A man took the company that employed him to court recently, claiming wrongful dismissal for terminating his employment about three months after he turned 63, without notice or payment in lieu.

The company contended that the termination was lawful as it was "retiring" the man, and no notice or salary in lieu was required in such circumstances, according to a judgement dated Jul. 13.

It also argued that it offered re-employment to the man, but he had turned the offer down, which meant that it was not required to give him an employment assistance payment.

The man sought S$11,600 (about his two months' basic salary) in damages, and an employment assistance payment of S$14,750.

The full sum was ultimately granted to him by the judge at the Employment Claims Tribunals, who ruled that the company was lawfully required to give the man two months' notice or salary in lieu, and that it did not reasonably engage or consult him regarding re-employment.

Wrongful dismissal

The man was let go on Jun. 18, 2025, when the statutory retirement age was 63 years old.

In the notice of termination, the company informed him that it would "process [his] retirement" on Jun. 18, 2025, as his last working day, and his "retirement" would take effect from the following day.

It added that because this "retirement marks the natural end of [the] employment", it could let him go without giving the two months’ notice or salary in lieu as stated in his employment contract.

The judge said that the company breached the employment contract.

Under the Employment Act, a company was required to give two months’ notice or salary in lieu if it were to terminate the contract after the employee attained the statutory retirement age.

The judge also noted that the man was seeking only S$11,600 in damages, a sum less than two months of his gross salary, which was S$6,428 a month.

Thus, this claim fell within what he was "properly entitled to recover", the judge said.

The re-employment offer

The man argued that the company did not fulfil its obligations to offer re-employment to him, and thus it was required to compensate him with an employment assistance payment.

The judge pointed out that the company did not make any offer of re-employment to the man before he turned 63.

Re-employment discussions were initiated by the man himself over email on Jun. 8, 2025, and the company replied with an offer two days later.

In this offer, the man's salary would be cut from S$6,428 to S$4,000, and he would be under a six-month fixed-term contract.

His role would also be adjusted from area manager to training executive, due to a restructuring exercise that would render the man's original role redundant, according to the company.

The company gave him a firm deadline to decide and accept the offer by Jun. 17, 2025 — about a week after it was first made.

His request for a short extension, also because he was on medical leave, was declined.

The man ultimately rejected the offer, saying that it was drastically different in scope from his existing role, offered little employment stability, and involved a substantial reduction in salary.

The day after receiving this rejection, the company sent the notice of termination.

Was it 'unreasonable'?

The man contended that the terms of the proposed re-employment and the manner the company offered it were unreasonable.

Under the Retirement and Re-employment Act, the employer must offer re-employment for at least one year unless otherwise agreed by both parties.

The man highlighted this in his claim, and the judge acknowledged it as well.

He argued that since the company gave an offer confined to six months, which was not accepted by the man, the offer did not suffice to discharge the company's re-employment obligations.

On the points about the change in job role and reduction in salary, the judge said that these factors alone do not render a re-employment offer unreasonable.

However, he believed the company did not engage with the man early on the offer — a process that would have allowed "meaningful discussion" about salary, possible re-employment arrangements, and more.

"Where engagement is perfunctory or opaque, employees may feel that their past contributions have been overlooked, or that the terms proposed are imposed rather than fairly negotiated," the judge said.

He noted that the Tripartite Guidelines on the Re-Employment of Older Employees recommends that consultations on re-employment should ordinarily begin at least six months before retirement.

On why the company began discussions only three months after the man turned 63, the human resources executive who had liaised with him accepted that these requirements had been overlooked and expressed regret that the matter had not been addressed earlier.

She also explained she declined the man's request for a deadline extension due to "her own disposition and a desire to conclude the matter expeditiously".

Judgement

The judge believed it was "unsurprising" that the man came to view the re-employment offer process as unfair.

The way it was conducted "fell short of the standard of reasonableness", and thus the judge ruled that the company was required to pay an employment assistance payment.

He allowed the man's total claims for S$26,350 in full, and also ordered that the company pay S$250 in costs and S$70 in disbursements.

Singapore Minister for Foreign Affairs Vivian Balakrishnan paid his respects to Princess Bajrakitiyabha Mahidol, the eldest daughter of Thai King Maha Vajiralongkorn, on Jul. 14 while on a working visit to Bangkok.

Paying respects

Bajrakitiyabha passed away on Jun. 11 after being in a coma for almost three years, after being hospitalised for a cardiac condition in 2022.

