Justice Served: Illegal Investment Scheme Ends in RM28 Million Repayment

WikiFX

| 2024-11-18 17:40

Abstract：The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that a Singaporean businessman, Chan Cheh Shin, must return RM28 million to 122 Malaysian investors after the court determined that his investment operations were conducted illegally.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that a Singaporean businessman, Chan Cheh Shin, must return RM28 million to 122 Malaysian investors after the court determined that his investment operations were conducted illegally. The decision highlights the importance of regulatory compliance and investor protection within the financial sector.

The ruling, delivered by Judicial Commissioner Datuk Mohd Arief Emran Arifin, concluded that Chan had collected investment funds without the required approval from the Securities Commission of Malaysia (SC). The court found that Chan's activities violated Malaysian financial regulations, rendering his operations unlawful.

Chan, the director and founder of Fulda Malaysia Bhd, promoted various investment products through roadshows and seminars. These promotional efforts, which began in 2016, targeted Malaysian investors who subsequently invested their money into Fulda Malaysia Bhd and another company, Palau Capital Ltd, based in Singapore, where Chan also held a directorial position.

The plaintiffs in the case alleged that Chan had persuaded them to invest in numerous financial products, including overseas ventures, with promises of substantial returns. They also stated that Chan, reportedly credentialed as a “leading banker” with expertise in finance and investments, assured them that he would carefully manage their funds and personally cover any potential losses. Despite these assurances, the investors received no returns on their investments, prompting them to file a lawsuit in 2022 to recover their money.

In an online judgement, Judicial Commissioner Arief ordered Chan to repay the RM28 million to the 122 investors. Additionally, Chan is required to pay interest at a rate of 5% per annum on the amount owed, calculated from the date the lawsuit was filed until the judgement sum is fully settled.

The plaintiffs were represented by lawyers M. Manian and R. Gajelan, while Chans legal defence was handled by Ravi Nekoo and Sarah Anthony. Following the ruling, Ravi Nekoo indicated that his client intends to appeal the decision, though further details on the appeal process were not disclosed.

Forex trading Forex news

【Inside the Elite Committee】Talk with Mohamed Lewaa

WikiFX has launched the “Inside the Elite” Interview Series, featuring outstanding members of the newly formed Elite Committee. During the committee’s first offline gathering in Dubai, we conducted exclusive interviews and gained deeper insights into regional market dynamics and industry developments. Through this series, WikiFX aims to highlight the voices of professionals who are shaping the future of forex trading — from education and compliance to risk control, technology, and trader empowerment.

Original 2025-12-22 11:24

Is ZarVista Legit? A Critical Review of Its Licenses and Red Flags

For traders asking, "Is ZarVista legit?", the evidence points to a clear and strong conclusion: ZarVista operates as a high-risk broker. While it shows a modern interface and different account types, these features are overshadowed by major weaknesses in how it is regulated, a history of legal problems, and many user complaints. This article will break down these issues to give you a complete view of the risks involved. Our analysis shows that the chance of losing capital when dealing with ZarVista is very high. The combination of weak overseas licensing and documented problems creates a situation where trader funds are not properly protected.

Original 2025-12-21 13:26

AMarkets Licensing Details: What Their Offshore Regulation Really Means for You

When choosing a broker, the most important question is always: "Are my funds safe?" The answer depends on the broker's regulatory framework. For a company like AMarkets, which has been operating since 2007, understanding its licensing isn't just about checking a box. It's about understanding what that regulation truly means for your protection as a trader. This article provides a clear, detailed breakdown of AMarkets' licenses, what their offshore status really means, the extra safety measures it uses, and the risks you need to consider. We will go beyond marketing claims to give you factual, balanced information about their official licenses and other trust signals, helping you make a smart decision.

Original 2025-12-19 20:24

AMarkets Safety Review: Is Your Money Protected?

The question "Is AMarkets safe?" is the most important thing any trader can ask before investing. Putting your capital in a trading company requires a lot of trust, and the answer isn't simply yes or no. It's complicated and depends on understanding how the company works, what protections they have, and their past performance. To give you a clear answer, we've done a complete safety review of AMarkets. Our research looks at three main areas, each examining a different part of the company's safety. We'll share what we found using facts you can check, so you can make your own smart decision about whether your capital will be safe.

Original 2025-12-19 19:51