http://www.thestandard.com.hk/news_detail.asp?pp_cat=11&art_id=72537&con_type=1&d_str=20081006
Banks should settle with Lehman minibond investors instead of battling it out in court, analysts say.
"Lawsuits are not the way to go to solve the Lehman Brothers minibonds dilemma, as they are lengthy in process and might not benefit the investor in the end," Ho Lok-sang, professor of economics and director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies at Lingnan University, said yesterday.
A member of the audience at RTHK's City Forum in Victoria Park agreed, saying: "Even if the lawsuits were won, the compensation given might not be enough to cover the lawyers' fees."
Ho added: "Of course, the banks should just settle with the affected investors if possible."
The professor said it was important to study the fine print in promotional material, claiming it could hint at certain levels of deception.
Legislative Council member Chim Pui-chung defended bank staff caught up in the fury.
He said they were merely acting on the orders of the banks who sold the products, and were told not to ask questions when they had doubts.
He added that some staff had fallen victim themselves, having invested in the structured products and recommending them to close friends and family.
But this was not the first time retail investors have been hard hit by structured products. Lawmaker- designate Ip Wai-ming said warrants and accumulators could also be problematic products that involved more leverage than many investors realized.
In a survey by the Democratic Party, 67.6 percent of 552 people polled did not understand the nature of Lehman Brothers' minibonds.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Consumer banking sells the structured products
Comment posted in my blog
I come from the banking industry and I am really ashamed about how these people from the consumer banking side conduct themselves.
It is the banking industry's secret that the lower calibre people in the bank are always chuffed into the consumer banking side. Managers from the consumer banking side also doesn't care about qualifications or training of the people they recruit as RMs or Investment Consultants. These unqualified people who join the consumer bank for the vain reason of being able to boast/ pose that they are "bankers" or "investment experts", even when they don't really have the substance or depth.
However, the conduct of the consumer banking divisions over the CLS scandal is downright unethical and heartless. It shows they don't care about the common folk, they just want to retain their undeserved titles.
We don't see such short-term-oriented and unscrupulous conduct occuring in the bank's Treasury dept/ Institution dept/ Corporate Bkg dept. Even in Private Bkg, I heard that Private Bkg RMs (those who serve customers with more than S$5m cash) refused to promote the structured investments to their customers cos they are afraid to lose their customers' long term business. In fact the Private Bkg RMs cannot see any reason why they should lock their customers' money into a 7-year, illiquid, fishy, structured investment.
I come from the banking industry and I am really ashamed about how these people from the consumer banking side conduct themselves.
It is the banking industry's secret that the lower calibre people in the bank are always chuffed into the consumer banking side. Managers from the consumer banking side also doesn't care about qualifications or training of the people they recruit as RMs or Investment Consultants. These unqualified people who join the consumer bank for the vain reason of being able to boast/ pose that they are "bankers" or "investment experts", even when they don't really have the substance or depth.
However, the conduct of the consumer banking divisions over the CLS scandal is downright unethical and heartless. It shows they don't care about the common folk, they just want to retain their undeserved titles.
We don't see such short-term-oriented and unscrupulous conduct occuring in the bank's Treasury dept/ Institution dept/ Corporate Bkg dept. Even in Private Bkg, I heard that Private Bkg RMs (those who serve customers with more than S$5m cash) refused to promote the structured investments to their customers cos they are afraid to lose their customers' long term business. In fact the Private Bkg RMs cannot see any reason why they should lock their customers' money into a 7-year, illiquid, fishy, structured investment.
Loss of retirement savings
Posted in my blog.
The irony of it all! In US, borrowers who have defaulted in their loans resulted in the collapse of the lenders. Lenders are blamed for the collapse but all the same the government bailed out the lenders.
