Fawzi Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 19 Ms Ng Swee Bee Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 20 Ms Rebecca Chin Lan Ping Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 21 Ms Tan Hui Ying, Randi Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 22 Mr Yip Tai Ann Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 23 Mr Shafie Bin Md Rased Member 1 October 2015 to 30 September 2017 24 Mr Daniel Goh Pei Siong Member 1 February 2016 to 30 September 2017

of 83

Appendix E: Summary of Key Findings made by KPMG on the RPTs with FMSS and FMSI

1. A summary of the key findings made in the KPMG Report on the RPTs with FMSS and

FMSI, including the key figures which KPMG has identified as improper payments, is as

follows.

2. First, the Town Council’s governance of matters relating to FMSS and FMSI was

“seriously flawed”1:

(1) The Conflicted Persons 2 held direct ownership interests and management

responsibilities in FMSS and/or FMSI, whilst concurrently holding key

management and operational positions in the Town Council. This was a serious

conflict of interest.3

(2) The Conflicted Persons held “key functions” in respect of the Town Council’s

payment approval processes and were involved at every stage. Accordingly, the

integrity of the payment approval process for FMSS and FMSI was “severely

undermined by the involvement of the Conflicted Persons at every stage”.

KPMG’s review further showed that the Conflicted Persons effectively had the

power to approve payments to themselves:4

(a) A total of 132 payment vouchers, comprising 748 FMSS transactions

(with a cumulative value of $23,299,483), were effectively self-

approved by the Conflicted Persons; of which the Work Orders for 74

transactions (with a cumulative value of $1,213,580) were also “self-

certified” by the Conflicted Persons.5

(b) The Conflicted Persons were also permitted to act as co-signatories for

the cheques or bank transfers in respect of FMSS’s invoices.6 In fact, for

payment of FMSI’s invoices, there were 6 instances where the Conflicted

Persons were able to give the final sign-off for payments to FMSI either

on their own, or simply with the sign-off of another employee or officer

1 KPMG Report at 5.2.20. 2 “Conflicted Persons” are defined in the KPMG Report as individuals having direct ownership interests in FMSS and/or FMSI and concurrently holding management positions in the Town Council. They included Mr Danny Loh (Secretary of the Town Council) and Ms How Weng Fan (Deputy Secretary and General Manager of the Town Council). 3 KPMG Report at 5.2.3. 4 KPMG Report at 5.2.4, 5.2.6-5.2.8. 5 KPMG Report at 5.2.10. 6 KPMG Report at 5.2.13.

of 83

of FMSS (without the involvement of the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of

the Town Council). Such instances involved a total payment of

$176,400.00 to FMSI.7

(3) No protocols or processes were put in place for the Town Councillors or

independent parties to independently and objectively monitor and assess the

service levels of FMSS and FMSI.8

(4) The Town Council’s finances operated in “a highly deficient environment,

involving pervasive Control Failures, in particular a lack of discipline in

financial operations and record-keeping”.9

3. KPMG concluded that the elected Town Councillors had surrendered an

“unacceptably high degree of financial responsibility” to the Conflicted Persons, in a

control environment in which “meaningful oversight by the Town Councillors was

absent”. 10 This had the potential to “conceal and hinder the detection and

identification of all instances of improper payment”; and/or impair the ability to assess

how much of such improper payments ought to be recovered.11

4. Second, given the limitation above, KPMG has only managed to detect the following

improper payments to FMSS and FMSI, which aggregate to a total sum in excess of

$1,518,286, and has assessed that at least $624,621 (out of this total sum) ought to be

recovered. There are certain items which KPMG, however, was unable to determine the

amounts that should be recovered. The detectable improper payments include:12

(1) Overpayments to FMSS in respect of overtime claims and CPF contributions;

(2) Overpayments to FMSS for electrical parts;

(3) Payments to FMSS for electrical parts without requisite approval;

(4) Payments to FMSS purportedly for project management fees in respect of

matters that are either wholly13 or partly14 covered by managing agent (“MA”)

fees;

7 KPMG Report at 5.2.16. 8 KPMG Report at 5.2.17. 9 KPMG Report at 5.2.19. 10 KPMG Report at 5.2.20. 11 KPMG Report at 5.2.21. 12 KPMG Report at 5.3.2-5.3.36. 13 99 invoices with a total value of SGD 608,911. 14 83 invoices with a total value of SGD 611,786.

of 83

(5) Payments to FMSS or FMSI (including MA fees) that are unsupported by

certifications of services received and/or contracts;

(6) Payments to FMSS made in breach of financial authority (namely, without

requisite co-signature of the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Town Council)

(7) Unclaimed liquidated damages under EMSU contract; and

(8) Amount which could not be recovered from FMSS as a result of the “settlement”

of breaches with FMSS.

5. Third, KPMG noted that it remains “a real and reasonable prospect that there are

further instances of improper payments to FMSS or FMSI in respect of which

detection by an independent review is not readily achievable”. 15 This is because

payment vouchers and Work Orders were approved by the ultimate beneficiaries

themselves. 16 KPMG pointed out that the following transactions are of significant

concern:

(1) 132 payment vouchers, comprising 748 FMSS transactions (with a cumulative

value of $23,299,483), which were “approved by the Conflicted Persons in

effect for payment to themselves”; of which the Work Orders for 74 transactions

(with a cumulative value of $1,213,580) were also “self-certified” by the

Conflicted Persons.17

(2) 33 petty cash reimbursements, amounting to $1,883, which were paid to

Conflicted Persons and approved by Conflicted persons.18

6. Fourth, the tender and engagement process in respect of FMSS and FMSI were, as a

whole, inadequate and unsatisfactory, particularly in relation to the MA contracts:19

(1) For the 1st MA contract with FMSS for the period 15 July 2011 to 14 July 2012

under which FMSS was appointed as the Town Council’s MA (by waiver of

tender), KPMG concluded that the process by which FMSS was appointed as MA

was “unsatisfactory overall”.20 In this regard, KPMG found, amongst others,

that:

15 KPMG Report at 5.4.1. 16 KPMG Report at 5.4.7. 17 KPMG Report at 5.2.10 and 5.4.2. 18 KPMG Report at 5.4.3. 19 KPMG Report at 5.5.1. 20 KPMG Report at 5.5.20.

of 83

(a) By a letter of intent dated 15 June 2011, FMSS indicated that it would take

over “all the existing staff of the former Hougang Town Council at their

existing salary and terms of appointment on 15 June 2011.” This was

stated to be in anticipation of FMSS’s appointment as MA for the Town

Council from 15 July 2011. This suggests that FMSS had secured de facto

appointment as the Town Council’s MA as at that earlier date (even

before the Town Council had completed the waiver process). Indeed,

FMSS issued an invoice dated 30 June 2011 that included S$92,000 for

its “Provision of Managing Agent Services for Hougang SMC for the

month of June 2011”.21 The Town Council’s waiver process therefore

appears to have been a “foregone conclusion”.22

(b) Using the incumbent MA’s, CPG’s, rate as an arbitrary method of pricing

FMSS’ services (with no adjustments to account for differences in

experience and manpower), given that FMSS had charged a flat fee of

$1,114,283 (based on the actual staff expense for the preceding year of the

former HTC), FMSS would already be 10% more expensive (i.e. $515,773

more expensive) than CPG for this period (assuming if CPG had also

taken over Hougang Division which would have been possible under its

contract. 23

(c) The MA contract with CPG (i.e. the CPG Contract) still had 2 years to run,

with an option at the sole discretion of the Town Council to continue for

a further period of three years.24 The Town Council had no obligation to

release CPG.25 A prudent approach would be for Town Council to call for

a tender whilst keeping CPG on in the interim, instead of appointing

FMSS by waiver of tender.26

(d) The Town Council failed to adequately address the critical conflicts of

interest in the appointment of FMSS or discuss the necessary safeguards

to be adopted.27

21 KPMG Report at 5.5.6. 22 KPMG Report at 5.5.14. 23 KPMG Report at 5.5.9. 24 KPMG Report at 5.5.6. 25 KPMG Report at 5.5.17. 26 KPMG Report at 5.5.10. 27 KPMG Report at 5.5.11.

of 83

(e) That the tender was waived in the circumstances leads to the conclusion

that:

(i) the Workers’ Party “intended to import expertise from Hougang

SMC – whether in the form or incarnation of FMSS or otherwise”;

and

(ii) the Town Council had no real alternative to FMSS, “not

necessarily because there were no other managing agents

prepared to work with it, but because the Workers’ Party had

from the outset decided to keep the work “in house” in relying on

resources already familiar and available.”28

(f) Had a more prudent approach been taken (including, for instance, the

calling of a formal tender, and requiring CPG to remain as the MA in the

interim), AHTC would potentially have been able to secure better pricing

for MA services, or been able to secure a MA with stronger experience

and competencies.29

(2) For the 2nd MA contract with FMSS for the period 15 July 2012 to 14 July 2015

(which was awarded by tender), KPMG found, inter alia, that:

(a) FMSS’ tender for this contract had a marked price increase of 17.3%.30

(b) Some of the justifications given by FMSS for the higher rate turned out to

be wrong and/or false.31 For instance, FMSS had indicated that it would

only be able to earn a proposed pre-tax profit margin of 8.3%, which was

allegedly reasonable. However, analysis of the FMSS financial statement

excerpts for FYs 2013 and 2014 indicates that, while FMSS made a net

(post-tax) profit margin of 7.6% for FY 2013, by FY 2014, it had jumped

to 23.2%.32

28 KPMG Report at 5.5.19. 29 KPMG Report at 5.5.20. 30 KPMG Report at 5.5.2 and 5.5.46. 31 KPMG Report at 5.5.36 and 5.5.38. 32 KPMG Report at 5.5.38.

of 83

(c) FMSS’s fee was at the high end of the scale of management charges at

other town councils. 33 The Town Council’s MA fees over Town Council

operating expenditure was the highest in Singapore from FYs 2013 to

2015.34

(d) Had the Tender & Contracts Committee taken a sufficiently robust and

stringent approach in scrutinising FMSS’s MA fees and project

management fees 35, the Town Council could potentially have avoided

significant additional costs, of, conservatively, $746,000.36

(3) For the first EMSU contract with FMSS for the period 1 October 2011 to 30 June

2012 (which was awarded by waiver of tender), KPMG found, inter alia, that:

(a) As the Audit has found, the committee formed to assess FMSS’s proposal

incorrectly calculated a number of elements in the contract of the then

current EMSU providers, CPG and EMS, resulting in a figure

approximately 30% higher than the actual rates (i.e. $122,412).37

(b) No contract appears to have been signed with FMSS for the provision of

EMSU services during this period, and the lack of documentation in

respect of this contract is striking.38

(c) The Town Council again failed to consider the important and critical

conflicts of interest in awarding the contract to a related party and the

necessary safeguards.

