SINGAPORE: A maid agency has been ordered by the magistrate to pay about S$1,558 to its helper’s former employer after falsely presenting her as Mandarin-speaking, even though she was later found to have little to no ability to communicate in the language.

According to a judgment published on June 9, the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) found that the agency had engaged in an unfair practice by misrepresenting the helper’s language skills.

The dispute centred on an elderly woman who was bedridden due to a stroke and Parkinson’s disease. Her son had approached the agency in late 2024 specifically seeking a helper who could speak Mandarin and had experience caring for elderly people with disabilities, Channel NewsAsia (CNA) reported (June 10).

Those requirements were not a preference. They were essential as the elderly woman spoke mainly Mandarin and understood very little English, making communication a key part of her daily care.

The helper couldn’t communicate in Mandarin or even English

The maid agency recommended a helper from Myanmar to the family. Her biodata listed Mandarin as a spoken language skill. The agency also sent a video showing her speaking Mandarin and arranged a video interview with the woman’s son.

Based on the documents, video, and interview, the son believed the helper could communicate in Mandarin and therefore, hired her. However, after she started work in December 2024, he began to realise she struggled to understand and speak both Mandarin and English.

The problem became obvious almost immediately. The son informed the agency through WhatsApp but was told to give the helper time and use translation tools to bridge the communication gap.

For about a week, he relied on Google Translate while teaching the helper his mother’s care routine, but his mother couldn’t use a smartphone herself, making communication impossible whenever the son wasn’t present.

By January 2025, the son requested a replacement helper. However, none of the alternatives suggested by the agency met the family’s requirements.

The maid agency argues that Mandarin proficiency is a more expensive package

The agency later refunded part of the money paid but declined to provide a full reimbursement. The matter eventually reached the Small Claims Tribunal under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act.

During the hearing, the agency argued that it had only been asked to find a helper who could speak “simple” Mandarin and that the helper met that standard. It also argued that stronger Mandarin proficiency would have required a more expensive package and a higher-paid helper, such as those with experience working in Taiwan or Hong Kong.

Tribunal Magistrate Leon Abraham Tan rejected those arguments. He found no evidence that the family had requested only basic proficiency in Mandarin. Messages exchanged between the parties supported the son’s account that he had consistently asked for a helper who could communicate properly in Mandarin.

The magistrate also noted that the agency later suggested another helper who could “speak good Mandarin,” which further weakened its argument.

Mr Tan said the agency couldn’t rely on the claim that finding a Mandarin-speaking helper within the family’s budget was difficult. If the agency believed the request was unrealistic, it could have declined the job instead of accepting it and providing inaccurate information. The tribunal found the helper’s Mandarin ability was either extremely poor or effectively non-existent.

Maid agencies cannot market skills that helpers don’t possess

The case goes beyond a disagreement over language skills. Singapore’s ageing population has increased the demand for foreign domestic workers to care for elderly family members with medical conditions.

Communication isn’t a bonus feature for many such households. It is part of safe and effective caregiving. As such, the tribunal stressed that agencies have a responsibility to accurately describe a helper’s abilities so that families can make informed decisions.

A mismatch can create stress, extra costs and practical difficulties, especially when the person receiving care is elderly, disabled or unable to communicate in another language. Maid agencies cannot market skills that helpers don’t possess, whether the mistake is deliberate or accidental.

The agency representative wanted a video conference hearing from a Starbucks outlet

The judgment also took issue with the conduct of the agency’s representative during the proceedings. According to the tribunal, the representative attempted to attend part of the hearing by video conference from a Starbucks outlet at Changi Airport while accompanying a maid.

The magistrate said the location was unsuitable because hearings are private and shouldn’t be conducted in public spaces where others may overhear proceedings.

The representative later became frustrated when asked to move to a more appropriate location and unsuccessfully sought to have the magistrate removed from the case. He also wanted to file a complaint against the magistrate for being difficult on him.

Mr Tan eventually ordered the agency to pay an additional amount of about S$270 in costs and disbursements, citing the representative’s conduct and applications that unnecessarily prolonged the proceedings. He also emphasised that video-conference attendance is a convenience granted by the tribunal and shouldn’t be treated as an automatic right.

Lack of communication and honesty can affect everything

Families hiring caregivers focus on their work experience, salary and availability. This case shows why verifying language ability can be just as important.

Communication can affect everything from medication and meals to safety and dignity for households caring for elderly relatives.

Again, maid agencies should be careful not to oversell a helper’s abilities. When expectations and reality don’t match, everyone ends up paying the price.

This article (Maid agency falsely claims that its helper could speak Mandarin; magistrate orders them to pay S$1,558 to family) first appeared on The Independent Singapore News.