In Singapore, savers (like me), who have obediently answered the call by the government to save to provide for our retirement stand to lose all or substantial part of that retirement fund are being told that it is our own fault for
(1) not understanding the thick prospectus littered with technical jargon; and
(2) not disbelieving the bank's representatives and agents when they told us they are safe investments.After all, we must be morons to proceed with these risky investments even after being told by the banks that they are risky. (Well, the banks must have been truthful and told us they are risky, right?)
Moral of the story? Borrow, don't save.
Tiang
The irony of it all! In US, borrowers who have defaulted in their loans resulted in the collapse of the lenders. Lenders are blamed for the collapse but all the same the government bailed out the lenders.
In Singapore, savers (like me), who have obediently answered the call by the government to save to provide for our retirement stand to lose all or substantial part of that retirement fund are being told that it is our own fault for
(1) not understanding the thick prospectus littered with technical jargon; and
(2) not disbelieving the bank's representatives and agents when they told us they are safe investments.After all, we must be morons to proceed with these risky investments even after being told by the banks that they are risky. (Well, the banks must have been truthful and told us they are risky, right?)
Moral of the story? Borrow, don't save.
Tiang
Speaker's Corner, Saturday 11 October, 5 - 7 pm
CONFIRMED:
Venue: Speaker's Corner, Hong Lim Green
Date: Saturday 11 October from 5 to 7 pm.
Topic: Petition to Singapore Government on Credit Linked Securities.
Speakers:
1. Tan Kin Lian
2. Leong Sze Hian
As a large crowed is expected, it may not be possible for some investors to hear the speakers. The authority allow a loud hailer to be used, but not a powered loudspeaker. I will keep my speech short and give a handout to people who are not able to hear me.
Signs will be put up for the attendees to meet other investors who have invested in similar products, e.g. Minibond, High Notes, Pinnacle Notes, Jubilee Notes. The main purpose of this event is to show a large gathering of investors.
Venue: Speaker's Corner, Hong Lim Green
Date: Saturday 11 October from 5 to 7 pm.
Topic: Petition to Singapore Government on Credit Linked Securities.
Speakers:
1. Tan Kin Lian
2. Leong Sze Hian
As a large crowed is expected, it may not be possible for some investors to hear the speakers. The authority allow a loud hailer to be used, but not a powered loudspeaker. I will keep my speech short and give a handout to people who are not able to hear me.
Signs will be put up for the attendees to meet other investors who have invested in similar products, e.g. Minibond, High Notes, Pinnacle Notes, Jubilee Notes. The main purpose of this event is to show a large gathering of investors.
Section 199 of the Securities and Futures Act
Read this blog for the actual wordings of section 199 of the Securities and Futures Act.
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/10/securities-and-futures-act.html
The Act defines "securities" to mean any unit in a collective investment scheme. I consider a structured product to fall under this definition.
Section 199 stats that no person shall make a make a statement, or disseminate information, that is false or misleading in a material particular and is likely to induce other persons to subscribe for securities, if he knows or ought reasonably to have known that the statement or information is false or misleading in a material particular.
The structured product are so complex that the representative (i.e. relationship manager) may not be aware that the statement they are making (i.e that the product has low risk and is like a bond) is false or misleading.
However, the financial institution that employs the representative "knows or ought reasonably to have known" that the statement or information is false or misleading. It is their duty to be aware about the nature of the product when they train the reprsentative to sell the product to the retail investors.
In my view, the financial institution has breached section 199 of the Act.
I hope that the MAS or Attorney General will take up this matter on behalf of the thousands of investors who have been given false and misleading information to invest in the structured products.
I hope that the MAS or Attorney General can negotiate an out-of-court settlement where the distributor shall buy back the product from the retail investors for 50% to 80% of the invested sum. A higher percentage should be given to the elderly and illiterate investors who were misled into the investment.
By buying back the structured product at the negotiated value, the distributor can reduce its loss from the recovery of any residual value arising from the liquidation of the assets of the structured product.
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/10/securities-and-futures-act.html
The Act defines "securities" to mean any unit in a collective investment scheme. I consider a structured product to fall under this definition.
