Woman who filed numerous criminal complaints rapped for wasting court and police resources

A woman with a history of filing numerous police reports and criminal complaints over non-criminal matters has been rapped by the court for wasting resources and abuse of process.

In the current case, Ms Angeline Tan Poh Hong filed a magistrate’s complaint in 2024 against her condominium’s management, but she ignored a request to attend an interview at a police station to provide more details.

The complaint was dismissed in September by the court after two different investigation officers concluded that no crime was committed.

Ms Tan failed in her subsequent appeal against the dismissal.

In a written judgment published on Nov 27, Senior Magistrate Ng Peng Hong said: “In my view, Ms Tan is clearly abusing her access to justice and consuming too many police and judicial resources thereby depriving others of the right to timely access to justice.”

Police investigations revealed there was a pattern of Ms Tan making “excessive” police reports over noise complaints, incense burning and condo management issues.

She harassed investigation officers even after the cases had been closed. Court records also showed that she had filed no less than 11 magistrate’s complaints, of which seven involved her condo’s management. Most of the complaints were dismissed.

It shows that she has been habitually and without any reasonable grounds instituting vexatious legal proceedings, said the magistrate.

He noted that there was no right of appeal against the dismissal of a magistrate’s complaint, and that her filing may have been accepted by the court registry “on account of her insistence” and the fact that she is self-represented.

Hence, her appeal was legally unsustainable, frivolous and an abuse of the process of court, he said.

The magistrate pointed out that Ms Tan did not even specify the names of the parties against whom she was complaining.

“This is not surprising as she displayed the same attitude and insolence even with the police,” he said.

Ms Tan first appeared before the court on Oct 2, 2024, in an inquiry into her complaint.

The magistrate said he could not make out what her written complaint was, and adjourned the inquiry for her to provide specific facts.

After she clarified that the complaint was against the council members of her condo’s management corporation, the magistrate directed the police to investigate her allegations of irregularities, harassment or bullying. 

The case was heard again on May 7 for the court to consider the police’s investigation report.

In the report dated March 28, the police said Ms Tan had shown no interest in coming forward for an interview at the assigned police station.

She cited concerns regarding her identity card being given to an auxiliary police officer at the security counter, which she claimed would be a breach of the Personal Data Protection Act.

She also complained there were no parking facilities at Police Cantonment Complex and demanded that the interview be conducted at a neighbourhood police centre in Marina Bay.

The police decided not to investigate further, given that her complaints were mainly non-criminal-related incidents and that she was unwilling to provide elaboration, said the report.

The inquiry was further adjourned after Ms Tan said she wanted to contact the Commissioner of Police.

At the next hearing on July 7, she claimed her call was not returned and there was no justice.

Ms Tan, a diploma holder, alleged that she did not know how to write to the Police Commissioner.

She was given time to write to the Police Commissioner and the Public Prosecutor.

By the time the inquiry resumed on Sept 22, the police had submitted a second report, dated July 28, prepared by another investigation officer.

The report noted that the complaints raised by Ms Tan were primarily civil in nature, involving maintenance issues, management decisions, financial matters and building management policies.

The report revealed she had filed 44 reports across various police divisions and made 89 calls to the police emergency hotline 999.

The magistrate rejected Ms Tan’s allegation that the investigation was not thorough.

He said the report revealed that she was a “difficult person” who displayed intolerance of things or people around her.

In November 2024, a law was passed to clarify that abuse of the court process, including commencing baseless civil claims for damages just to oppress the defendant, amounted to contempt of court.

Source: The Straits Times © SPH Media Limited. Permission required for reproduction.

New IP rider rules: What stays, what goes, and how it affects you