33 KPMG Report at 5.5.39. 34 KPMG Report at 5.5.42. 35 KPMG Report at 5.5.45. 36 KPMG Report at 5.5.40-5.5.41: There are five scenarios in KPMG’s Report, and the potential costs savings range from SGD 670,000 to SGD 5,293,000. 37 KPMG Report at 5.5.52: FMSS has repaid this amount to the Town Council. 38 KPMG Report at 5.5.53.

of 83

(4) For the second EMSU contract with FMSS for the period 1 July 2012 to 30 June

2015 (which was awarded by tender), KPMG found, inter alia, that:

(a) FMSS’ tendered rate was 8.5% higher than the existing rate. No attempt

was made to draw any comparisons in terms of price with the rates that

other Town Councils were being charged in order to verify this change in

rate.39

(b) The Town Council again failed to consider the important and critical

conflicts of interest in awarding the contract to a related party and the

necessary safeguards.40

39 KPMG Report at 5.5.55 to 5.5.56. 40 KPMG Report at 5.5.57.

of 83

Appendix F: List of Transactions with Neela

S/N Invoice Number

Invoice Date Description of work Amount

($) Exception

1 NEE0002/2015 30 Nov 2015 Roller shuttle faulty, need urgent repairs

3,061.85

No photograph of work completed;

Invoice not certified by

Property Manager

2 NEE0003/2015 30 Nov 2015 Roller shuttle faulty/jammed, cannot close manually, need urgent repair

3,061.85

3 NEE0004/2015 30 Nov 2015 Roller shuttle door open, unable to close manually, need urgent repair

3,006.85

4 NEE0005/2015 30 Nov 2015 Roller shuttle door open, unable to close manually, need urgent repair

3,061.85

5 NEE0006/2015 30 Nov 2015 Blk 180C Rivervale Crescent To rectify faulty crc roller shuttle door

3,083.85

6 NEE0007/2015 30 Nov 2015 Roller shuttle jammed, unable to close, need urgent repairs - please

eNable roller shuttle to be operated manually

3,083.85

7 NEE0008/2015 30 Nov 2015 To rectify CRC roller shuttle door that unable to close automatically.

3,061.85

8 0009/2015 11 Dec 2015 Roller shutter door faulty/jammed, cannot close shutter

3,072.85 No work order; Accounts Payable

Journal Report not checked by

Property Manager; Invoice

not certified by Property Manager

9 0010/2015 11 Dec 2015 Roller shutter door jammed, unable to operate, need urgent repairs

3,050.85

Total 27,545.65

of 83

Appendix G: Summary of exceptions by vendors

Vendor41 Category of exception

Number of invoices Amount ($)

BSG Landscape B 3 62,476.86

Campaign A 6 313,793.23

B 6 313,793.23

Certis Cisco B 2 1,527.83

Citicon A 1 1,193.12

B 1 1,193.12

EM Services B 3 2,373.81

Empire A 1 8,991.18

B 3 26,973.53

Fujitec A 5 7,252.46

J Keart A 1 3,873.40

B 10 18,125.80

Mitsubishi C 20 23,776.26

NETS B 1 1,071.56

Promptech B 1 2,297.65

Propell A 6 5,027.41

B 8 11,993.11

Red-Power B 6 14,670.78

Titan A 2 195,929.14

B 2 195,929.14

Uniquetech B 9 13,796.04

YL Integrated B 1 8,166.24

41 Refer to Appendix AA for list of abbreviations used for vendors.

of 83

Appendix H: Review of Payments Made for PE Direct Expenses in November 2015

We set out our work procedures on the review of PE Direct Expenses in November 2015 below.

Basis of selection

1. Based on the list of payments made in the month of November 2015 for PE’s direct

expenses, we have selected paid invoices to achieve an 80% coverage for our review of

PE’s direct expenses. Please refer to Appendix T for a summary of the invoices

reviewed.

Understanding the Procurement-to-payment process

2. Before we go into our findings, it will be apposite for us to first set out briefly the

procurement-to-payment system in AHPETC. AHPETC has a process for procuring

goods and services, incurring expenditure and making payment, which applies to all

procurements and payments (including direct payments made by a division). Controls

to address the requirements of the TCFR are included in this process.

3. While we understand from Kevin Lee that there is no formalized written policies and

procedures for procurement to payment process during our Review Period, there is an

established work procedure which is not documented. We understand that AHTC has

only developed and finalised the policies and procedures in November 2016, subsequent

to our Review Period.

4. Based on our understanding of the established work procedures with Kevin Lee and

Vincent Koh, the procurement, expenditure and payment process42 are as follows:

Procuring – Tender or quotation

5. Rule 73(1) and (1A) of the TCFR state the following:

“Quotations in writing shall be invited for any single item of stores, services or works

estimated to cost not more than $70,000. A tender need not be invited if quotations are

invited for any single item of stores, services or works estimated to cost not more than

$70,000, and the quotations obtained exceed $70,000 but do not exceed $80,000”.

42 Please refer to Appendix Y for detailed flow charts illustrating the procurement to payments process.

of 83

In practice, the Town Council procures goods and services through either tender or

quotation process. Unless waived, a tender is required for incurring expenditure valued

above $70,000, and a quotation is required for expenditure valued below $70,000.

6. Rule 74(1) of the TCFR states the following:

“Tenders shall be invited for the execution of works or for any single item of stores or

services estimated to cost more than $70,000.”

In practice, tenders are managed centrally by the Contracts Department for purchases

above $70,000. The official order forms includes tender specification, tender notice,

tender evaluation report, provisional tender result, tender result, letter of award”.

7. Rule 73(2) and 73(3) of the TCFR state the following:

“Quotations may be obtained by telephone or orally where the stores, services or works

are estimated to cost not more than $3,000; and a written note of the particulars of

the suppliers and the date of each of the quotations is made and certified by the officer

authorized to accept the quotations. Where quotations are called, at least 3 firms shall

be invited to quote”.

Rule 73(7) of the TCFR states the following:

“Where the amount of the quotation is not expected to exceed $5,000, the firms invited

to quote may be asked to send their quotations direct to the Department concerned.

In practice, AHTC is required to obtain a minimum of three quotes for expenditure

below $70,000. Details of the types of quotations and requesting departments are as

follows:

Amount Type Official order forms Requesting department

Less than $3,000 Verbal quotation43 Approval of Quotation

(“AOQ”)

User department

$3,000 to $5,000 Written quotation Approval of Quotation

(“AOQ”)

User department

$5,001 to $70,000 Written quotation Approval of Quotation

(“AOQ”)

Contract Department

43 A verbal quotation is obtained by telephone or orally while a written quotation is obtained via a formal document.

of 83

8. Based on our understanding of the work process with Kevin Lee,

(a) where quotations are required, the requesting department will source for

quotations and prepare a summary of the quotations obtained for comparison.

This said summary is documented on the Approval of Quotation44 form (“AOQ”)

which includes the description, quantity and cost quoted. The recommended

vendor would also be identified in the AOQ and this AOQ is submitted to the

Chairman or Secretary for his review and approval;

(b) where a tender is required, the Contract Department will call for tender by

publishing tender notice on the Straits Times newspaper. A scanned copy of the

tender notice published in the newspapers will also be posted on the AHPETC

website. Tender submissions are submitted through the tender box which will be

opened by authorised officer in the presence of another independent personnel on

the tender due date. Upon the receipt of tender submissions, Contract Department

prepares a summary of the tenders obtained for comparison and a Tender

Evaluation Report (‘TER”) which includes the description, quantity, cost

submitted for tender. TER is approved by the Tenders and Contracts Committee

based on the recommendations by the Contract Department. Once approved, a

letter of award will be issued to the winning vendor.

Procuring – Authority to incur expenditure

9. Once approval of the AOQ from the Chairman or Secretary is obtained, a Written

Instruction45 (“WI”) will be generated for the procurement of goods and services for

non-routine estate works. The approved WI is issued to vendor to carry out the work as

stated in the WI.

10. We understand from our discussion with Mr Kevin Lee, while AHTC does not have

formal list of authorised approvers in relation to WI, the WI are raised by an officer and

approved by the Department Manager.

44 An Approval of Quotation is a document which summarizes the selected quotation, showing the work description, quantity and amount, and approval obtained from the Chairman or Secretary. 45 A Written Instruction is a document used by the Town Council to instruct the vendor to deliver goods and services at the agreed scope.

of 83

11. No WI is required for routine estate work46 and non-estate work47. Routine estate work

is incurred as agreed in the contract while non-estate work uses the AOQ to inform the

vendor of the required goods and services.

Certification of receipt of goods or services

12. Upon the completion of work, a Work Order (“WO”) is prepared by the requesting officer

and reviewed and authorised by the Department Manager as a form of certification that

goods and services have been appropriately delivered by the vendor.

Payment processing

13. Once the WO is approved by the Department Manager, it will be sent to the vendor for

issuance of invoice.

14. Based on the representation from Jessalyn Lim, invoices from vendor are approved by

either an officer or the Department Manager before Finance Department processes the

payment.

15. The Delegation of Authority for cheque payments are detailed below: Cheque amount Authorised signatory

Not exceeding $50,000 or such lesser amount as

authorized by the town council

Town Council Secretary and one appointed officer

Any amount One from Group A and one from Group B

16. During our Review Period, the following personnel were authorised as cheque

signatories48:

Eff

ecti

ve d

ate

Sec

reta

ry

Dep

uty

S

ecre

tary

Ap

poi

nte

d

Off

icer

1

Ap

poi

nte

d

Off

icer

2

Ap

poi

nte

d

Off

icer

3

Ap

poi

nte

d

Off

icer

4

Ap

poi

nte

d

Off

icer

5

Ap

poi

nte

d

Off

icer

6

Ch

airm

an

Vic

e C

hai

rman

1 V

ice

Ch

airm

an

2

Group A Group B

26 Mar 13 DL HWF RT - - - - - SL PS PEH

23 May 15 VK - CSM LTK MF LLL WT RT SL PS PEH

8 Oct 15 VK - CSM LTK MF PC WT - PS SL PEH

46 Routine estate work refers to maintenance of mechanical and electrical services such as lifts, pumps and lighting, proper upkeep of property and the living environment, conservancy and cleaning which are fixed monthly expenses and payments agreed in contract. 47 Non-estate work pertains to general expenses for e.g. office supplies, printing for advertisements and magazines. 48 Acronyms used in the table are as follows: DL – Danny Loh, VK – Vincent Koh, RT –Raymond Tan, CSM – Chen Show Mao, SL – Sylvia Lim, LTK – Low Thia Kiang, WT – Winnie Tan, MF – Muhamad Faisal bin Abdul Manap, LLL - Lee Li Lian, PC – Phyllis Chee, PS – Pritam Singh, PEH – Png Eng Huat

of 83

Review Procedures for Samples Selected

17. We have reviewed our sample transactions and grouped them under the following five

categories:

(a) Tendering of contracts are properly supported by requisite documents and approved by personnel of appropriate level of authority;

(b) Instructions are given and work done are certified on a timely basis; (c) Work done are properly supported by requisite documents and approved by

personnel of appropriate level of authority; (d) Payable recording, payment processing and approval by personnel of appropriate

level of authority; (e) For samples with exceptions noted, for these vendors, determine whether it is a

related party transaction

(a) Tendering of contracts are properly supported by requisite documents

and approved by personnel of appropriate level of authority

18. All selected samples are supported by contracts as they pertain to routine and non-

routine estate work. There are no non-estate work in our sample transactions.

19. For contracts waived from tendering, we have obtained the waiver of tender documents

and checked that it was approved by the Chairman of the Town Council. We also ensured

that the waiver process complies with Rule 74(17) of the TCFR49.

20. For contracts that was awarded through the tender process, we have obtained the tender

notice published on the newspaper and checked that the minimum tender notice period

is met in accordance to the TCFR Rule 74(6)50.

21. We then obtained the provisional tender results51 and checked that the tender box was

opened by authorised personnel in the presence of another independent personnel on

the day of the deadline.

22. We reviewed the TER and checked that it was prepared by Contract Department and

approved by the Chairman of the Tenders and Contracts Committee.

49 Rule 74(17) of the TCFR states that “Tenders may be waived by the Town Council or the chairman as authorised within the limits of his financial authority to incur expenditure where — (a) the supply of goods or services is known to be only within the capacity of a sole agent or a specialist contractor; (b) the urgency of the requirement makes it necessary; or (c) it is manifestly necessary in the public interest to do so.” 50 Rule 74(6) of the TCFR states that “Subject to paragraph (7), the minimum period of tender notice shall not be less than — (a) in the case of contracts which are advertised locally — 3 weeks for conventional contracts and 8 weeks for design and build contracts; or (b) in the case of contracts which are advertised both locally and overseas — 12 weeks.” 51 Provisional tender results summarises the details of the opening of tender box and tenders received upon the opening of tender box.

of 83

23. From the TER, we checked that AHTC/AHPETC has compared the tender price among

the bidders in the tender against its existing contract price or the price contracted in

other divisions for the same nature of work and etc. before the tender was awarded. We

obtained the tender documents submitted by the bidders and checked against the tender

price in the TER. We also recomputed the Price Quality Matrix scores of each tenderer

based on the Tender Evaluation criteria used from the tender documents submitted by

the bidders.

24. For any tenders that was not awarded to the lowest bidder, we have requested for all

supporting documents to ascertain the reasons to award at a higher price.

25. We checked that the Letter of Award and the contract is authorised by the Secretary for

contracts signed before 15 July 2015 and the Chairman of the Town Council for those

signed from 15 July 2015 onwards.

(b) Instructions are given and work done are certified on a timely basis

26. For the samples selected pertaining to non-routine estate work, we have obtained the

WI and checked that it was prepared by an officer and approved by the Department

Manager. We also matched the description of work required on the WI to the contract.

27. We have checked that WI was approved after contract was signed and prior to delivery

of goods and services, invoice date and payment disbursement date.

28. For routine estate work where WI is not required, we have checked to the contract and

ascertained that it was signed prior to work commencement.