Vivian, accompanied by MFA officials, presented a wreath to the late princess, and in a social media post, paid tribute to her.

He called her a steadfast champion of the vulnerable and disadvantaged, noting her initiatives to uplift underprivileged children and support female inmates.

He also credited her as an accomplished diplomat, saying she had represented Thailand on the international stage with distinction and grace, citing her advocacy for justice, the rule of law, and women's rights, which had earned her recognition from the United Nations and the international community.

Vivian said that Singapore extended its deepest condolences to the King, the royal family and the people of Thailand, as well as a book of condolence.

Highest honors

Bajrakitiyabha was hospitalised in December 2022 after experiencing heart problems while training her pet dogs for the Thailand Working Dog Championship.

Her condition worsened, and she eventually fell into a coma.

On Jun. 11, 2026, the Bureau of the Royal Household reported that she had passed away, after her condition had worsened.

Her father issued a royal command ordering the Bureau of the Royal Household to arrange royal funeral rites with the highest honours according to royal traditions, as well as to enshrine her at the Phiman Rattaya Hall in the Grand Palace.

Informal Myanmar meeting

Vivian was in Bangkok to attend the Informal Meeting of Asean Foreign Ministers with Myanmar and the Extended Informal Consultation on Myanmar.

There he received a briefing by a senior representative of the Myanmar authorities, Tin Maung Swe, on developments in Myanmar.

Myanmar has been fighting a civil war between the military-backed government, sometimes referred to as the Junta, and a number of Ethnic Armed Organisations (EAOs) as well the the People's Defence Force (PDF), ever since the military seized power in February 2021.

The Junta had initialled agreed with Asean to conform to the Five-Point Consensus, which included the cessation of hostilities and giving the bloc access to political prisoners, amongst other things, but has thus far failed to comply, instead holding elections in December 2025 in attempt to legitimise the government.

Speaking to the press after the meeting, Vivian stressed that all Asean countries reaffirmed the central importance of the Five-Point Consensus, saying that it was and it remains valid.

Three areas for progress

Vivian then said that Asean wanted to see demonstrable progress in three specific areas. First, an end to violence, especially against civilians. Second, the release of political detainees, including Aung San Suu Kyi.

And finally, for the Asean Coordinating Centre for Humanitarian Assistance on Disaster Management to be able to deliver assistance across Myanmar, regardless of political allegiance.

Replying to a question about inviting Myanmar back to Asean before progress had been shown, Vivian said that Asean was trying to engage with all stakeholders, including military authorities .

He said that they were also engaging with a wide variety of EAOs and the PDF, who were opposed to the Myanmar junta.

"The key point is Asean wants to engage across the board, widely and in an inclusive manner."

While in Bangkok, Vivian was also hosted to lunch by Thai prime minister Anutin Charnvirakul.

Vivian said that both countries had enjoyed a "close and enduring friendship", and said he looked forward to working with Anutin to "further strengthen the Singapore-Thailand partnership and advance Asean's shared interests."

A 56-year-old Chinese national was sentenced to 13 months’ jail and fined S$1,000 after driving an over-height lorry with a high crane affixed to it and hitting the Central Expressway (CTE) tunnel ceiling.

He was also disqualified from holding all classes of driving licences for 24 months.

Lai Daohong (transliterated) pleaded guilty to two charges under the Road Traffic Act on Jul. 13, Lianhe Zaobao reported.

Incident

The incident occurred on Nov. 8, 2024, at about 12:10pm, at the CTE entrance along Cairnhill Road towards the Seletar Expressway (SLE).

In a video circulated online, the crane attached to the truck first struck a tree branch

It then hit a height restriction bar before striking the CTE tunnel entrance.

The ceiling became visibly damaged with hanging exposed wires visible.

The road was reportedly closed for about 10 hours, and repair costs amounted to about S$1.45 million.

Failure

According to court documents, the driver failed to check if the crane had been lowered before driving the truck.

At about 11:50am to 12:10pm on the day of the incident, he travelled approximately 3.1km along Nassim Road, Tanglin Road, Orchard Road, Pit Building Road, and Cairnhill Road before hitting the tunnel entrance.

The height limit for the tunnel was 4.5m.

After noticing he had struck the tunnel ceiling, he stopped the truck and lowered the crane.

He was then arrested for illegally driving a heavy motor vehicle over a height of 4.5m without being escorted by a police officer or an auxiliary police officer.

According to the Land Transport Authority (LTA), the slip road only reopened at about 10:35pm on the same day, following recovery works.

