The authorities are probing the latest incident in a spate of Housing Board lift glitches, which has left residents concerned.

The use of one of two lifts at Block 317, Ang Mo Kio Street 31 was suspended on Tuesday by the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) after it malfunctioned on Monday evening. Ms Evi Lisnawati fell and hit her back after Lift A, which she was taking to the ground floor, suddenly shot up 17 storeys.

It then stalled between the 19th and 20th storeys, trapping the 36-year-old Indonesian maid for over an hour before she was rescued. BCA said Ang Mo Kio Town Council (AMKTC), which manages the lift, is now required to appoint an independent authorised examiner to inspect it.

The authorised examiner must also recommend rectification works and submit its findings to BCA.

A BCA spokesman said: “BCA will allow the lift to resume operations only when the investigation and rectification works are completed, and BCA is satisfied that the lift is safe for use.”

A spokesman for AMKTC said this is the first time the 23-year-old lift has caused problems.

In the light of Monday’s incident, he said the town council is stepping up its lift maintenance, which is usually carried out once a month, although it did not specify how.

The lift, which was manufactured by Fujitec, was last serviced on Feb 23. The AMKTC spokesman added: “The investigation is still ongoing and we shall await the conclusion from the investigators and (professionals) before proceeding further.”

Fujitec Singapore’s chief operating officer William Wong said his company’s technicians are assisting BCA with investigations.

Asked what might have caused the accident, Mr Wong said: “Until we are able to pinpoint the cause, I don’t want to speculate.”

Some residents had noticed problems with the two lifts in the block even before the accident.

Administrator Lim Geok Hong, 53, who has lived there for over 20 years, said both lifts would occasionally fail to move even after the doors shut.

She said in Mandarin: “You have to push the lift doors slightly before the lift will start to move.”

Retiree Wong Leat, 68, said that in the two weeks before the accident, he had sometimes felt Lift A shaking while it was moving.

“Even my granddaughters were scared,” he said.

AMKTC chairman Ang Hin Kee said that the block’s Lift B is “functioning normally” and checks have been carried out by BCA and Fujitec.

He added: “We will continue to check it daily over the next few days. We are also talking with residents to allay their concerns.”

Last October, an 85-year-old Jurong resident’s hand was severed after the doors of the lift she was in closed on her dog leash. She also fell and broke her leg.

In January, a faulty HDB lift in Punggol’s Edgefield Plains was suspended from use after one of the lift’s inner doors stayed open while the lift moved.

Correction note: An earlier version of the article stated that the town council must recommend rectification works and submit its findings to BCA. This is incorrect, the recommendation should be from the authorised examiner.

yeosamjo@sph.com.sg

rybentan@sph.com.sg

This article was first published on March 10, 2016.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.

The United States Polo Association (USPA) can go ahead and register a black-and-white trademark featuring two polo players and the letters USPA on eyewear being sold here after the High Court dismissed an appeal by fashion brand Polo Ralph Lauren to block it.

Ralph Lauren had claimed that USPA’s logo was similar to its own single player mark, registered here in 1996. USPA, polo’s American governing body, ventured into selling merchandise and registered the mark in 2012 as it intended to enter the eyewear market here.

US retailer Ralph Lauren, filed a notice of opposition when USPA tried to register for a trademark under the eyewear category.

Last June, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (Ipos) ruled in USPA’s favour, in a case heard by intellectual property adjudicator, Professor Ng-Loy Wee Loon. Ralph Lauren appealed against the ruling.

In court documents obtained by The Straits Times yesterday, Justice Lee Seiu Kin, in the appeal, noted that the the sole basis for Ralph Lauren’s case was the similarity of the marks and the likelihood of confusion on the part of the public.

But Justice Lee found, in contrast, a “low degree of similarity between the trademarks, particularly in respect of visual similarity and the greater attention that the average consumer is likely to pay when purchasing eyewear”. He said: “I find that there exists no likelihood of confusion on the part of the public.”

Prof Ng-Loy had concluded that eyewear is usually bought through salesmen and is a type of goods that commands a “higher degree of fastidiousness” on the part of the consumer.

Ralph Lauren’s lawyers had argued in their appeal that a “high degree of care” is exercised with regard to the lenses and the adjustment of the nose pad, rather than to the frame bearing the trademark.

But Justice Lee did not buy their argument. He said he did not think that the care exercised would be “restricted only to the lenses and the nose pad”.

It is actually “highly personal and is not something that would be purchased in a hurry but rather, would involve a high level of attention being paid by the consumer”.

