讨论新加坡法律我用英文了哦Disclaimer: I am NOT a criminal lawyer. You are NOT my client. This is NOT a legal advice. I do not assume any responsibility if you choose to rely on the following information. You should engage a criminal lawyer if you are serious about the answer to your query.
I would frame the issue in the following manner: whether or not it is a offence for a person to procure or offer to procure a loan for a consideration which is more than the principal sum from the a non-specific person in public who presumably neither possesses a moneylender licence nor is an exempted moneylender?
The Short answer is: Yes, it is an offence under Moneylenders Acts s 14 which is punishable under s 14(1A) read together with s 109 of the penal code.
Summarised analysis:
1. it is presumed to be illegal for a person who is not your friend or your relative to lend you money with a interest (ss 1, 3 and 5 of the Moneylenders Act).
2. Although you may feel free argue that a person you get "acquainted" via the in (more...)
首先逻辑完整,点赞。但重点部分讨论不深
总之知道了关于借钱合法性有一个要注意的坑。一定要让借贷行为尽可能避免被定义为carrying on the business of money lending。总之业余的、适度的、合理的、私下的、不广告的、不经常的借贷收利息行为是合法的。在公开论坛上邀约借钱是否违法,应该是并不绝对。要知道借贷人法令本身主要针对的是持续经营的放贷行为。法官判断时会考虑到各种因素。
再说执法问题。新加坡法律定的刑事罪的外延向来是极广的,比如非经授权下载音乐或软件就可能触犯版权法,可判坐牢最长6个月。但新加坡警方在小经济类案件执法是倾向于把它们当民事案处理的。比如说以前对类似森林广场这类明显是诈骗的案件不作为。比如说近来似乎有些换钱类的诈骗也是告知受害人不受理。警方通常要到民愤极大的时候才开始有行动。所以指望警方积极普遍查处网上借钱的行为基本不可能。
声明:本人表达个人业余的观点看法,不鼓励任何违法或可能违法的行为。
再说执法问题。新加坡法律定的刑事罪的外延向来是极广的,比如非经授权下载音乐或软件就可能触犯版权法,可判坐牢最长6个月。但新加坡警方在小经济类案件执法是倾向于把它们当民事案处理的。比如说以前对类似森林广场这类明显是诈骗的案件不作为。比如说近来似乎有些换钱类的诈骗也是告知受害人不受理。警方通常要到民愤极大的时候才开始有行动。所以指望警方积极普遍查处网上借钱的行为基本不可能。
声明:本人表达个人业余的观点看法,不鼓励任何违法或可能违法的行为。