(c) Work done are properly supported by requisite documents and approved

by personnel of appropriate level of authority

29. We have obtained the WO and noted that it was prepared by the requesting officer and

authorised by the Department Manager to certify that goods or services have been

appropriately delivered by the vendor.

30. We have matched the description of work done and amount documented on the WI to

the Job Sheet / delivery order issued by the vendor and to the WO prepared by the

requesting officer. We have also reviewed the supporting documents (i.e. delivery order,

pictures of the work done, or service report) as evidence of delivery by the vendor.

of 83

31. We matched the original supplier invoice to WO, and checked that the description of

work done, quantity of goods received and amount billed is correctly computed in

accordance with the rates and fees structure agreed in the contract/quotations.

32. We checked that the original supplier invoice was authorised by Department

Manager/Officer prior to payment disbursement date.

(d) Payable recording, payment processing and approval by personnel of

appropriate level of authority

33. We checked that the Accounts Payable Voucher Journal Report is checked by the

Department Manager and verified and approved by the Finance Department before

accounts payable is recorded in the accounts payable sub-ledger. We matched the details

on the Accounts Payable Voucher Journal Report against the original supplier invoices.

34. We matched the details on the payment voucher against the original supplier invoices

and supporting documents (i.e. work order / contract / delivery order / pictures of work

done / service report).

35. We checked that the payment voucher was prepared by Accounts Executive / F&A

Assistant / F&A Executive / Accountant and authorised in accordance with the

Delegation of Authority for payments.

36. We have reviewed that the payment voucher and ensured that was authorised prior to

actual disbursement date.

37. We obtained the duplicate copy of the cheque and checked that the signatories was in

accordance with the Delegation of Authority.

(e) For samples with exceptions noted, for these vendors, determine whether

it is a related party transaction

38. For vendors with exceptions noted, we have obtained the list of shareholders and

directors of the vendors and checked whether any of the shareholder and director was

the town councillor or AHPETC’s key management personnel on board during the

period under our review, namely the General Manager, Contract Manager, and Finance

Manager. We have summarized the list of exceptions by vendors in Appendix G.

of 83

Appendix I: List of invoices without evidence of work done

S/N Vendor52 Invoice date

Invoice number

Work Order

Signed by

Payment date

Payment Approver

Document absent

Amount ($)

1 Titan 27-Oct-15 TTNIV15/09/005

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)

11-Nov-15 1. Sylvia Lim (Chairman)

2. Vincent Koh

(Secretary)

Monthly service report

97,964.57

2 Fujitec 18-Nov-15 FUJDW9098059589

Abdul Muhaimin Bin Abdul

Malik (Assistant

Lift Manager)

26-Nov-15 1. Pritam Singh

(Chairman)

2. Winnie Tan Lee Eng

(Deputy Finance

Manager)

Photograph of lift spare

part replaced or repaired

2,836.57

3 Campaign 13-Oct-15 INV10/15-024

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)


80,286.29


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

80,286.29


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

80,286.29


of 83


Invoice number

Work Order

Signed by

Payment date

Payment Approver

Document absent

Amount ($)

6 Campaign 18-Nov-15 INV09/15-021

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)


24,311.45


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

24,311.45


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

24,311.45

9 Citicon 26-Oct-15 CTCIV13109

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)

2. Vincent Koh

(Secretary)

Job sheet 1,193.12

10 Empire 13-Oct-15 EMP/19682

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)


8,991.18



Malik (Assistant

Lift Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)



1,332.15

of 83


Invoice number

Work Order

Signed by

Payment date

Payment Approver

Document absent

Amount ($)



Malik (Assistant

Lift Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)



1,151.32



Malik (Assistant

Lift Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

1,151.32

14 Fujitec 18-Nov-15 DW9098059585


Malik (Assistant

Lift Manager)


2. Vincent Koh

(Secretary)

781.10

15 J Keart 28-Oct-15 INV112015020782

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


2. Vincent Koh

(Secretary)


3,873.40

16 Propell 14-Oct-15 PRO1511468

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

Verification of work done

1,055.37


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

913.53

of 83


Invoice number

Work Order

Signed by

Payment date

Payment Approver

Document absent

Amount ($)


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

Verification of work done

883.76


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

774.89


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

714.85


Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)


(Deputy Finance

Manager)

685.00

22 Titan 3-Nov-15 IV15/10/021

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)


(Chairman)

2. Vincent Koh

(Secretary)


97,964.57

Total 536,059.92

of 83

Appendix J: List of Written Instruction authorised by Senior Property Officer instead of Property Manager

S/N Vendor53 Written

Instruction Signed by?

WO number

WO Signed

by?

Invoice number

Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)

1 EM Services

Evon Quck Ee Wern (Senior

Property Officer)

WO39716431

Imran Ridae

(Property Manager)

IPR16/0186


(Chairman) 2. Winnie Tan

(Deputy Finance

Manager)

1,151.87


of 83

Appendix K: List of Work Order authorised by Senior Property Officer instead of Property Manager

S/N Vendor54 WO number

Invoice number

Payment date Payment Approver Amount

($)

1 Promptech WO39706368 PMEIV.10191 11-Nov-15 1. Pritam Singh (Chairman) 2. Winnie Tan (Deputy Finance

Manager)

2,297.65


of 83

Appendix L: List of invoices not certified by Department Manager


Invoice number

Invoice Certified by

Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)

1 BSG Landscape

13-Oct-15 BSGAH-PETC/15090

1

Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)

11-Nov-15 1. Pritam Singh (Chairman)

2. Winnie Tan (Deputy Finance

Manager)

30,789.03

2 Promptech 14-Oct-15 PMEIV.10191

Justin Gan Chin Feng (Property

Officer)



Manager)

2,297.65

3 Propell 14-Oct-15 PRO1510355 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



Manager)

3,317.00

4 Titan 27-Oct-15 TTNIV15/09/005


11-Nov-15 1. Sylvia Lim (Vice Chairman)

2. Vincent Koh (General Manager

97,964.57

5 Uniquetech 11-Nov-15 UQT00226098

Kwong Siew Wen (Property

Officer)


2. Vincent Koh (General Manager)

1,912.84





1,912.84


Johnny Yeo (Property Officer)



1,817.71

8 YL Integrated

5-Oct-15 YLIYL0670 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)

11-Nov-15 1. Winnie Tan (Deputy Finance

Manager) 2. Vincent Koh

(General Manager)

8,166.24

9 J Keart 18-Nov-15 JKTINV102015018821




3,873.40


of 83


Invoice number


Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)

10 J Keart 16-Nov-15 INV112015020375




3,873.40

11 Red-Power 14-Oct-15 REDRP 5031009/15




Manager)

3,365.69

12 Red-Power 20-Oct-15 REDRP 5030909/15




Manager)

3,322.35

13 NETS 14-Oct-15 IN15J01295(F)

Lim Siok Ling Jessalyn (F&A

Executive)



Manager)

1,071.56

14 BSG Landscape

13-Oct-15 AH-PETC/151101




Manager)

30,789.03

15 BSG Landscape

13-Oct-15 AH-PETC/15100

3


Officer)



Manager)

898.80





Manager)

80,286.29





Manager)

80,286.29





Manager)

80,286.29





Manager)

24,311.45

of 83


Invoice number


Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)





Manager)

24,311.45





Manager)

24,311.45

22 Certis Cisco 3-Nov-15 CER94001456




Manager)

769.11

23 Certis Cisco 16-Nov-15 CER94001491




Manager)

758.73

24 Citicon 27-Oct-15 CTCIV13109 Zulkarnaen Jailani

(Property Officer)



Manager)

1,193.12

25 EM Services

3-Nov-15 IPR16/0186 Kwong Siew Wen (Property

Officer)



Manager)

1,151.87

26 EM Services

27-Oct-15 PGM16/1317 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



Manager)

610.97

27 EM Services

3-Nov-15 PGM16/1379 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



Manager)

610.97

28 Empire 3-Nov-15 EMP/19681 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



Manager)

8,991.18

29 Empire 13-Oct-15 EMP/19682 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



Manager)

8,991.18

of 83


Invoice number


Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)

30 Empire 13-Oct-15 EMP/19680 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



Manager)

8,991.18

31 J Keart 28-Oct-15 INV112015020782




3,873.40

32 J Keart 16-Nov-15 INV102015019621


Officer)



1,337.50

33 J Keart 16-Nov-15 INV112015020700




1,107.45

34 J Keart 18-Nov-15 INV112015020285


Officer)



1,086.05

35 J Keart 18-Nov-15 INV102015019660


Officer)



898.80

36 J Keart 18-Nov-15 INV112015020699




898.80

37 J Keart 18-Nov-15 INV112015020783


Officer)



663.40

38 J Keart 18-Nov-15 INV112015020701




513.60




Manager)

3,648.70

of 83


Invoice number


Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)




Manager)

1,055.37

41 Propell 14-Oct-15 PRO1511467 Justin Gan Chin Feng (Property

Officer)



Manager)

913.53


Officer)



Manager)

883.76




Manager)

774.89




Manager)

714.85


Officer)



Manager)

685.00

46 Red-Power 3-Nov-15 RP 5064411/15




Manager)

3,365.69

47 Red-Power 3-Nov-15 RP 5064311/15




Manager)

3,322.35

48 Red-Power 3-Nov-15 RP 5086711/15


Officer)



674.10

49 Red-Power 16-Oct-15 RP 5064511/15


Officer)



Manager)

620.60

of 83


Invoice number


Payment date

Payment Approver

Amount ($)

50 Titan 3-Nov-15 IV15/10/021 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)


2. Vincent Koh (Secretary)

97,964.57



Officer)



2,514.92



Officer)



1,805.59





1,157.40

54 Uniquetech 16-Oct-15 UQT00226573


Officer)



Manager)

1,008.92

55 Uniquetech 29-Sep-15 UQT00226456


Officer)

28-Nov-15 1. Png Eng Huat (Vice-Chairman)


Manager)

966.11

56 Uniquetech 30-Sep-15 00226660 Kwong Siew Wen (Property

Officer)

28-Nov-15 1. Png Eng Huat (Vice-Chairman)


Manager)

699.71

Total 674,388.70

of 83

Appendix M: List of Accounts Payable Voucher Journal Reports not checked by Property Manager

S/N Vendor56

WO number

Invoice number

Invoice certified by

Payment date Payment Approver Amount

($) 1 Certis

Cisco WO397128

20 CER940014

56 Zulkarnaen

Jailani (Property Officer)


2. Winnie Tan (Deputy Finance Manager)

769.11

2 Certis Cisco

WO39715127

CER94001491



2. Winnie Tan (Deputy Finance Manager)

758.73

3 Citicon WO39713849

CTCIV13109 Ng Kai Xian (Property Officer)



1,193.12

Total 2,720.96


of 83

Appendix N: List of Written Instructions not authorised prior to job commencement

S/N Vendor57 WI date WI number Job sheet date (Job

start date)

Job sheet number

Days delayed Amount ($)

1 Mitsubishi 15-Jul-15 WI/PE/00130/07/2015

27-Jun-15 CH066582 18 1,588.95

2 Mitsubishi 15-Jul-15 WI/PE/00131/07/2015

27-Jun-15 CH066582 18 2,097.20

3 Mitsubishi 04-Sep-15 WI/PE/00029/09/2015

06-Aug-15 CH055771 29 1,626.40


21-Aug-15 CH067057 14 830.64


21-Aug-15 CH067057 14 620.60


21-Aug-15 CH067058 14 830.64


21-Aug-15 CH067058 14 620.60


13-Aug-15 CH067135 22 830.64


13-Aug-15 CH067135 22 830.64


14-Aug-15 CH067136 21 830.64


14-Aug-15 CH067136 21 830.64


16-Aug-15 CH066546 19 661.26

13 Mitsubishi 06-Oct-15 WI/PE/00053/10/2015

02-Oct-15 CH069061 4 3,244.24


02-Oct-15 CH069061 4 1,284.00


02-Oct-15 CH069061 4 612.04


10-Jul-15 CH055768 90 813.20


of 83

S/N Vendor57 WI date WI number Job sheet date (Job

start date)

Job sheet number

Days delayed Amount ($)


12-Oct-15 CH066830 8 3,630.51


13-Oct-15 CH063107 7 664.47

19 Mitsubishi 02-Nov-15 WI/PE/00006/11/2015

26-Oct-15 CH063179 7 664.47

20 Mitsubishi 02-Nov-15 WI/PE/00007/11/2015

26-Oct-15 CH063180 7 664.47

Total 23,776.25

of 83

Appendix O: Allocation of Common Expenses to PE

1.1 On the allocation of past payments of common expenses (for the entire Town Council)

to PE, from PE’s perspective, an improper payment could also take the (additional)

form of a wrongly allocated common expense to PE. In other words (and by way of

illustration), a past payment which was properly made on behalf of the entire Town

Council, could still be an improper payment for PE, if PE’s share of the expense was

wrongly allocated. The allocation of the common expenses to PE would also have a

direct bearing on whether the balances handed over and/or to be handed over from

AHTC to PRPTC (for the constituency of PE) are correct.