Section 199 stats that no person shall make a make a statement, or disseminate information, that is false or misleading in a material particular and is likely to induce other persons to subscribe for securities, if he knows or ought reasonably to have known that the statement or information is false or misleading in a material particular.
The structured product are so complex that the representative (i.e. relationship manager) may not be aware that the statement they are making (i.e that the product has low risk and is like a bond) is false or misleading.
However, the financial institution that employs the representative "knows or ought reasonably to have known" that the statement or information is false or misleading. It is their duty to be aware about the nature of the product when they train the reprsentative to sell the product to the retail investors.
In my view, the financial institution has breached section 199 of the Act.
I hope that the MAS or Attorney General will take up this matter on behalf of the thousands of investors who have been given false and misleading information to invest in the structured products.
I hope that the MAS or Attorney General can negotiate an out-of-court settlement where the distributor shall buy back the product from the retail investors for 50% to 80% of the invested sum. A higher percentage should be given to the elderly and illiterate investors who were misled into the investment.
By buying back the structured product at the negotiated value, the distributor can reduce its loss from the recovery of any residual value arising from the liquidation of the assets of the structured product.
Section 27 of the Financial Advisers Act
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/09/financial-adviser-act-section-27.html
Section 27 of the Financial Adviser Act require an adviser to ensure that the recommendation (i.e. to invest in the credit linked securities) is appropriate to the person being advised.
No licensee (i.e. adviser) shall make a recommendation with respect to any investment product to a person who rely on the recommendation, if the licensee does not have a reasonable basis for making the recommendation.
A licensee does not have a reasonable basis for making a recommendation to a person unless he has obtained information or conducted investigation into the investment objectives, financial situation and particular needs of the person.
Where a licensee contravenes this requrement and the person who relies on the recoomendation has suffered loss or damage, the licensee is liable to pay damages to that person in respect of that loss or damage.
I believe that many distributing financial institutions will be found to have failed in their duty. It is inappropriate to recommend the credit-lined structured product to elderly folks who do not understand the risk.
Section 27 of the Financial Adviser Act require an adviser to ensure that the recommendation (i.e. to invest in the credit linked securities) is appropriate to the person being advised.
No licensee (i.e. adviser) shall make a recommendation with respect to any investment product to a person who rely on the recommendation, if the licensee does not have a reasonable basis for making the recommendation.
A licensee does not have a reasonable basis for making a recommendation to a person unless he has obtained information or conducted investigation into the investment objectives, financial situation and particular needs of the person.
Where a licensee contravenes this requrement and the person who relies on the recoomendation has suffered loss or damage, the licensee is liable to pay damages to that person in respect of that loss or damage.
I believe that many distributing financial institutions will be found to have failed in their duty. It is inappropriate to recommend the credit-lined structured product to elderly folks who do not understand the risk.
Request for help from Relationship Managers
Request from an investor
This is to invite the just and upright relationship managers from financial institions who were involved in the sales of Minibonds, High Notes, Pinnacle Notes, Jubilee Notes and similar products.
I believe you have heard/witness the number of people, some of those are old and financially blind, affected by the above product. To date the investigation is still on and what is mentioned/demanded by the financial institutions are proof of misrepresentation, which many of the victims will not be able to produce because most of the these are communicated verbally.
Can you share how the RM in your financial institution are trained to position he product and who are the targetted customers?
Please send your reply to kinlian@gmail.com. It will be treated in confidence.
This is to invite the just and upright relationship managers from financial institions who were involved in the sales of Minibonds, High Notes, Pinnacle Notes, Jubilee Notes and similar products.
I believe you have heard/witness the number of people, some of those are old and financially blind, affected by the above product. To date the investigation is still on and what is mentioned/demanded by the financial institutions are proof of misrepresentation, which many of the victims will not be able to produce because most of the these are communicated verbally.
Can you share how the RM in your financial institution are trained to position he product and who are the targetted customers?
Please send your reply to kinlian@gmail.com. It will be treated in confidence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)