“The eyewear is likely to be purchased on a myriad of factors, including not just comfort but also its appearance, and any purchase would likely entail a detailed visual inspection of the eyewear,” he said.

Polo Ralph Lauren’s lawyer, Mr Sukumar Karuppiah from Ravindran Associates, told The Straits Times he would report the judgment to his client and await further instructions.

USPA’s lawyer, Mr Prithipal Singh from Miranda Law LLP, said: “The decision is very sound and we are happy with the outcome.”

jalmsab@sph.com.sg

This article was first published on March 10, 2016.
Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories.

When Miss Janel Tay heard screams of “Help me! Help me!” in Mandarin at about 3.30am, she thought it was a robbery.

But when a burning smell wafted into her room a while later, the 18-year-old knew it was something else.

What she saw next as she rushed to the balcony at the back of the kitchen shocked her: Plumes of smoke billowing out of a balcony window diagonally across her flat and a woman gasping for air.

“She was leaning outside the window and holding on to the window pane. The smoke was very ‘jialat’ (Hokkien for dire),” the ITE student told The New Paper.

The fire started on Sunday morning in a three-room flat on the seventh storey of Block 318, Woodlands Street 31.

Miss Tay, who lives on the eighth storey, immediately woke her mother up.

“My mother told me to call 995 and to spray water at the woman (to help her feel better from the smoke),” said the teenager.

She did just that with a hose connected to a tap in her kitchen. She aimed the hose at her neighbour who was struggling amid the acrid smoke.

“(The victim) kept asking (me) to spray more water on her. That’s all I know,” said Miss Tay.

She kept at it for about five minutes, until officers from the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) arrived.

The SCDF was alerted to the fire at 3.50am, said a spokesman. Its officers had to use breaking tools to force open the metal gate, as the grilles had been locked with a bicycle chain.

Shin Min Daily News reported that the fire was believed to be linked to a man involved in unlicensed moneylending. (See report at right.)

Officers put out the fire in the living room with a water jet before rescuing the 46-year-old victim from the balcony.

She was taken to Singapore General Hospital for smoke inhalation.

CROWD

A crowd had gathered at the foot of the block. One of them was a quality control inspector who wanted to be known only as Mr Dharmaraj.

The 38-year-old, who had moved into his sixth-storey flat just four months earlier, said he was startled by the woman’s screams and ran downstairs to find out what was going on.

Another resident, a retiree who gave his name as Mr Teng, said he initially thought the ruckus was caused by a quarrelling couple.

TNP understands that the victim was alone in the flat during the fire. Her nephew, who studies in a nearby school, usually stays with her but he had gone to Malaysia that day.

The victim is believed to be putting up at her neighbour’s flat.

When approached, the neighbour declined to comment, adding that she preferred not to speculate out of respect for the victim.

When TNP visited the affected flat yesterday afternoon, the burnt smell still lingered.

The walls of the living room and its contents were charred. A tangled mess of wires could be seen hanging from the ceiling.

With no front door left, the flat was secured with a bicycle lock on the unit’s metal gate.

The police have classified the fire as a case of unlicensed money-lending harassment, said a spokesman.

Investigations are ongoing.

‘I didn’t owe any money but…’

The fire that burned the three-room flat on Sunday morning is believed to be linked to a man who wanted to be known only as Mr Aw.

According to Shin Min Daily News, his name and identification number, along with the message “O$P$”, were scribbled on the wall next to the burned flat at Block 318.

When approached by The New Paper yesterday, Mr Aw, who lives in Block 317, Woodlands Street 31, denied borrowing any money.

“I didn’t owe any money, but I was the guarantor for my friend whom I think ran away,” Mr Aw, who looked to be in his late 20s, told TNP.

MOVED OUT

Mr Aw said he had moved out of the flat more than a year ago and was back to “take some stuff”.

He claimed his friend had borrowed $800 from “a legal company”, but the amount snowballed to $2,400 due to late payment.

When asked why another flat in an adjacent block was made to bear the brunt of the debt, Mr Aw pointed at the surveillance cameras outside the unit and said: “Maybe it’s because of them?”

Three of the cameras were installed three years ago, after the Aw family found their items placed in the corridor missing. A fourth one was installed by the police on Monday.

After the fire on Sunday, Mr Aw said he continued receiving calls from moneylenders threatening to burn his flat.

He said he has given his statement to the police.

fjieying@sph.com.sg

This article was first published on March 10, 2016.
Get The New Paper for more stories.