1.2 For the Review Period, AHPETC manages three constituencies, namely Hougang

Single Member Constituency (“SMC”), PE SMC and Aljunied GRC. Aljunied GRC

covers five divisions, namely Bedok Reservoir-Punggol, Eunos, Kaki Bukit, Paya Lebar

and Serangoon. Each SMC is considered as a division on its own for the purpose of

management. Accordingly, under AHPETC, there would be in total seven divisions.

1.3 Common expenses incurred for the benefit of more than one division are paid centrally

from a central bank account maintained by AHPETC and allocated to the individual

divisions. The payment of common expenses is tracked and recorded using the Town

Council’s Accounting System 58 . We understand from Mr Kevin Lee, the Finance

Manager, that there are two ways of recording the payment of common expenses in the

Accounting System, i.e. via the accounts payable module and through manual journal

entries59.

1.4 Within AHPETC’s Accounting System, each division under AHPETC is assigned a

separate business unit for the accounting of transactions pertaining to that division.

For example, PE is assigned the “PEG60” business unit and transactions pertaining to

PE are recorded under the PEG business unit.

58 The accounting system used by AHTC is Oracle’s JD Edwards system. 59 Payment can be recorded via the account payable module only when there is an existing invoice recorded in the account payable module. Payments can be recorded via manual journals entries when information are input manually through the requisitions of journals (i.e. bypassing the account payable module). 60 PEG in this context refers to Punggol East.

of 83

1.5 For the recording of common expenses, AHTC created a separate business unit, HGA,

in the Accounting System and had also designated specific General Ledger (“GL”)

codes for use solely for the recording of these common expenses. All such expenses

incurred during the month are initially recorded to one of these GL codes under the

HGA business unit. Subsequently at the end of the month, the expenses are allocated

to each division’s business unit based on the applicable allocation percentage for the

month.

1.6 We understand the monthly allocation percentage is computed by the Finance &

Accounts Executive, based on the data of the residential, commercial and parking lots

units. The computed allocation percentage is then reviewed and approved by the

Senior Finance Executive. The amount allocated at month-end to each division is

prepared by Finance & Accounts Executive, verified by Assistant Finance Manager and

approved by Deputy Finance Manager.

Allocation method

1.7 The allocation of common expenses amongst the divisions under AHPETC is based on

the number of Equivalent Dwelling Units (“EDUs”), i.e. each division’s share of the

common expenses is based on the percentage of the total EDUs in that division out of

the total EDUs for the entire Town Council.

1.8 For the purpose of computing EDUs, each residential property is considered as one

EDU and each commercial property is considered as two EDUs. For parking lots, six

car lots, 36 motor cycle lots or four lorry lots are considered as one EDU:

Property Type Number of EDUs 1 Residential Property Unit 1 1 Commercial Property Unit 2 6 Car lots or 36 Motorcycle lots or 4 Lorry lots 1

of 83

1.9 Information on the number of residential and commercial units for each division are

provided and uploaded by HDB through a website known as HDB Gateway61 on a

weekly basis. AHPETC would, in turn, download the aforementioned information

from HDB Gateway and upload the information to its own Accounting System, so as to

update a “Property Masterfile”, which contains (and maintains) the details of the

residential and commercial units for all divisions in AHPETC.

1.10 The updated Property Masterfile would then be used by AHPETC to compute and

determine the EDUs for each division under AHPETC.

1.11 However, the information provided on the HDB Gateway excludes information on the

number of parking lots for the Town Council. We understand that such information is

provided by HDB to AHPETC via hardcopy instead on a monthly basis, and the

document from HDB would include the total number of parking lots for each division.

On a monthly basis, the Finance Accounts Executive will manually compute and

determine the total carpark lots for each division under AHPETC before converting the

carpark lots into EDUs.

1.12 From our review and discussions with Mr Kevin Lee, we found that the allocation of

common expenses at AHPETC was not performed timely and consistently throughout

the Review Period. Our findings showed that the pattern of allocation of common

expenses could be categorised under three periods, as follows:

(a) 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014 – No allocation of common expenses to the

divisions under AHPETC was performed;

(b) 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015 – Common expenses were allocated at the end

of each month via the Accounting System to the individual divisions, i.e. the

common expenses were allocated automatically by the Accounting System; and

(c) 1 April 2015 to 30 November 2015 – Common expenses were allocated at

the end of each month via manual journal entries to the individual divisions,

instead of automatically by the Accounting System.

1.13 Mr Kevin Lee explained that due to the high staff turnover at the Town Council’s

Finance Department and in the absence of formalised written policies and procedures,

there was a lack of proper handover and transfer of knowledge and guidance over the

61 HDB Gateway is a website for Town Councils to download information on EDUs.

of 83

execution of allocation process to the junior and/or new staff. Consequently, the

allocation procedures were carried out inconsistently across the different periods.

1.14 In the premises, we set out our findings in this Section, first, in relation to the common

expenses allocated by the Town Council (be it automatically through the Accounting

System or manually by way of manual journal entries) for the period 1 April 2014 to 30

November 2015, and, second, our findings in relation to the common expenses that the

Town Council failed to allocate for the period 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014.

Common expenses allocated (1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015)

1.15 As we explained above, the information on the number of residential and commercial

units and parking lots for each division are provided by HDB either online through

HDB Gateway or by way of hardcopy. We note that for the information on the number

of residential and commercial units prior to March 2015, which was previously

available on HDB Gateway, is now no longer available on the website, and AHPETC

unfortunately also did not maintain, in its own records, a copy of all such information

prior to March 2015. AHPETC’s records of the hardcopy information from HDB on

the parking lots were also incomplete. In this circumstances, for the purposes of our

review:

(a) AHPETC was only able to provide us with the allocation percentages (and not the

actual EDUs) that is attributable to each of the division from April 2014 to March

2015.

(b) For information on the residential and commercial units, AHPETC could only

derive and generate the information from their own Accounting System records

from April 2014 to March 2015. For the information on the parking lots,

AHPETC was only able to provide us with such information for the period from

April 2014 to March 2015.

of 83

1.16 Based on the information in sub-paragraph (a) of the preceding paragraph made

available to us, we note that the allocation percentage attributed to PE during the

period from 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015 was in the range of 19.57% to 20.84%. We

set out in Appendix T the monthly allocation percentages for each of the division under

AHPETC.

1.17 Based on our review, major common expenses allocated to the divisions by AHPETC

for the period 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015 comprised the following:

Nature of common expenses as per General Ledger description

Amount62 ($)

Managing Agent Fees 8,902,369.41 Depreciation 558,276.34 Computer Maintenance 224,752.04 Skills Development Levy & Foreign Worker Levy 223,169.37 Publicity 195,299.25 Telephone 190,928.83 Computer Services 181,952.05 Salaries 158,620.27 Postages & Courier 124,960.70 Printing & Stationery 94,378.02 Councilor Allowance 84,000.00 Others 352,887.46 Total 11,291,593.74

62 Please refer to Appendix Z for the list of common expenses, service providers and amount incurred for the period 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015. We have classified the common expenses into two categories - common expenses recorded via accounts payable module and common expenses recorded via manual journal entries.

of 83

1.18 The total common expenses that were allocated to PE during this period amounted to

$2,422,965.88, as follows:

Month Common expenses Managing agent fees

Common expenses allocated to PE

April 2014 62,823.12 564,314.25 5,361.36 May 2014 119,803.57 564,314.25 16,832.10 June 2014 94,735.60 563,148.90 11,684.60 July 2014 153,361.57 - 25,088.39

August 2014 108,263.66 - 15,671.13 September 2014 110,747.84 - 17,246.51

October 2014 79,246.44 1,773,820.28 10,906.38 November 2014 78,578.00 - 10,869.55 December 2014 95,089.26 596,354.95 14,165.92

January 2015 143,679.56 1,192,709.90 23,585.71 February 2015 57,130.68 - -63

March 2015 118,1 67.16 1,802,406.71 1,591,020.2264 April 2015 42,072.48 - 8,460.78 May 2015 87,235.74 - 17,543.11 June 2015 86,484.29 1,845,300.17 20,707.55 July 2015 261,255.51 - 53,371.95

August 2015 118,234.44 - 24,344.47 September 2015 147,059.59 - 30,367.81

October 2015 149,336.34 - 31,121.68 November 2015 275,919.48 - 494,616.4665

Total 2,389,224.33 8,902,369.41 2,422,965.88

1.19 To review and check the computation of the allocation percentages (provided to us),

we performed the following procedures:

(a) We re-computed the total monthly EDUs for the residential and commercial

units for the individual divisions (using the information obtained from the

Property Masterfile);

(b) We also re-computed the total monthly EDUs for parking lots for the individual

divisions. In this regard, we set out in Appendix U the number of parking lots

EDUs for PE for the period 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015;

(c) Thereafter, we re-computed the monthly allocation percentages of each division

by dividing the monthly total EDUs (comprising of residential, commercial and

parking lots EDUs) of individual divisions over the monthly total EDUs of

AHPETC; and

(d) We compared the monthly allocation percentages of each of the divisions of

AHPETC re-computed by PwC against the monthly allocation percentages

computed (and provided to us) by AHPETC.

63 Expenses in February 2015 were allocated in March 2015. 64 Management agent fees for financial Year 2014 were allocated in March 2015. 65 Management agent fees for financial Year 2015 were allocated in November 2015.

of 83

1.20 Another check we performed to verify the allocation percentages used by AHPETC was

through the use of the GL. We understand from Mr Kevin Lee that the common

expenses, be it recorded via manual journal entries or accounts payable module, are

recorded to specific GL codes in the Accounting System in order to account for the

common expenses. AHTC has provided us with the list of these GL codes and based

on this information, we extracted the list of transactions recorded during the period

from 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015 using these codes. Thereafter, we performed

the following procedures:

(a) We separately extracted the list of all transactions recorded under the HGA

business unit (which is the Business Unit used by AHPETC for recording and

allocating common expenses) for each month and proceeded to match the total

expenses recorded therein with the total expenses extracted from the above

identified GL codes used for common expenses for the same month;

(b) For each GL code, for each month, based on the transactions allocated and

recorded to each Division, we computed the allocation percentages used by

dividing the amount allocated to each division for the month over the total

amount of the GL balance for the same month; and

(c) We matched the allocation percentages we computed above against the

allocation percentages provided by AHTC.

1.21 For the payments of common expenses recorded and allocated automatically via the

accounts payable module in the Accounting System for the period 1 April 2014 to 30

November 2015, we also selected samples, covering 87% of the total value (including

MA fees), and performed the following checks and/or procedures to determine

whether the payment was proper (in the first place) and whether the subsequent

allocation of PE’s share of this specific payment was correct:

(a) We reviewed the underlying supporting payment documents for procurement

initiation (tender/quotation), verification of goods/service receipt, invoice

approval, authorisation of payment and verification of payment to the bank

statement; and

(b) We re-computed the amount to be allocated to PE based on the allocation

percentage of PE for the month in which the payment was recorded in and

matched the amount to that recorded in the GL of PE.

of 83

1.22 For the payments of common expenses recorded and allocated via manual journal

entries for the period 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015, we likewise re-computed the

amount to be allocated to PE based on the allocation percentage of PE for the month

in which the payment was recorded in and matched the amount to that recoded in the

GL of PE. However, we did not review the underlying supporting payment documents

for these transactions, given that payments via manual journal entries have been

reviewed by KPMG.