Second conviction

The driver had previously been fined S$3,500 and disqualified from driving for nine months on Jan. 25, 2017, for driving a heavy vehicle that struck a building or structure.

This is his second conviction for a similar offence.

The prosecution argued that drivers of heavy vehicles ought to exercise greater caution.

They cited the damage caused, such as cables in the tunnel ceiling coming loose, and the substantial repair costs.

The prosecution further argued that this caused traffic congestion in the tunnel at the time.

While no one was injured, they cited the incident’s high-risk nature and the inconvenience caused to other motorists.

The accused reportedly said through an interpreter that an alarm had malfunctioned at the time of the incident.

He claimed that if the warning sound had gone off, he would not have forgotten to lower the crane.

The prosecution argued that the heavy vehicle driver did not merely make a momentary error, but had failed to notice that the crane was not lowered throughout the entire journey.

They also said he did not mention the alarm malfunction during the investigation, and even if the alarm was not working as usual, it was his duty to check it before driving.

Given his prior similar record, the driver should have been all the more aware of the need to do so.

The defence lawyers stated that he stopped his vehicle after the incident, cooperated with the investigations, and expressed remorse.

The accused was apparently his family's sole breadwinner, it was argued.

As Tatsanai, 31, lay outside the burning Na Ladprao pub in Bangkok waiting for rescue workers, she turned to her boyfriend and asked: "Am I still beautiful?"

Her boyfriend, Phitsanu Nim-mian, 31, recounted the moment to reporters on Jul. 13 after accompanying her family to Phahon Yothin Police Station to file an official report, according to Khaosod English.

Tatsanai had told him earlier: "I can't take it anymore. I'm in so much pain. Am I still beautiful?"

He told reporters what he said to her:

"It's all right. Focus on getting treatment first. No matter what happens to you, I accept everything.

Just come home and be with the children. It doesn't matter if anything was lost. I only want you to be safe."

What happened that night

The fire broke out at the Na Ladprao pub in Chatuchak, Bangkok, at around 12:02am on Jul. 13, killing at least 27 people and injuring 63 others, as Mothership reported.

Most fatalities resulted from smoke inhalation. Flames reportedly spread rapidly through ceiling decorations, and many victims had rushed to the toilets at the back of the pub, where rescuers had difficulty reaching them.

Tatsanai had gone to the venue that night with colleagues from the cosmetic clinic where she worked. She had invited Phitsanu to join them, but he stayed home to care for her two children.

He drove her there around 9pm and planned to fetch her later. On his way home, one of his tyres burst, forcing him to call a mechanic.

He only learned about the fire when he received a call asking if he was Tatsanai's boyfriend.

The caller initially said her phone had been lost, then told him she had been severely burned.

When Phitsanu arrived at the scene, he found flames and thick black smoke engulfing the building. Tatsanai had managed to escape, but had to run through the flames to do so because the exit was narrow.

Bystanders used a cloth to extinguish the fire on her hair and head before she lay outside waiting for rescue workers.

Critical condition

According to the doctors, Tatsanai remained in critical condition with burns to her arms, legs, face and back. Doctors also sought permission from the family to shave her head and clean her wounds.

Hospital visits have since been suspended to reduce the risk of infection.

Tatsanai's father, Thuan Manpraphan, 61, told Khaosod English his daughter was being treated in the intensive care unit at Paolo Hospital Chokchai 4.

Though she had begun regaining consciousness, he said burns covered most of her body except her face.

The hospital told the family she would need to be transferred eventually, though no receiving hospital had been confirmed yet.

Calls for accountability

Phitsanu called for entertainment venues to have more emergency exits and clearly marked evacuation signs, saying Tatsanai had told him the venue's entrance and exit were both narrow.

He also weighed in on reports that an emergency exit had allegedly been locked to stop customers from leaving without settling their bills.

He told Khaosod English:

"If that is true, it is completely unacceptable. Money should never be considered more important than people's lives. If something like this happens again, how many more people will die, and who will take responsibility?"

Phitsanu claimed that official coordinator had reached out to the family with information or assistance.

He added that he had met Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul and Bangkok Governor Chadchart Sittipunt at the scene on the night of the fire, and was advised to register at Phahon Yothin Police Station.

He was told that government agencies would step in to help and that those affected would not be left without support.

Thuan said he believed the venue's negligence had contributed to the tragedy, and urged authorities to hold those responsible accountable.

Back home, Phitsanu said her two children continued asking where their mother was.

He told Khaosod English: "I can only tell them, 'Mum hasn't finished work yet. Dad will go and bring her home soon.'"

