MY BROTHER, who has just died, has had his Central Provident Fund (CPF) nomination ruled as invalid.

According to the CPF Board's Nomination Section (NS), its investigations showed that the witnesses were not able to provide any information regarding my late brother's CPF nomination form.

I would like to know how this conclusion was reached.

Even if I had been present when the nomination was executed, I doubt I would have been able to dispute its findings, as it would have been my word against those of the two witnesses.

This is an unfortunate situation for my late brother, as his wishes cannot be fulfilled due to no fault of his.

In the absence of any concrete evidence, how does the NS satisfy itself that a witness' memory can be relied on? There is the possibility that the relationship between the witness and the deceased could have soured, and the former could be taking an opportunity to scuttle the deceased's nomination.

For efficiency's sake, the NS could mandate that all CPF nominations be executed at its office, with its staff as witnesses. With this in place, the need to investigate each time a nominator dies can be done away with.

According to the CPF Nomination Rules, a nomination is not compulsory. But if a member chooses to make a nomination, it is probably something of considerable importance to him or her.

Mr Seah Kian Chong

For more my paper stories click here.