1.23 Separately, for the MA fees (under the 2nd MA Contract) from 1 April 2014 to 30

November 2015, we performed the following procedures:

(a) The total fees for the 2nd MA Contract with FMSS (contract reference:

OT/0264/12) for the period of 15 July 2012 to 14 July 2015 was separated into 3

years and by property category (i.e. residential dwelling units,

commercial/market/hawker stall units, and motorcar/motorcycle/lorry parking

lots). Accordingly there was a fixed price for each property category for the first

12 months, second 12 months, and third 12 months. Based on this information,

we derived the unit price for each property category for each period by dividing

its total price for the period over the total units of that property category;

(b) Re-computed the monthly MA fees applicable to PE by using the number of units

for residential, commercial and parking lots for the month obtained from the

Property Masterfile and multiplying by the unit price derived from (a) above, and

compared the monthly MA fees re-computed by PwC against the actual MA fees

charged; and

(c) Reviewed the underlying supporting payment documents for verification of

goods/service receipt, invoice approval, authorisation of payment and

verification of payment to the bank statement. However, we did not review the

procurement initiation, including the tendering process of the 2nd MA Contract

with FMSS, as this has already been covered by KPMG in its review.

1.24 The total MA fees that were allocated to PE during the period 1 April 2014 to 14 July

201566 amounted to $1,929,395.25. The details of such allocation of MA fees to PE are

set out in Appendix U.

66 The managing agent contract between the AHPETC Town Council and FMSS was contracted for the period from 15 July 2012 to 14 July 2015.

of 83

1.25 From our review of the MA fees, we note that the MA fees allocated to PE were not paid

for the months of June 2015 and July 2015, and this amounted to $126,466.00 and

$57,113.67 respectively. We understand from Mr Kevin Lee that these amounts were

not paid as the MA fees for these two months were being disputed by AHPETC with

FMSS.

1.26 Based on the work done above, we have reached the following findings (which we will

elaborate further below):

(i) There are doubts as to the accuracy of the allocation percentages used by

AHPETC for the allocation of common expenses;

(ii) Wrong allocation percentages were in fact used to allocate common expenses in

November 2015; and

(iii) In the sample transactions we reviewed, a number of common expenses did not

have supporting payment documents.

Common expenses not allocated (1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014)

(a) As explained in the paragraph 1.20 above, AHPETC had designated specific GL

codes to record common expenses during this period. Based on the chart of

accounts 67 for the Accounting System, we were able to identify the types of

common expenses that were allocated for the period 1 April 2014 to 30 November

2015;

(b) Accordingly, we identified the same / similar types of common expenses for the

period of 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014 booked under the HGA business unit,

which, should likewise have been allocated amongst the different divisions. We

set out in Appendix Q the types of common expenses incurred by the AHPETC

from 1 May 2013 to 30 November 2015.

(c) We then requested AHTC to extract the Property Masterfile containing the data

of the residential and commercial units for the period 1 May 2013 to 30 March

2014, and carried out the procedures described in paragraph 1.19, except for

parking lots. For parking lots, we note that the number of EDUs for parking lots

remained the same at 12,832.80 from 1 May 2013 to 31 January 2015 and since

67 A chart of accounts is a listing of the names of the accounts that a company has identified and made available for recording transactions in its general ledger.

of 83

we had tested one month in May 2014 within this period, we did not perform

additional work;

(d) Based on the information obtained from (b) and (c), we were able to estimate the

total common expenses, excluding MA fees, to be allocated to PE for the period

of 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014; and

(e) For MA fees, based on the 2nd MA Contract with FMSS (contract reference:

OT/0264/12) and data obtained from (c) above, we carried out the procedures

described in paragraph 1.23 to estimate the MA fees to be allocated to PE for the

period of 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014.

1.27 In coming up with our estimates of the potential common expenses that should be

allocated to PE for the period from 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2014, we assumed the

following:

(a) The information of EDUs for residential and commercial units for all divisions

and constituencies extracted from the Accounting System were accurate; and

(b) The expenses recorded in the GL codes identified in paragraph 1.20 above are all

common expenses only.

1.28 Based on the above work performed, we estimate that the total common expenses that

should have been allocated to all divisions is approximately $6,922,073.24. On the

above basis, we determined that the total estimated common expenses that should be

allocated to PE for the period 1 May 2013 to 31 March 2014 would be approximately

$1,313,925.42. The details of such common expenses that should be allocated to PE are

set out in Appendix W. The common expenses and MA fees not allocated for the period

had resulted in lower expenses incurred and reported for PE, and thus lower Sinking

Fund / liabilities balance as at 30 November 2015 that should be transferred to PRPTC.

of 83

Appendix P: List of the types of common expenses incurred by the Town Council from 1 April 2013 to 30 November 2015

GL Code Common expenses for the

period 1 May 2013 to 30 March 2014

GL Code Common expenses for the period 1 April 2014 to 30

November 2015 53200 Penalty & Fines 67110 Computer Services 66110 Staff Salaries 67120 Computer Maintenance 66130 Central Provident Fund 67300 Managing Agent Fees 66230 Central Provident Fund 67310 Managing Agent Fees 66240 Skills Development Fund 67410 Fines 66260 Staff Foreign Workers Levy 67420 Penalty 66380 Transport Claims 67550 Transport Claim 67110 Computer Services 67560 Search Fee 67120 Computer Maintenance 67610 Public Liability 67160 Consultancy Fee 67620 Plate Glass 67190 Managing Agent Fees 67630 Money 67230 Other Fees & Charges 67640 Fire Insurance 67290 Insurance - Public Liability 67650 Commercial All Risks 67301 Insurance - Plate Glass 67700 Professional Fees 67302 Insurance - Money 67715 Consultation Fees 67320 Legal & Professional Fee 68010 Publicity 67336 Search Fee 68020 Advertising 67350 Publicity 68030 Goodwill Activities 67360 Advertising 68040 Hospitality & Refreshment 67380 Goodwill Activities 68050 Newspaper Publishment 67390 Hospitality & Refreshment 68140 Office Upkeep / Repairs 67480 Upkeep/Repair - Office Premise 68160 Office Supplies 67493 Office Supplies 68180 Printing & Stationery 67495 Office Stationery 68190 Photocopying 67496 Publicity 68210 Councillor Allowance 67497 Printing 68231 Salaries 67499 Photocopying 68240 CPF Employer

67520 Councillor Allowance 68250 Skills Development Fund & Foreign Workers Levy

67610 Telephone 68320 Bank Charges 67630 Postage 68340 –Input GST – Non Claimable 67700 Miscellaneous Operating Expense 68510 Telephone 67710 Newspaper & Magazine 68520 Postages & Courier 67730 By-Laws, Annual Reports 68620 By-Laws, Annual Reports

68110 Depreciation - Data Processing Equipment 68630 Miscellaneous Operating

Expenses

68120 Depreciation - Furniture & Fitting 68910 Depreciation -Data Processing Equipment

68130 Depreciation - Office Equipment 68920 Depreciation - Furniture & Fitting

68930 Depreciation - Office Equipment

of 83

Appendix Q: Allocation percentages computed by AHPETC were different from our computations for certain months

Month

Information Provided by AHTC PwC’s Computation

Difference ($)

Allocation percentages

from the Property

Master file

Common expenses

allocated to PE ($)

Allocation percentages from the re-

run Property Master file

Common expenses

allocated to PE using the re-run

percentages ($)

[A] [B] [C] [D] =[C]/[A]*[B] [E]=[B]-[D] Apr-14 20.56% 5,361.36 20.55% 5,358.75 2.61 May-14 20.56% 16,832.10 20.55% 16,823.91 8.19 Jun-14 20.70% 11,684.60 20.71% 11,690.24 (5.64) Jul-14 20.78% 25,088.39 20.78% 25,088.39 0.00 Aug-14 20.78% 15,671.13 20.78% 15,671.13 0.00 Sep-14 20.78% 17,246.51 20.78% 17,246.51 0.00 Oct-14 20.56% 10,906.38 20.56% 10,906.38 0.00 Nov-14 20.56% 10,869.55 20.31% 10,737.38 132.17 Dec-14 20.29% 14,165.92 20.34% 14,200.83 (34.91) Jan-15 20.29% 23,585.71 20.22% 23,504.34 81.37 Feb-15 20.20% -68 20.20% - - Mar-15 20.20% 98,136.91 20.18% 98,039.75 97.16 Total

249,548.56

249,267.61 280.95

68 Expenses in February 2015 were allocated in March 2015.

of 83

Appendix R: List of common expenses in November 2015

a) Common expenses allocated based on October 2015 percentages

GL Code Description

Total Amount

($)

Amount allocated to PE based on

October percentages

($) [A]


November Percentages

($) [B]

Difference ($)

[C]=[A]-[B]

67110 Computer Services 10,011.50 2,086.4 2,076.39 10.01 67120 Computer Maintenance 29,285.30 6,103.06 6,073.77 29.29 67560 Search Fee 780.00 162.55 161.77 0.78 67715 Consultation Fees 4,250.00 885.70 881.45 4.25 68010 Publicity 5,317.04 1,108.07 1,102.75 5.32 68020 Advertising 342.53 71.39 71.04 0.35 68140 Office Upkeep / Repairs 2,255.40 470.03 467.77 2.26 68160 Office Supplies 1,989.00 414.51 412.52 1.99 68180 Printing & Stationery 13,819.40 2,879.95 2,866.14 13.81 68210 Councillor Allowance 4,800.00 1,000.32 995.52 4.80 68231 Salaries 1,465.33 305.37 303.91 1.46 68250 Skills Development Fund &

Foreign Workers Levy 146,098.00 30,446.83 30,300.73 146.10

68340 – Input GST – Non Claimable (43,002.72) (8,961.77) (8,918.76) (43.01) 68510 Telephone 19,593.69 3,848.76 4,063.73 (214.97) 68520 Postages & Courier 16,110.38 3,357.4 3,341.29 16.11 68630 Miscellaneous Operating

Expenses 80.00 16.67 16.59 0.08

68910 Depreciation -Data Processing Equipment

20,417.49 4,255.00 4,234.59 20.41

68920 Depreciation - Furniture & Fitting

2,883.52 600.93 598.04 2.89

68930 Depreciation - Office Equipment

1,740.73 362.77 361.03 1.74

Total 3.67

b) Common expenses allocated based on June percentages

GL Code Description

Total Amount

($)

Amount allocated to PE based on June

percentages ($) [A]


November percentages

($) [B]

Difference ($)

[C]=[A]-[B]

68340 – Input GST – Non Claimable 43,002.72 8,690.85 8,918.76 (227.91)

of 83

Appendix S: Sequence of events

(1) 1 March 2016 – AHTC announced that it has appointed KPMG as its accountants pursuant to the Judgment.

(2) 24 March 2016 – HDB confirmed that it has, in-principle, no objections to Pasir Ris-

Punggol Town Council’s (“PRPTC”) proposed appointment of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) as the accountants for PRPTC pursuant to the Judgment.

(3) 15 April 2016 – After consulting with PwC, PRPTC wrote to AHTC with a detailed list of

documents and/or information requested by PwC, which PwC would require to perform the tasks set out in the Judgment.

(4) 15 May 2016 – PwC submitted its finalised monthly progress report dated 30 April 2016

to PRPTC. In the report, PwC highlighted that:

(a) It has still not been given access by AHTC to the necessary documents and/or information; and

(b) Until the necessary documents and information and/or access to such documents and information have been given to PwC, PwC is unable to perform the review of past payments of AHPETC.

(5) 30 May 2016 – PRPTC announced that it has appointed PwC as its accountants pursuant

to the Judgment and published and released PwC’s monthly progress report dated 30 April 2016.

(6) 6 June 2016 – HDB wrote to both Town Councils (“TCs”) and their respective

accountants, noting the disagreement between the two TCs (in their respective media statements on 30 May 2016 and 1 June 2016) over the granting of access to AHTC’s documents to PwC. Accordingly, HDB invited both the TCs and their respective accountants to attend a meeting at HDB to discuss and coordinate the implementation details for the accountants’ review of past payments.

(7) 15 June 2016 – The proposed meeting was held at HDB, where PRPTC, PwC and KPMG

attended. However, AHTC did not attend this meeting. At the meeting, PwC raised again the issue that it has not been given the necessary documents and/or information by AHTC required to perform the review of past payments. KPMG indicated that it was willing to share its access to the relevant documents with PwC, if AHTC agreed.

(8) 8 July 2016 – A further hearing took place before the Court of Appeal (“CA”), where the

CA directed that the two sets of accountants (i.e. KPMG and PwC) “should communicate directly with one another and afford each other such access as may reasonably be required to safeguard each party’s interests”.

of 83

(9) 11 July 2016 – The Attorney-General’s Chambers conveyed the CA’s directions to PRPTC, which, in turn, conveyed this to PwC.