A 23-year-old Singaporean man, who went on a midnight joyride on the Central Expressway (CTE) towards Ayer Rajah Expressway (AYE) with five other people in 2024, was sentenced to four months' jail on Jul. 13, 2026.

Lee Jun En Gilviz, who was the fourth driver in the group of six, will be disqualified from driving for three years from his prison release date.

He had pleaded guilty to one charge of dangerous driving, The Straits Times reported.

Court documents seen by Mothership stated that in the early hours of Oct. 27, 2024, six drivers, including Lee, had been involved in a major road traffic accident.

There were two collisions.

Other sentences

Damien Chia Hwa Chuan, 29, and Sherman Quah Kok Rong, 22, had earlier been sentenced on Jun. 29 to four months and two weeks' jail and two months and three weeks' jail, respectively.

They were also disqualified from driving for three years from their release date.

After pleading guilty to dangerous driving, Marcus Lau Yong Wei, 35, had previously been sentenced on Jun. 26 to four months' jail and disqualified from driving for three years.

ST reported that the other alleged drivers, Goh Jared-Kane, 26, and Kong Jia Quan, 24, are also facing charges.

Speeding

According to court documents, at about 1am on Oct. 27, 2024, the group of six met at a Stadium Boulevard car park before going on a joyride to the downtown area.

They trailed one another at high speeds towards the town area via the Pan Island Expressway (PIE) towards Tuas, the CTE, before exiting at Buyong Road and continuing along Orchard Road, Bras Basah Road, and Raffles Boulevard, until the accident occurred in front of the Fort Canning Tunnel.

The drivers of all six vehicles confirmed that they had been travelling at high speed at the time of the incident.

Lee had been travelling at speeds of between 141km/h and 181km/h along the CTE near the Rangoon Road exit, despite the speed limit being 90km/h.

Collisions

According to surveillance footage, Goh was observed to be speeding along Stamford Road towards Fort Canning Link, where Kong and Lee followed closely behind in separate cars.

Goh then had to brake hard to avoid a collision while making a right turn into Queen Street from Stamford Road.

Kong's vehicle then rear-ended Goh's due to the sudden braking, after which Lee swerved sharply to the right, where his car mounted the adjacent grass verge and overturned.

This resulted in damage to the roadside vegetation, a road sign and a traffic light signal, where the total cost of repairing the damaged property amounted to over S$2,900, ST reported the prosecutor as saying.

In addition, Lau and Chia were also approaching the accident site at high speed.

Lau then braked as debris from the first collision flew across the far-right lane, which caused Chia's car to rear-end Lau’s vehicle.

Aftermath

Quah's, Goh's and Kong's cars did not stop at the accident scene.

They drove away after the collisions to a nearby building.

Lee, who was taken to Singapore General Hospital for treatment, suffered a neck sprain, chest and abdominal contusions, and abrasions on his right hand, while his 22-year-old passenger was not injured.

The accident also caused the front of Lee's car to be dented and ripped off, with the left side mirror shattered, and the windscreen cracked.

Lee was arrested on Mar. 2.

The prosecutor sought a sentence of between four and six months' jail and a driving disqualification of three to four years.

ST reported that Lee had previously been convicted in 2023 for using a communication device while driving.

Dangerous, reckless driving: Prosecutor

In light of this incident, the prosecutor said that rather than a momentary or transient lapse in judgment, Lee's dangerous and reckless driving was sustained and deliberate.

"The most egregious instance occurred at the junction of Stamford Road and Victoria Street, where the accused had entered the junction at an estimated speed of 122km/h to 144km/h in a 50km/h zone, more than twice the legal limit."

Noting that this was not an isolated incident but a prolonged course of dangerous and reckless conduct, he added that Lee's car overturning further demonstrated the dangerous manner of driving that the accused had adopted at the time of the offence.

Following the accident, Lee had made full restitution for the damage he caused, ST reported that his lawyer told the court.

For dangerous driving, an offender can be fined up to S$5,000, jailed for up to one year, or both.

Singapore influencer Mangobossku's new cat grooming venture is under investigation after viewers of a TikTok livestream accused him of handling a cat "roughly" during a session.

Mangobossku, whose real name is Mohamad Hussin Said, has denied any intention to hurt or abuse the cat, telling Mothership that the clip circulating online only showed "a short portion" of a longer livestream.

What sparked the backlash

The controversy began after clips from a livestreamed grooming session showed Hussin handling a cat in a manner that some viewers found troubling.

