Businesswoman sues former relationship manager for negligence; defence claims ‘seller’s remorse’
Source: Straits Times
Article Date: 16 Sep 2025
Author: Selina Lum
The businesswoman and her husband have sued their former banking relationship manager, alleging that she was negligent for failing to monitor the prices of certain shares, which resulted in financial losses.
A Taiwan-born Singaporean businesswoman and her Canadian husband have sued their former banking relationship manager, alleging that she was negligent for failing to monitor the prices of certain shares, which resulted in financial losses.
Ms Fiona Lee Hsueh Ching claimed that Ms Loh Kia Hui, who was then at Swiss bank Julius Baer, had advised her to sell her shares in Toronto-listed Lithium Americas Corp (LAC) at C$1.53 apiece in 2017.
Ms Lee said that Ms Loh, whom she regarded as a close friend, had told her that she could earn a greater profit by making short-term trades of the stock instead of holding on to her shares.
The businesswoman said she agreed to sell the 198,600 shares after Ms Loh promised to monitor the stock price and to inform her when it fell below the target price of C$1 so that she could buy shares for short-term trading.
Two months after the sale, LAC shares were consolidated at a 5:1 ratio, which meant each share would be worth five times as much.
In her defence, Ms Loh denied giving the alleged advice and making the alleged promises.
Her lawyers contended that Ms Lee was a savvy investor who had “a serious case of seller’s remorse” and was trying to blame Ms Loh for her own decisions.
Ms Lee and her husband did not sue Julius Baer, but Ms Loh brought her former employer into the lawsuit as a third party to indemnify her against the damages or the legal costs, depending on the outcome.
A trial began in the High Court on Sept 15 to determine issues of liability. The assessment of damages will be heard separately if Ms Loh is found liable.
Ms Lee and her husband Sarge Sargeant, a Singapore permanent resident, run businesses in the food and beverage industry, including Blooie’s Roadhouse restaurant in Upper Bukit Timah Road.
Mr Sargeant is not giving evidence in the trial, as Ms Lee was the one who dealt with Ms Loh on matters pertaining to their joint account with the bank.
In their opening statement, the couple’s lawyers Pradeep Pillai and Simren Kaur Sandhu said Ms Lee and Ms Loh were “very close friends”.
They said it was this personal relationship which led Ms Loh to take on responsibilities that went beyond the contractual obligations owed by the bank to its customers.
Ms Lee said that while she is adept at options trading, she was not as familiar with stock trading, which requires research into the fundamentals of companies, market conditions and trends.
She said that on Sept 22, 2017, Ms Loh arranged to meet her at the bank’s office, where she told her there was very little activity in the account and suggested that she sell her LAC shares.
Ms Lee said she was initially reluctant to sell the shares she had accumulated over the years, but eventually did so after Ms Loh volunteered to monitor the share price and help her make short-term trades.
In March 2019, Ms Loh left the bank and another employee was assigned as the couple’s relationship manager.
Ms Lee said she realised in late 2021 that the share price had increased significantly.
She said after the sale of her shares, the share price fell below the target price many times, but she was not notified.
She alleged that Ms Loh failed to monitor the share price, failed to help her make short-term trades, and failed to conduct a proper handover of her investment portfolio.
Ms Loh’s lawyers, Senior Counsel Lok Vi Ming and Mr Qabir Sandhu, contended that the alleged meeting on Sept 22, 2017, never took place.
In their opening statement, they said the sale of the shares had earned a profit of about C$126,000 after commission, and goods and services tax.
They argued that Ms Lee’s real complaint was that she could have made even more money by holding those shares.
Julius Baer’s lawyers, Ms Rebecca Chew and Ms Priscilla Soh, said Ms Loh had never been authorised to give advice or make recommendations to Ms Lee, and the bank should not be held responsible for any loss.
In cross-examining Ms Lee, Mr Lok noted under their contract with the bank that clients are responsible for monitoring their own investments.
Ms Lee retorted that it was an “open secret” that relationship managers would help customers monitor their investments to retain them as clients.
Mr Lok suggested that Ms Lee decided to go after Ms Loh personally because she knew she had “no hope” of succeeding against the bank based on the contract.
Ms Lee replied: “The reason I didn’t sue the bank was because the bank didn’t do anything wrong.”
The trial continues on Sept 18.
Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.
10