(10) 18 July 2016 – Pursuant to the CA’s directions, PwC wrote to KPMG:

(a) Setting out a preliminary list of documents and/or information that PwC would

like to have access to, as a matter of priority, to be able to perform its tasks; and

(b) Proposing a meeting with KPMG to discuss, amongst others, access to such documents and/or information, as well as the scope of review and methodology for review of past payments.

(11) 22 July 2016 to 28 July 2016 – Correspondence were exchanged between PRPTC and

AHTC in relation to PwC’s access to the necessary documents and/or information. There was an impasse between the two TCs, as AHTC insisted on imposing conditions, including the giving of certain conflict undertaking, on the provision of access, documents and/or information to PwC.

(12) 27 July 2016 – Pursuant to the request made by PwC in its letter dated 18 July 2016, a

meeting took place between KPMG and PwC. At this meeting, KPMG indicated that it was happy to share its documents and/or information with PwC, but this was subject to AHTC’s agreement.

(13) 8 August 2016 – Given the impasse between the TCs, PRPTC, through its lawyers, Drew

& Napier LLC (“D&N”), applied to the CA on 8 August 2016 for an urgent hearing. (14) 18 August 2016 – At the convened CA hearing, CA directed that:

(a) AHTC shall release the Punggol East (“PE”) documents (the “Category 1 Documents”) to PRPTC / PwC without the imposition of any condition; and

(b) PRPTC / PwC be also given access to all the remaining documents (the “Category 2 Documents”), save that for those specific documents which AHTC has concerns, the TCs’ solicitors, with the assistance of the accountants, are to work out the conditions upon which these documents can be released to PRPTC / PwC.

(15) 22 August 2016 – Pursuant to the latest CA’s directions, PwC wrote to KPMG to ask for

the Category 1 Documents to be provided as soon as possible. (16) 24 August 2016 – PwC also met with KPMG on 24 August 2016 to follow up on the

documents, and were informed by KPMG that AHTC would be sending over the Category 1 Documents on 25 August 2016.

(17) 25 August 2016 – AHTC (through KPMG) provided PwC with limited Category 1

Documents, namely:

of 83

(a) A CD-ROM containing General Ledger data extract for PE from 1 May 2013 to 30 November 2015 (“GL Data”);

(b) A list of “live” contracts handed over to PRPTC (without the actual contracts); and (c) a list of expired contracts taken from PRPTC (without the actual contracts). In so far as the GL Data was concerned, it was bereft of context; without any vendor master listing and mapping table (to explain, for instance, the different codes, fields and other attributes in the excel files / tables), PwC was unable to understand and/or make any sense of the numbers and data contained in the excel files / table.

(18) 30 August 2016 - PwC wrote to KPMG to point out that the Category 1 Documents

provided were limited and incomplete. PwC also set out in this letter a list of documents and/or information which, in its view, ought to exist in relation to the Category 1 Documents and requested that these documents and/or information be provided to PwC on an urgent basis, and, in any event, no later than the close of business on 1 September 2016.

(19) 31 August 2016 – At PwC’s request, PwC and its lawyers, Allen & Gledhill LLP (“A&G”),

met up with KPMG and its lawyers, Shook Lin & Bok (“SLB”) to discuss, amongst others, the outstanding documents and how the accountants can better co-ordinate their review of past payments. At this meeting, KPMG, again, indicated that it was prepared to share its access to the relevant documents and/or information with PwC, subject to AHTC’s consent. On the same day, PRPTC also wrote to HDB to seek an extension of the deadline for submission of PwC’s report on the review of past payments (which was originally due on 31 August 2016).

(20) 6 September 2016 – AHTC (in a letter dated 5 September 2016 through KPMG) provided

PwC with selected additional but limited Category 1 Documents, namely:

(a) A list of PE-related vendors;

(b) Old and new COA mapping chart; and

(c) Raw GL (old database) extract for FY2013-14. Save for these 3 items, the list of documents and/or information (in relation to Category 1 Documents) set out in PwC’s letter dated 30 August 2016 remained outstanding.

(21) 13 September 2016 – HDB wrote to PRPTC (copying PwC), informing PRPTC that given

that PwC has yet to obtain access to the necessary documents, HDB has in-principle no objection to PRPTC’s request for the deadline for the submission of PwC’s report on its review of past payments to be extended to 30 November 2016. HDB also requested that PwC submit to HDB an interim update of its review by 15 October 2016.

of 83

(22) 16 September 2016 – Pursuant to the CA’s directions given on 18 August 2016 and at D&N’s invitation, a meeting took place between D&N, AHTC’s lawyers, Peter Loh LLC (“PL”), PwC, A&G, KPMG and SLB to discuss the provision of the Category 1 and Category 2 Documents. At this meeting, amongst others:

(a) AHTC’s lawyer, Mr Peter Loh, indicated that he was not aware that there were still

outstanding Category 1 Documents not provided to PwC (as he had not been kept in the loop by his client on this), and that he would procure AHTC to provide the remaining outstanding documents to PwC.

(b) Mr Peter Loh also indicated that he would ask AHTC to permit PwC to attend at

AHTC’s premises together with KPMG so that PwC could be given access to all the necessary documents.

(c) KPMG offered to set up a meeting for PwC with the relevant personnel in AHTC

for the relevant personnel to explain the GL Data to PwC.

(d) PwC further raised the possibility of KPMG sharing KPMG’s working papers on its review of past payments so far, as this may help to avoid a duplication in work between the accountants.

(23) 20 September 2016 – D&N wrote to PL, copying, amongst others, PwC’s solicitors, A&G,

to set out a record of the meeting and the agreements reached at the meeting on 16 September 2016.

(24) 21 September 2016 – PwC received an excel file from AHTC containing the column

names and descriptions of the data received on 6 September 2016. (25) 22 September 2016 – A&G wrote on behalf of PwC in response to D&N’s letter of 20

September 2016 to confirm the record of the meeting and to request that:

(a) D&N let A&G know once D&N receives confirmation from AHTC that PwC is permitted to attend at AHTC’s premises to be given access to the remaining outstanding Category 1 Documents and all of the Category 2 Documents; and

(b) PL and/or SLB confirm if PwC can be given access to KPMG’s working papers (as

requested at the 16 September 2016 meeting).

On the same day, PwC also wrote separately to KPMG to follow up again on the outstanding Category 1 Documents.

(26) 27 September 2016 – A&G received a letter from PL enclosing PL’s reply to D&N’s letter

dated 20 September 2016. PL’s reply stated, amongst others, that PL was still taking instructions from AHTC as to whether KPMG was permitted to allow PwC to attend at AHTC’s premises so that PwC could be given access to all of the documents.

of 83

(27) 28 September 2016 – A working-level meeting was arranged by KPMG for PwC, KPMG and AHTC to meet, in order for the relevant personnel from AHTC to explain some of the codes in the GL Data to PwC. At this meeting, PwC had also asked generally about the outstanding Category 1 and Category 2 Documents, and the AHTC personnel indicated that AHTC was currently evaluating and prioritising requests (for documents and/or information), and could only provide an update in 1 to 1.5 weeks’ time.

(28) 29 September 2016 – D&N responded to PL’s letter dated 27 September 2016, copying,

amongst others, A&G. (29) 30 September 2016 – AHTC provided some answers to PwC’s queries in relation to the

GL Data. (30) 5 October 2016 – A&G received a letter from PL enclosing PL’s reply to D&N’s letter

dated 29 September 2016. In PL’s reply, it was (surprisingly) stated (at paragraph 15) that “[AHTC’s] understanding … was that PwC would inform KPMG and/or our client what documents they require after the General Ledger data is sorted out. We will then revisit the issue of the specific concerns in relation to confidentiality of specific parts of those documents (where necessary) at a later date and the necessary conditions for access to be granted to PRPTC and PwC”.

(31) 28 October 2016 – The Court of Appeal released its Judgment, which, amongst others, made the following orders: (a) AHTC is to provide Pasir-Ris Punggol Town Council (“PRPTC”) /

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”) with access to the Category 1 and Category 2 Documents forthwith, and in any event no later than 4 November 2016; and

(b) KPMG LLP (“KPMG”) is to inform the Court of Appeal by letter copied to other parties if it objects to the release of its working papers to PwC (to expedite the audit process), and, if so, on what basis.

(32) 31 October 2016 – KPMG released its report on its review of past payments of Aljunied-

Hougang Punggol East Town Council (the “KPMG Report”). We note that the KPMG Report covers past payments that concerned the entire Town Council, including Punggol East (“PE”).

On the same day, pursuant to the Judgment, PwC was also granted access by AHTC to both Categories 1 and 2 Documents at AHTC’s offices.

(33) 4 to 25 November 2016 – PwC met with AHTC and/or KPMG on the following key occasions to, amongst others, discuss and/or understand the General Ledger data and documents provided, seek further documents and/or clarifications, discuss and/or understand the findings made by KPMG in the KPMG Report, and discuss how KPMG and PwC can co-operate and work together to avoid duplication of work and to ensure that PwC can complete its review expeditiously:

of 83

(a) PwC met with AHTC and KPMG on 4 November 2016 for a walkthrough of the purchases and payments process and internal controls of AHTC, and to agree on the process for KPMG to share with PwC the specific samples of payments tested pertaining to PE’s payments, including details of the procedures performed, evidence gathered and findings.

(b) PwC met with KPMG on 18 November 2016 to understand their procedures in

connecting the different datasets (i.e. General Ledger, Work Order, Invoices and Payment), to understand their procedures in identifying their payment population using the datasets, and to clarify their data analytics parameters used to generate results for follow up procedure.

(c) PwC met with KPMG on 25 November 2016 to seek further clarification on their procedures performed and/or evidence gathered on selected transactions and/or payments.

(34) 16 November 2016 – KPMG’s solicitors, Shook Lin & Bok LLP, wrote to the Court of Appeal to inform the Court that it would be “inappropriate” for KPMG to release its working papers to PwC.

(35) 25 November 2016 – PwC’s solicitors, Allen and Gledhill LLP, wrote to the Court of Appeal to inform the Court that KPMG has informed PwC that they are prepared to offer any assistance to PwC for PwC’s review / scope of work (including in relation to documents and/or information received by PwC from AHTC, as well as investigations and inquiries PwC may undertake on the relevant issues). PwC’s position is that it will accept such arrangement for now so as to avoid protracted interactions on the need to obtain and review KPMG’s working papers, on the basis that full cooperation will be given by KPMG. However, should it become necessary in the future to ask for the release of the working papers, PwC’s right to do so is expressly reserved.

(36) 28 November 2016 – The Court of Appeal noted the position of the accountants in

relation to KPMG’s working papers and that PwC has reserved its right to apply for the release of the papers in the future. The Court further indicated that it will consider the propriety of such an application if and when one is made.

(37) 27 January 2017 – PwC wrote to AHTC to request further and/or outstanding

information and/or documents, which PwC was still unable to retrieve and/or obtain from the Town Council’s offices and/or from the Town Council’s staff.