On Threads, cat owners and self-described cat lovers weighed in, with some saying they would think twice about sending their pets to Hussin's premises after watching the video.

One user urged business owners to educate themselves before entering the pet industry, and pet owners to do their due diligence before engaging one.

She added:

"Simply taking them out of their familiar environment is already stressful enough, let alone having them aggressively restrained and literally hung while being groomed by someone who was even VAPING."

Another user said she had raised concerns with Hussin directly and claimed she had been blocked as a result.

Others raised questions about Hussin's qualifications.

One user pointed out that cat groomers typically spend years training in salons and sitting for courses before being certified, and asked whether Hussin's certificate was authentic or simply "AI-verified" — noting that his grooming premises reportedly shared an address with his car wash business.

Separately, another user raised concerns after coming across footage of Hussin grooming two cats with what appeared to be skin conditions, including redness around the neck and tail that she worried could be ringworm.

She noted he had not worn gloves while handling either cat, and questioned whether tools and surfaces had been disinfected between sessions to prevent cross-contamination.

Authorities confirm investigations are underway

The SPCA confirmed to Mothership that it was aware of the case and had escalated it to other authorities.

"The SPCA is aware of the case, and our Inspectors have escalated it to the authorities at NParks/AVS for further investigation and any enforcement action. If called upon to assist in investigations, we will do our best to support every effort."

NParks similarly confirmed that the matter was being looked into.

"The National Parks Board (NParks) is aware of the alleged mishandling of a cat that happened during a livestreamed grooming session. Investigations are ongoing."

Mangobossku says handling was for the cat's safety

Responding to queries from Mothership, Hussin said the clips circulating online did not tell the full story.

"We are aware of the clips circulating from our TikTok livestream. We understand the concern from viewers who only saw a short portion of the video," he said.

He explained that the cat had been placed in a grooming hammock, a method he described as industry-recognised, to keep it secure during the session.

He added: "The handling seen was to ensure the cat's safety. The full livestream shows the full context.”

He struck a similar tone in an Instagram post on Jul. 11, defending his approach publicly for the first time since the backlash began.

"Whatever people want to say, let them. What matters is we know what we're doing isn't to hurt the cat or abuse the cat, we do all this for the cat's own good and cleanliness. "

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Mangobossku (@the_godfather_mangobossku)

Hussin also told Mothership that NParks had since visited his premises to review his procedures, adding that the welfare of the cats in his care remains his top priority.

He has expanded to offer both in-house and home grooming services as well, so paw parents can be present from start to finish.

"This makes the process more transparent and less stressful for the cats. We remain committed to providing safe, low-stress grooming for all pets in our care."

Planning to upskill

Despite the ongoing scrutiny, Hussin has continued to advertise his grooming services on social media, including offering fur-styling options such as the Lion Cut and Bear Cut.

Hussin is reportedly planning to enrol in the Universal Cat Association (UCA) Cat Grooming Programme, an internationally recognised certification course, according to Berita Harian.

Investigations into the case remain ongoing.

U.S. President Donald Trump has formally announced that the country is back at war with Iran.

According to Politico, Trump formally notified Congress that the conflict had resumed, giving his administration another 60 days to use military force in the region without congressional approval.

Strait of Hormuz

The move comes amid recent strikes between the U.S. and Iran and the ongoing struggle over the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial route for global energy supplies.

In a Truth Social post on Jul. 13, Trump said that the Strait of Hormuz is open "with or without Iran", while reinstating a blockade on Iranian vessels.

In his post, Trump also noted that countries would be required to reimburse the U.S. 20 per cent on all cargoes shipped, supposedly to cover the costs of providing safety and security.

Ceasefire over

The letter came after Trump announced that the ceasefire with Iran had ended.

Previously on Jun. 17, Trump signed a 60-day ceasefire with Iran, along with a 14-point framework outlining the terms for further negotiations.

According to a letter to Congress obtained by Politico, Trump said the strikes, which started on Jul. 7, were "military action consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans and United States' interests both at home and abroad."

The cyclist who was given a seven-day short detention order (SDO) for fighting with a bus driver over a lane dispute is appealing against his conviction and sentence.

The 49-year-old cyclist, Chia Meng Chiang, filed the appeal after completing his sentence.

Chia was given the SDO after being convicted of committing an affray, an offence in which two or more people disturb the public peace by fighting in a public place.

What is an SDO?

According to the Singapore Courts, an SDO is a type of community-based sentence (CBS) intended to act as a "deterrent by allowing the offender to experience prison life".

