INVESTOR ALERT: Alleged Unauthorized Takeovers, Unpaid Shares & Faruq Marican
A 2022 image of Faruq Marican during an interview for popsical (failed/bankrutped as of 2024).
Source: Google.com (Image)
A Warning for Business Owners: The "System Error" Trap, Unpaid Agreements, and Alleged Stealing.
Faruq Marican no lawyer representation.
Source: judiciary.gov.sg
This is an urgent warning to all Singaporean SME owners, investors, and sellers regarding business dealings with an individual named Faruq Marican (also known as Marican Faruq Umar).
A recent High Court lawsuit (HC/OC 517/2025) has exposed a dangerous pattern of behavior involving this individual. While the case was recently settled, the court documents and evidence filed by the defense reveal a series of alleged deceptions, contradictions, and "bait-and-switch" tactics that every business owner must be aware of before entering into any agreement with him.
The Alleged Modus Operandi
The initial dispute involved the sale of a local engineering firm. The owners alleged that Marican used a "Trojan Horse" tactic to gain control of the company’s digital assets and bank accounts without paying the full agreed price or signing the necessary legal transfers.
According to legal documentation and sworn testimony, here are the specific red flags identified in his conduct:
5 Major Red Flags (Based on Legal Documentation & Sworn Testimony)
1. The "System Error" Fabrication
His Claim: Marican requested "Admin" access to the company’s CorpPass (ACRA), claiming that "technical issues" or "system errors" were preventing the standard transfer of shares.
The Evidence: A Statutory Declaration, sworn by an independent Corporate Secretary before a Commissioner for Oaths, attested that there were no system errors during the material time. Furthermore, CorpPass access was requested for business monitoring purposes, not for share transfers. Since payment had not been made and the property had not yet been excluded from the sale—a process requiring at least six months—this was agreed upon in front of many witnesses, including the Corporate Secretary.
The Danger: Once granted access, Marican allegedly used it to digitally transfer 100% of the shares to himself unilaterally, bypassing the legal requirements for wet-ink signatures and Board Resolutions, while claiming the sale was completed.
2. The "False Alibi" (The Dubai Lie)
His Claim: When the owners discovered the unauthorized transfer and tried to confront him, Marican claimed via text message that he was "overseas" and on a flight to Dubai, making him unavailable to meet.
The Evidence: Documentary evidence and banking records obtained during the dispute contradicted this claim. On the exact day he claimed to be overseas, bank transaction logs allegedly placed him physically at a UOB Branch in Serangoon, where he was attempting to change the authorized signatories to seize control of the company's cash.
3. The "Bait-and-Switch" on Assets
His Claim: The deal is completed.
The Reality: After gaining digital control, he allegedly relied on an older, unexecuted draft contract to claim ownership of all assets, including properties previously agreed to be excluded. This contradicts his verbal agreement—made in the presence of the Corporate Secretary and many witnesses—to cancel the previous contract in exchange for receiving CorpPass access. Furthermore, he has failed to pay the agreed full purchase price for the company.
4. The "Completion" Contradiction
His Claim: In court filings, he claimed the deal was verbally "completed" in early February 2025.
The Evidence: Text messages from late March 2025 (weeks later) show him asking his broker: "What is meant by 'upon completion'?" This contradiction suggests he claimed a deal was finished while simultaneously admitting he did not understand the basic terms of the contract.
Furthermore, the contract stipulated that a completion date must be agreed upon in writing by both parties; however, he cannot provide proof of any such agreed date. He also previously agreed to a six-month period to "carve out" properties from the company, as the sale was intended for the company entity only, excluding those specific assets.
5. The "Triple Lockout" (Unauthorized Removal)
His Claim: Marican asserted that he was verbally authorized by the existing directors and shareholders to remove them from their positions and the share registry immediately upon gaining access to the system.
The Evidence: The Corporate Secretary’s affidavit explicitly contradicts this, confirming that no such authorization was given. Furthermore, there are no signed Board Resolutions or "wet-ink" resignation letters to support these changes. Legally, such removals require formal documentation which Marican bypassed entirely using CorpPass via ACRA.
The Reality: In a single unilateral move, Marican allegedly removed the original Directors, revoked all other CorpPass users' access, and deleted the existing Shareholders from the ACRA registry. This "triple lockout" was executed before the purchase price was paid and without the legal consent of the parties involved, effectively seizing total control of the entity by administrative force rather than legal process.