(38) 3 February 2017 – AHTC replied to PwC’s document request of 27 January 2017, stating that it would provide some of the requested documents. However, for the rest of the documents, AHTC claimed that they were either “Category 3” documents which did not relate to PE at all, or it has already disclosed all the relevant documents to PwC.

of 83

Appendix T: List of paid invoices tested69

S/N Vendor70 Payment date

Category of

exception Amount ($)

1 Aetos Security 6-Nov-15 - 1,877.85

2 BSG Landscape 11-Nov-15 B 30,789.03

3 BSG Landscape 28-Nov-15 B 30,789.03

4 BSG Landscape 28-Nov-15 B 898.80

5 Campaign 28-Nov-15 A, B 80,286.29

6 Campaign 28-Nov-15 A, B 80,286.29

7 Campaign 28-Nov-15 A, B 80,286.29

8 Campaign 28-Nov-15 A, B 24,311.45

9 Campaign 28-Nov-15 A, B 24,311.45

10 Campaign 28-Nov-15 A, B 24,311.45

11 Certis Cisco 28-Nov-15 B 769.11

12 Certis Cisco 28-Nov-15 B 758.73

13 Citicon 28-Nov-15 A, B 1,193.12

14 CKR Contract 18-Nov-15 - 112,804.09

15 CWB Solutions 20-Nov-15 - 1,150.95

16 EM Services 28-Nov-15 B 1,151.87

17 EM Services 28-Nov-15 B 610.97

18 EM Services 28-Nov-15 B 610.97

19 Empire 28-Nov-15 B 8,991.18

20 Empire 28-Nov-15 A, B 8,991.18

21 Empire 28-Nov-15 B 8,991.18

22 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 4,337.78

69 Data extracted from payment documents. 70 Refer to Appendix AA for list of abbreviations used for vendors.

of 83


Category of


23 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 4,337.78

24 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 4,337.78

25 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 3,420.79

26 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 3,420.79

27 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 3,420.79

28 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 2,836.57

29 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 A 2,836.57

30 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 2,836.57

31 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 2,836.57

32 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 2,362.56

33 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,688.46

34 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,688.46

35 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,332.15

36 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,332.15

37 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 A 1,332.15

38 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,332.15

39 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,151.32

40 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,151.32

41 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,151.32

42 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,151.32

43 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 A 1,151.32

44 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 A 1,151.32

45 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,151.32

46 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 1,151.32

of 83


Category of


47 Fujitec 26-Nov-15 - 813.20

48 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 4,314.24

49 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 4,314.24

50 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 3,054.85

51 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 1,572.90

52 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 991.89

53 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 888.10

54 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 888.10

55 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 888.10

56 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 888.10

57 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 872.05

58 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 781.10

59 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 A 781.10

60 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 781.10

61 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 781.10

62 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 781.10

63 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 781.10

64 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 751.14

65 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 751.14

66 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 751.14

67 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 750.07

68 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 631.30

69 Fujitec 28-Nov-15 - 600.27

70 HDB 30-Nov-15 - 4,850.00

of 83


Category of


71 J Keart 13-Nov-15 B 3,873.40

72 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 3,873.40

73 J Keart 28-Nov-15 A, B 3,873.40

74 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 1,337.50

75 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 1,107.45

76 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 1,086.05

77 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 898.80

78 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 898.80

79 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 663.40

80 J Keart 28-Nov-15 B 513.60

81 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 C 2,097.20

82 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

83 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

84 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

85 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

86 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

87 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

88 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

89 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

90 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

91 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

92 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

93 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

94 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

of 83


Category of


95 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

96 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

97 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

98 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

99 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

100 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

101 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

102 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

103 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

104 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

105 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

106 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

107 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

108 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

109 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40


111 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

112 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

113 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40

114 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 - 1,626.40



117 Mitsubishi 26-Nov-15 C 813.20

118 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 31,219.39

of 83


Category of










127 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

128 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

129 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

130 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

131 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

132 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

133 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

134 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

135 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

136 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

137 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

138 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

139 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

140 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

141 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

142 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

of 83


Category of


143 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

144 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

145 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

146 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

147 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

148 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00

149 Mitsubishi 27-Nov-15 - 749.00








157 Mitsubishi 28-Nov-15 - 31,219.39

158 NETS 23-Nov-15 B 1,071.56

159 Promptech 11-Nov-15 B 2,297.65

160 Propell 11-Nov-15 B 3,317.00

161 Propell 28-Nov-15 B 3,648.70

162 Propell 28-Nov-15 A. B 1,055.37

163 Propell 28-Nov-15 A, B 913.53

164 Propell 28-Nov-15 A, B 883.76

165 Propell 28-Nov-15 A, B 774.89

166 Propell 28-Nov-15 A, B 714.85

of 83


Category of


167 Propell 28-Nov-15 A, B 685.00

168 QS Consultants 28-Nov-15 - 2,436.74

169 Red-Power 13-Nov-15 B 3,365.69

170 Red-Power 13-Nov-15 B 3,322.35

171 Red-Power 28-Nov-15 B 3,365.69

172 Red-Power 28-Nov-15 B 3,322.35

173 Red-Power 28-Nov-15 B 674.10

174 Red-Power 28-Nov-15 B 620.60

175 Sigma Elevator 27-Nov-15 - 1,727.62


177 Sigma Elevator 27-Nov-15 - 642.00


179 Surbana 27-Nov-15 - 11,708.03

180 Surbana 27-Nov-15 - 11,639.45

181 Titan 11-Nov-15 A, B 97,964.57

182 Titan 28-Nov-15 A, B 97,964.57

183 Uniquetech 11-Nov-15 B 1,912.84







190 Uniquetech 28-Nov-15 B 966.11

of 83


Category of


191 Uniquetech 28-Nov-15 B 699.71

192 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 6,038.01

193 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

194 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

195 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

196 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

197 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

198 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

199 Willoglen 26-Nov-15 - 4,025.34

200 YL Integrated 11-Nov-15 B 8,166.24

Total 1,099,690.95

of 83

Appendix U: Monthly allocation percentages for each of the division under AHPETC

Month BP71 EU1 HG1 KB1 PE1 PL1 SG1

May 2013 13.47% 15.19% 11.90% 12.90% 19.57% 17.26% 9.71% June 2013 13.42% 15.13% 11.88% 12.85% 19.86% 17.19% 9.67% July 2013 13.42% 15.13% 11.88% 12.85% 19.86% 17.19% 9.67%

August 2013 13.42% 15.13% 11.88% 12.85% 19.86% 17.19% 9.67% September 2013 13.43% 15.13% 11.87% 12.85% 19.86% 17.19% 9.67%

October 2013 13.43% 15.13% 11.87% 12.85% 19.85% 17.19% 9.68% November 2013 13.43% 15.13% 11.87% 12.85% 19.85% 17.19% 9.68% December 2013 13.43% 15.13% 11.87% 12.85% 19.85% 17.19% 9.68% January 2014 13.78% 15.07% 11.81% 12.80% 19.78% 17.12% 9.64% February 2014 13.78% 15.07% 11.81% 12.80% 19.78% 17.12% 9.64%

March 2014 13.78% 15.07% 11.81% 12.80% 19.78% 17.12% 9.64% April 2014 14.52% 15.06% 10.75% 12.41% 20.56% 17.13% 9.57% May 2014 14.52% 15.06% 10.75% 12.41% 20.56% 17.13% 9.57% June 2014 14.62% 15.16% 10.43% 12.51% 20.70% 17.25% 9.33% July 2014 14.67% 15.21% 10.12% 12.55% 20.78% 17.31% 9.36%


October 2014 15.57% 15.05% 10.02% 12.42% 20.56% 17.12% 9.26% November 2014 15.57% 15.05% 10.02% 12.42% 20.56% 17.12% 9.26% December 2014 16.49% 14.90% 9.91% 12.29% 20.29% 16.95% 9.17% January 2015 16.49% 14.90% 9.91% 12.29% 20.29% 16.95% 9.17% February 2015 16.90% 14.94% 9.84% 12.20% 20.20% 16.82% 9.10%

March 2015 16.90% 14.94% 9.84% 12.20% 20.20% 16.82% 9.10% April 2015 16.82% 14.88% 10.23% 12.15% 20.11% 16.75% 9.06% May 2015 16.82% 14.88% 10.23% 12.15% 20.11% 16.75% 9.06% June 2015 16.80% 14.86% 10.22% 12.13% 20.21% 16.73% 9.05% July 2015 16.80% 14.82% 10.19% 12.10% 20.39% 16.68% 9.02%


October 2015 16.72% 14.73% 10.14% 12.03% 20.84% 16.58% 8.96% November 2015 16.80% 14.66% 10.09% 12.29% 20.74% 16.50% 8.92%

71 BP = Bedok Reservoir-Punggol Division EU = Eunos Division HG = Hougang SMC KB = Kaki Bukit Division PE = Punggol - East SMC PL = Paya Lebar Division SG = Serangoon Division

of 83

Appendix V: Number of Residential, Commercial and Parking Lots EDUs for PE for the period 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015

Month Number of Residential

EDUs

Number of Commercial

EDUs

Number of Parking Lots

EDUs

Total Number of EDUs

Apr-14 14949 106 2138.80 17194 May-14 14949 106 2138.80 17194 Jun-14 14949 106 2138.80 17194 Jul-14 14949 108 2138.80 17196 Aug-14 14949 108 2138.80 17196 Sep-14 14949 108 2138.80 17196 Oct-14 14949 108 2138.80 17196 Nov-14 14949 112 2138.80 17200 Dec-14 14949 110 2138.80 17198 Jan-15 14949 112 2138.80 17200 Feb-15 14949 112 2138.83 17200 Mar-15 14949 112 2138.83 17200 Apr-15 14949 112 2138.53 17200 May-15 14949 112 2138.53 17200 Jun-15 15051 112 2138.53 17302 Jul-15 15255 112 2138.53 17506 Aug-15 15357 112 2257.47 17726 Sep-15 15425 112 2257.47 17794 Oct-15 15629 112 2257.47 17998 Nov-15 15629 112 2257.47 17998

of 83

Appendix W: Allocation of Managing Agent fees to PE

Month

Number of residential

units Rate72 Amount

($)

Number of commercial

units Rate2 Amount

($)

Number of

parking lots units

Rate2 Amount ($)

[A] [B] [C]=[A]*[B] [D] [E] [F]=[D]*[E] [G] [H] [I]=[G]*[H] April 2014 14,949 7.42958 111,064.79 51 14.92485435 761.17 12,832.80 0.58300043 7,481.53 May 2014 14,949 7.42958 111,064.79 51 14.92485435 761.17 12,832.80 0.58300043 7,481.53 June 2014 14,949 7.42958 111,064.79 51 14.92485435 761.17 12,832.80 0.58300043 7,481.53

1st-14th July 2014

14,949 7.42958 50,158.29 51 14.92485435 343.75 12,832.80 0.58300043 3,378.75

15th-31st July 2014

14,949 7.8753595 64,560.93 51 15.8203039 442.46 12,832.80 0.6179796 4,348.93

August 2014 14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41 September

2014 14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

October 2014

14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

November 2014

14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

December 2014

14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

January 2015

14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

February 2015

14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

March 2015 14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41 April 2015 14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41 May 2015 14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41 June 2015 14,949 7.8753595 117,728.75 51 15.8203039 806.84 12,832.80 0.6179796 7,930.41

1st-14th July 2015

14,949 7.8753595 53,167.82 51 15.8203039 364.38 12,832.80 0.6179796 3,581.47

Sub-total

1,796,097.66

12,309.34

120,988.25 Total

Management agent fees

allocated to PE

1,929,395.25

72 The unit price for each property category and each month was derived by dividing its total price for the period over the total units of that property category stated in the MA contract with FMSS (Contract reference: OT/0264/12).

of 83

Appendix X: Common expenses that should be allocated to PE

of 83

Appendix Y: Detailed work flow for Procurement to Payments Process 1. Quotation process

Purchase ≤ $70,000

Request for quotation

Amount< $3k

Requesting department

obtains minimum 3

verbal/ written quotes

Circulation of awarded quotation

to Town Council

Amount$3k to $5k

Requesting department sends and

obtains invitation to

quote ("ITQ") to minimum 3

vendors

Amount$5k to $70k

Contracts Department sends and obtains ITQ to

minimum 3 vendors

Waiver of quotation

Amount< $3k

Waiver to be approved by Chairman or authorized

officer

Amount$3k to $70k

Waiver to be approved by

Chairman

of 83

2. Tender process – Invitation to tender

Purchase > $70k

Prepare tender documents

Tender notice meets requirements?

Publish tender notice

Award of contract

Waiver of tender

Submission of waiver approval

Amount > $100k

Waiver to be Approved by Town

Council

Waiver to be Approved by

Chairman

Approval from Chairman for shorter tender notice period

of 83

3. Tender process – award of contract

Tender deposit paid and tender documents submitted

Opening of tender box by authorized officer

Approval of provisional tender results by Chairman

Publish tender prices on Town Council's website

Approval of tender evaluation report by Chairman of Tender Committee

Publish final tender results on AHTC's website

Circulation of awarded tender to Town Council

Approval of Letter of Award ("LOA") by Chairman

Contracts Department sends approvd LOA to successdul tenderer

Submission of security deposit and insurance policies by tenderers

Signed contract

of 83

4. Contract variation or extension of contract

Contract variations or extension of

contracts

Contracts with variation order

("VO")

Request for VO ("RVO") by

Contract Department

Approval of RVO by Chairman

Revised contract sum

Expiring contract

Call for new tender by user or Contract

Department

Extension of contract

Approval by Tender Commitee

Approval of contract

renewal/extension letter by Chairman

Contracts department sends contract renewal/

extension letter

Acceptance of contract renewal/ extension letter by

vendor

Tender for new contact

Invitation to tender

of 83

5. Issuance of Written Instruction (“WI”)

Routine estate work?