Upon successfully completing a CBS, the offence for which an offender was convicted is removed from their criminal record.

What happened

According to court documents seen by Mothership, the incident occurred at Punggol East on Nov. 25, 2024, at about 6:41pm.

Chia and Khong Heng Chuen, the driver for bus service 85, were at a red light at the junction of Punggol East and Punggol Field Walk.

When the traffic light turned green, both men moved forward, with Chia making a sharp left lane change, cutting in front of the bus and subsequently towards the leftmost lane.

The bus driver honked at Chia, who then slowed down and caused the bus driver to step onto his emergency brake.

An altercation ensued, with both men confronting each other verbally and filming each other on their phones, before things got physical.

Both men sustained injuries as a result of the fight.

For voluntarily causing hurt, Khong was also given a seven-day SDO.

During the three-day trial

Chia claimed a trial on the charge.

Chia, who was self-represented, admitted that he had committed some acts of violence against the bus driver.

However, the question was whether Chia had acted in self-defence.

In the judgment, District Judge Cheng Yuxi said that she did not accept that Chia's actions were a result of self-defence for several reasons.

In summary, she did not think Chia acted in self-defence as there was "no reasonable apprehension" of force from Khong at the junctures when Chia charged towards him with his head bent towards his stomach, and when he ran towards Khong and kicked after Khong had already retreated.

In the end, District Judge Cheng Yuxi found that the prosecution had proven the charge against Chia beyond a reasonable doubt and convicted him of the charge accordingly.

Served his sentence

Chia indicated that he was ready to begin serving the SDO on the same day the district judge sentenced him to the seven-day order.

However, according to court documents seen by Mothership, Chia filed an appeal against the conviction and sentence.

This was after he had served his seven-day order.

According to CNA, the appeal will be heard at a later date.

Two workers were injured after a fire broke out as they were replacing a manhole cover in Pioneer on Jul. 10.

Both suffered burn injuries and were taken to the hospital.

One has been discharged, while the other remains warded for observation.

Their employer, Hong Hock Global Pte Ltd, has been instructed to stop all similar manhole cover replacements works until the cause of the incident has been established, the Minister of Manpower (MOM) said in response to Mothership's queries.

Fire breaks out while hacking cement

According to MOM's spokesperson, the incident took place at about 10:50am on Jul. 10 along the pavement near the junction of Jalan Buroh and Pioneer Road.

Two workers from Hong Hock Global were carrying out the manhole cover replacement works.

While hacking the cement around the manhole, a flash fire occurred.

Underground infrastructure known to produce flammable gas

MOM's spokesperson explained that underground infrastructure such as sewerage and waste pipes are known to produce flammable gases.

"Hence employers carrying out works on such infrastructure must conduct comprehensive risk assessments before work commences and implement appropriate risk control measures to protect workers against fire and explosion hazards," the spokesperson also said.

"Workers should also be adequately briefed on the hazards and safe work procedures and be provided with the necessary supervision," they continued.

Investigation ongoing

MOM is investigating the incident.

The employer has been instructed by MOM to stop similar works until the cause of the incident has been established and the necessary measures have been implemented to prevent a recurrence.

MOM has also directed the employer to "review and strengthen its risk assessment and safe work procedures" for such works before they resume.

A Grab passenger was left stunned after her driver allegedly asked her to pay S$2 for a wet tissue that he offered.

Singaporean model Fiona Fussi took to TikTok to share what she described as "one of her worst Grab experiences" ever.

Snapped at initially

Fussi, who explained that she had a runny nose during the ride, asked the driver if he had any tissues.

The driver allegedly snapped "No" in response, and Fussi left it at that.

However, about five minutes later, he suddenly told her that he had wet tissues.

Thinking it was a kind gesture, Fussi accepted them.

However, when they arrived at her destination, the driver apparently turned around and said, "S$2 for the wet tissue."

Fussi said she was taken aback, as she had not been told that the tissues would cost money.

"It's not about the S$2; it's not expensive. But it's the principle that he never told me he was charging me money," Fussi said in her video.

"I thought he was just being nice."

Driver allegedly locked the doors

Fussi also alleged that the driver locked the car doors and refused to let her leave until she paid him for the tissue, which was an incredibly stressful situation for her.

"Is it just me, or that is not right?" she questioned.

Grab responds publicly

Grab has since responded in the comments section of her TikTok video, apologising and requesting that Fussi DM them with her booking number.

The model has liked the comment.