The Fallout
- Frozen Accounts: The company's bank accounts were frozen due to the ownership dispute.
- Financial Loss: The original owner was forced to inject over S$400,000 of personal savings just to keep the company alive.
- Missing Funds: Allegations were made that S$30,000 was stolen by Marican immediately upon taking control from the company bank without authorization from the directors or shareholders, using allegedly fraud/fraudulent methods to seize control of the bank accounts.
A Developing Pattern? A Second High Court Case Emerges
Faruq Marican HC/OC 188/2026.
Source: judiciary.gov.sg
Adding to these concerns, public court registry records reveal a second, ongoing High Court lawsuit (HC/OC 188/2026) filed against Marican Faruq Umar.
The Case: Low Chee Seng, Adrian v Marican Faruq Umar
Nature of Dispute: Officially listed as "Contract-Others (Sale and Purchase of Company Shares Sale and Purchase of Company)"
The Context: This active legal dispute reportedly stems from Marican's acquisition of a cleaning business, Best Wave Cleaning Service Pte Ltd, from Mr. Low.
A Third Case Surfaces: Best Wave Cleaning Service Pte Ltd
Criminal case involving Best Wave Cleaning Service Pte. Ltd.
Source: judiciary.gov.sg
Further checks into publicly available court records reveal a third legal proceeding involving a company associated with Marican Faruq Umar — Best Wave Cleaning Service Pte Ltd.
Criminal case involving Best Wave Cleaning Service Pte. Ltd. with Marican Faruq Umar as Director
Source: ACRA
The Case: L21856_2024 PP v. Best Wave Cleaning Service Pte. Ltd.
Nature of Case: Criminal – Central Provident Fund Act 1953 & others
Status: Ongoing proceedings (For Further Mention)
Corporate records show that Marican Faruq Umar became a director of the company in late 2024, from ACRA record. This timing is significant, as it coincides with the period in which the company was reportedly acquired.
The Concern: This case appears to arise shortly after the acquisition of the company from its previous owner. Based on patterns observed in earlier disputes, there are concerns that the transaction may have involved deferred or installment-based payment arrangements, raising the question of whether the full purchase consideration was ever completed.
While the exact contractual terms remain subject to dispute, the emergence of yet another case involving a recently acquired company strengthens concerns about a repeating pattern of contested business takeovers.
Bankruptcy Filing (2022)
Faruq Marican filed for bankruptcy application 2022
Source: Singapore Bankruptcy Database
The Record: Public records indicate that Marican Faruq Umar filed for bankruptcy in 2022 (Case No: HC/B 3339/2022) with an amount of S$176,687.
The Uncertainty: It is currently unclear whether the full amount has been repaid or if the bankruptcy status has been fully discharged.
The Concern: Given the multiple ongoing legal disputes involving Marican Faruq Umar, this raises additional financial and credibility concerns. This combination of legal and financial issues should be considered a significant red flag.
Advisory: Any business dealings with him should be approached with extreme caution and thorough due diligence.
DUE DILIGENCE CHECKLIST : Protecting Yourself
If you are dealing with Faruq Marican or Marican Faruq Umar, strictly adhere to the following:
- ⚠️ Get Your Own LAWYER!: Do not use any lawyer who is not acting in your best interest. Especially in a business sale.
- ⚠️ Do not trust your broker: Broker are not in your best interest. Get your own lawyer! Broker just want to close the deal!
- ⚠️ No installments: If he wants to pay in installments, require a bank guarantee or have him take out a bank loan to pay in full.
- ⚠️ NO CorpPass Access: Under no circumstances should you grant him "Admin" rights to your ACRA/CorpPass account until the full purchase price is verified in your bank account.
- ⚠️ Verify "Proof of Funds": Do not accept screenshots. Require a verified banker’s letter or utilize an independent escrow arrangement.
- ⚠️ Physical Signatures Only: Do not rely on digital transfers or verbal agreements. Insist that all Share Transfer Forms are signed physically in the presence of your Corporate Secretary.
- ⚠️ Check the Timeline: If he claims to be overseas or unavailable during critical moments of a transaction, verify this independently.
The Lesson: Trust nothing verbal. Verify everything.