Issuance of WOOfficer prepares WI with description of required goods and

services

Approval of WI by Department Manager

Issue approved WI to vendor

Issuance of WO

Yes No

of 83

6. Issuance of Work Orders (“WO”)

Estate works

Routine estate works?

Project related expenses?

Require WO?

Create WO in accounting system

WO is closed and posted in accounting

system

Issue approved WO to vendor

Receive invoice from vendor

Accounts payable process

Contractor sends progress claim to

consultant

Consultant certifies works performed

Issuance of WI

Officer inspects goods received or services rendered

Approval of inspection results by

authorized officer

Yes No

Yes No

of 83

7. Payment processing

Prepare payment voucher ("PV") by Finance & Accounts Assistant

Approval of PV by cheque signatories

Payment by cheque or GIRO?

Cheque signed by cheque signatories

GIRO application signed by bank signatories

of 83

Appendix Z: List of common expenses, service providers and amount for the period from 1 April 2014 to 30 November 2015

a) Common expenses recorded via accounts payable module

Description Vendor Name Amount ($)

No. of Transactions

Related Party Transactions?

Managing Agent Fees

FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 8,902,369.41 21 Yes Total 8,902,369.41 21

Computer Maintenance

Eminet Pte Ltd 11,500.00 1 No Forgotten Technologies Pte Ltd 34,400.00 4 No Hitachi Sunway Information Systems 37,080.00 1 No

Imran Bin Ridae 454.21 2 No One Esystem 15,375.00 2 No Oracle Corporation Singapore Pte Ltd - 2 No S & I Systems Pte Ltd 127,907.01 10 No Softsource Solutions Pte Ltd 2,439.00 1 No

Total 229,155.22 23

Skills Development

Fund & Foreign Workers Levy

CPF Board 218,938.37 9 No Imran Bin Ridae 16.00 1 No

Total 218,954.37 10

Publicity

ACTC Translation Centre Pte Ltd 1,469.64 10 No Aljunied Constituency Commmittee (12,398.57) 2 No Alliance Graphic Pte Ltd 200.00 1 No Allmaster Enterprise 66,158.00 17 No Brandz Wave 11,000.00 21 No Chye Hup Seng Trading Co 650.00 3 No FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 272.19 3 Yes Foto88 Holdings Pte Ltd 3,600.00 1 No Hougang Constituency Committee (2,479.71) 2 No Lagoon Events & Entertainment Pte Ltd

26,310.00 1 No

Lu Miaoling Chelsea 20.56 1 No Propell Intergrated Pte Ltd 299.20 1 No Punggol East Constituency Committee

(2,479.71) 2 No

Rde Construction Pte Ltd 3,155.62 1 No Singapore Press Holdings Limited 1,306.74 13 No Stamford Press Pte Ltd 44,080.00 1 No The Fat Farmer 1,085.00 5 No The Printlodge Pte Ltd 63,326.07 3 No Tongying Construction Pte Ltd 2,704.60 1 No V3 Teletech Pte Ltd 1,808.00 3 No Valliyammai D/O V. Shanmugam 565.70 12 No Visual Publish Pte Ltd 1,785.00 3 No

Total 212,438.33 107

of 83


No. of Transactions


Telephone

M1 Limited 1,722.46 18 No Marine Parade Town Council 6,353.51 1 No Singtel 175,556.50 73 No

Total 183,632.47 92

Computer Services

FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 12,219.32 7 Yes Hitachi Sunway Information Systems 156,602.50 11 No Newmedia Express Pte Ltd 192.00 1 No One Esystem 9,957.50 2 No Png Eng Huat 46.73 1 No

Total 179,018.05 22

Salaries

CPF Board 6,514.00 5 No Imran Bin Ridae 332.44 2 No Raffles Medical Group Ltd 2,781.55 7 No Salary 16,093.62 2 No Times Software Pte Ltd 132,898.66 1 No

Total 158,620.27 17

Postages & Courier

Dicklin Corporation (Pte)Ltd 80.00 1 No Dpex Pte Ltd 14,850.00 15 No FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 1,394.82 10 Yes Imran Bin Ridae 903.29 4 No Singapore Post Limited 104,457.62 49 No Steiner Courier Pte Ltd 3,400.00 4 No

Total 125,085.73 83

Printing & Stationery

ACP Office Supplies Pte Ltd 1,757.20 1 No Advance Rubber Stamp Trading 1,958.50 16 No Ampway Industries Pte Ltd 2,066.40 7 No Dicklin Corporation (Pte)Ltd 2,142.66 6 No Dots Technology & Trading 545.60 1 No Evergreen Group Pte Ltd 9,578.03 21 No Fuji Xerox Singapore Pte Ltd 646.53 7 No Konica Minolta Business Solutions Asia

26,787.57 125 No

Mail Expertize LLP 378.00 2 No NTT Copier Machines & Supplies 300.00 20 No Printex Offset Printing Co. 20,000.00 26 No Ram I Pte Ltd 2,793.60 4 No Secura Singapore Pte Ltd 4,500.00 2 No Toh-Shi Printing Singapore Pte Ltd 18,787.40 38 No

Total 92,241.49 276

Councilor Allowance

Azman Bin Mohamed Osman 5,400.00 18 No Chua Zhi Hon 6,000.00 20 No David Ong Sin Gee 6,000.00 20 No Foo Seck Guan 6,000.00 20 No Francis Seet Yiew Chong 600.00 2 No

of 83


No. of Transactions


Councilor Allowance

Goh Anthony 6,000.00 20 No Han Joon Kwang 5,400.00 18 No John Chua 6,000.00 20 No Johnny Lim Joo Eng 300.00 1 No Lim Joo Eng 5,700.00 19 No Lim Tee Tee 600.00 2 No Mahfuz Bin Wan Abdullah 6,000.00 20 No Muhammad Fadli Bin Mohammed Fawzi

5,700.00 19 No

Ng Swee Bee 6,000.00 20 No Rebecca Chin Lan Ping 5,700.00 19 No Shafie Bin Md Rased 300.00 1 No Tan Hui Ying Randi 600.00 2 No Teo Xiang Ping Anthony 6,000.00 20 No Yip Tai Ann 5,700.00 19 No

Total 84,000.00 280

Office Upkeep / Repairs

ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd 28,440.00 18 No C P Lee Building & Plumbing Pte Ltd 116.97 8 No Crown Worldwide Pte Ltd 12,452.71 20 No Dicklin Corporation (Pte)Ltd 1,080.00 2 No Konica Minolta Business Solutions Asia

330.00 1 No

NTT Copier Machines & Supplies 250.00 1 No Rde Construction Pte Ltd 439.25 5 No Rentokil 120.00 1 No Trilight (Singapore) 120.00 1 No Vine-Cool Engineering Pte Ltd 23,125.00 56 No

Total 66,473.93 113

Employer's CPF

CPF Board 48,891.50 3 No Imran Bin Ridae 280.87 1 No

Total 49,172.37 4

Consultation Fees

Business Assurance 33,440.00 6 No OCBC Bank 4,250.00 2 No

Total 37,690.00 8

Office Supplies

Alsco Pte Ltd 950.00 19 No FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 874.01 11 Yes Fuji Xerox Singapore Pte Ltd 47.30 1 No Imran Bin Ridae 318.06 3 No Irawan Garden And Servicing 17,240.00 20 No Qmt Industrial & Safety Pte Ltd 2,370.00 1 No Refresh Water Trading Pte Ltd 905.00 10 No Wanin Industries Pte Ltd 4,672.00 18 No

Total 27,376.37 83

Fire Insurance Housing & Development Board 25,102.25 1 No

Total 25,102.25 1

of 83


No. of Transactions


Public Liability

Ava Insurance Brokers Pte Ltd 16,000.00 1 No FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 14.02 1 Yes

Total 16,014.02 2

Advertising

FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 124.68 1 Yes Singapore Press Holdings Limited 11,360.00 7 No Toppan Leefung Pte Ltd 3,139.81 10 No

Total 14,624.49 18

Miscellaneous Operating Expenses

Housing & Development Board 300.00 1 No Imran Bin Ridae 3,260.00 3 No Ministry Of Manpower 290.00 3 No SP Services Ltd 1,800.00 6 No Singapore Institute Of Management 125.00 1 No Toppan Leefung Pte Ltd 500.00 1 No

Total 6,275.00 15

Transport Claim

FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 1,291.59 23 Yes Housing & Development Board 3,291.68 5 No Imran Bin Ridae 228.53 2 No

Total 4,811.80 30

Search Fee

Land Transport Authority 3,295.00 16 No OCBC Bank 500.00 1 No

Total 3,795.00 17

Hospitality & Refreshment

FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 3,259.00 8 Yes Imran Bin Ridae 165.00 1 No OCBC Bank 136.00 1 No

Total 3,560.00 10

Newspaper Publishment

Imran Bin Ridae 1,476.00 2 No Total 1,476.00 2

Insurance - Money

NTUC Income 900.00 1 No Total 900.00 1

Commercial All Risks


Bank Charges

ATL Maintenance Pte Ltd (60.00) 1 No DBS Bank Ltd 50.00 1 No Hitachi Sunway Information Systems (60.00) 1 No Malayan Banking Berhad 50.00 1 No National Australia Bank 70.00 2 No OCBC Bank 230.00 5 No Salary 15.00 1 No United Overseas Bank (Cancel Chq) 120.00 2 No United Overseas Bank Ltd 186.92 1 No

Total 601.92 15

Insurance - Plate Glass


of 83


No. of Transactions


Goodwill Activities

FM Solutions & Services Pte Ltd 23.92 1 Yes

Total 23.92 1

Total 10,644,292.41

b) Common expenses recorded via manual journal entries

Description Amount ($)

Depreciation - Data Processing Equipment

456,788.53

Depreciation - Furniture & Fitting 58,864.48 Input GST - Non Claimable 43,002.72 Depreciation - Office Equipment 42,623.33 Public Liability 39,404.55 Consultation Fees 8,000.00 Telephone 7,296.36 Skill Development Fund & Foreign Workers Levy

4,215.00

Computer Services 2,934.00 Printing & Stationery 2,136.53 Office Supplies 1,037.00 Money 691.08 Miscellaneous Operating Expenses 600.00 Commercial All Risks 537.51 Office Upkeep / Repairs 535.20 Advertising 114.18 Search Fee 110.00 Transport Claim 78.32 Plate Glass 14.83 Bank Charges (15.00) Postages & Courier (125.03) Computer Maintenance (4,403.18) Publicity (17,139.08)

Total 647,301.33

of 83

Appendix AA: List of abbreviations used for vendors

S/N Abbreviation used Full name

1 Aetos Security Aetos Security Management Pte

2 BSG Landscape BSG Landscape & Construction Pte Ltd

3 Campaign Campaign Complete Solutions Pte Ltd

4 Certis Cisco Certis Cisco Auxiliary Police Pte Ltd

5 Citicon Citicon Construction Pte Ltd

6 CKR Contract CKR Contract Services Pte Ltd

7 CWB Solutions CWB Solutions Pte Ltd

8 EM Services EM Services Pte Ltd

9 Empire Empire Cleaning & Pest Control (S) Pte

10 Fujitec Fujitec Singapore Corporation Ltd

11 HDB Housing & Development Board (M

12 J Keart J Keart Alliances Pte Ltd

13 Mitsubishi Mitsubishi Elevator (Singapore) Pte Ltd

14 NETS Network For Electronic Transfer

15 Promptech Promptech (M&E) Pte Ltd

16 Propell Propell Integrated Pte Ltd

17 QS Consultants QS Consultants Pte Ltd

18 Red-Power Red-Power Electrical Engineering Pte Ltd

19 Sigma Elevator Sigma Elevator Singapore Pte Ltd

20 Surbana Surbana Technologies Pte Ltd

21 Titan Titan Facilities Management Pte Ltd

22 Uniquetech Uniquetech Pte Ltd

23 Willoglen Willowglen Services Pte Ltd

24 YL Integrated YL Integrated Pte Ltd

Pasir Ris- Punggol Town Council Appendices to Past Payments … to Past... · 2019. 1. 18. ·...

Documents

Transcript of Pasir Ris- Punggol Town Council Appendices to Past Payments … to Past... · 2019. 1. 18. ·...