Saturday, May 2, 2009

Critical year offer - seek advice from CASE

Hi
15 years ago, my father bought me an AIA insurance with critical year feature.

Now, AIA has mailed me to choose 2 options - 1) continue premium 2) pay from dividends till zero then start cash payment ago. Alternative is 3)support program, but no explanation whatsoever 4) adjudication.

If I don't choose, it will be taken as I were to accept AIA position. I am confused which is the better option. I was hoping for someone to initiate class action, but till now none forthcoming. I would like your advice on this.

REPLY
I suggest that you consult the Consumer Association of Singapore, CASE.  They have handled many of these cases i n the past.

Wrong advice about bonuses

Hi Mr. Tan
I was misled into buying insurance for all these years, thinking that the lump-sum amount paid to insurance will be like fixed deposit, and that once bonuses are declared, the surrender value in the benefit illustration shown will be guaranteed.

I did ask the agent about the guaranteed and non-guaranteed part but the answer was to look at the surrender value shown in the BIPS, which she claimed will be payable to me on surrender.

I have now found out that the terminal bonus and future reversionary bonuses are not guaranteed, which was not advised to me. Please advise me if I got a case against them.

REPLY
It is the duty of the agent to advise you correctly. If you were mis-informed, you should take the following steps:

a) Lodge a complaint to the management of the insurance company, giving facts about the mis-representation by the agent

b) If the insurance company does not give you a satisfactory solution, you can lodge a complaint to FIDREC. Details are in www.fidrec.com.sg. If you need legal or other advise, you should be willing to pay $500 for someone to advice you. I will not be able to look into your complaint, as it takes a lot of my time.

Party Whip in Parliament

Mr. Tan Kin Lian
Can you write a simple an article on how the PARTY WHIP works in parliament voting. I am interested and puzzled. My understanding is that all PAP MP must vote according to party line, regardless the MP’s constituencies view or the MP’s personal view on the subject being put to vote.

My simple understanding is as follows:

[1] MP is the representative of his constituencies. His vote speaks for the people who vote for him. We can see in US or UK that senators or MP would not vote simply it is party line. They vote in accordance to their constituency. For example, I could be a right-winged conservative, but my constituency is gay by large majority. When I am called to vote, I have to respect my constituencies’ wishes. If I don’t subscribe to this “democratic process” then I have to quit as MP or go elsewhere and win others vote to be an MP.

[2] The vote count is a statistical and historical record of the decision making process. The ratio of the majority will be a precious guide to how policy is implemented and how future decision making would to be made. For example, if a bill is passed with large majority then we know it is with the people, and it can be implemented with higher conviction and pace. However, if a bill is passed with slim majority, it would have to be executed with great compassion, care, circumspect, gentleness etc, because there is still a large minority who think otherwise.

[3] I think it is inconsistent when a person debate against a bill, and voted for it eventually. I find it hard to understand and reconcile. For example, if a MP were to speak against building of Casino, he has to vote against, when the vote is being called.

Can you write something to educate me, because I find that Singaporeans need to know more about how it works and the principal behind this policy.

CASHEW NUT

REPLY (revised)
You are right about the practice in Singapore and in the USA. In Singapoer, the MP has to vote according to the party line (unless the whip is lifted - which is seldom allowed). In the US, the Congressman votes according to his personal conscience (usually guided by the views of his constituents) and is not bound to vote according to the Party line. 

However, apart from Singapore, I know that the whip is also practiced in the UK. In this system, the concept is that the people vote for the policies of the party in power. The MPs are obliged to vote for the policies of the ruling party, as decided by the top leadership. This is to prevent a MP changing party and toppling the Government. In some countries, this is considered to be necessary to prevent a MP being bought over by money politics.

In my view, the US system is better. It ensures that the laws in the country better reflect the wishes and aspirations of the population. It also encourages greater transparency and discussion on the issues affecting the future of the country. It allows the citizens to be better engaged.

Friday, May 1, 2009

Crisis of Credit Visualised

Dear Mr. Tan
How are you? I am a regular visitor to your blog. Just thought I would share this nice link, The Crisis of Credit Visualized. Very nice and easy to understand animation. May be your visitors to the blog might enjoy it too.
 
Regards
Niranjan

Looking for a tailor

Dear Mr Tan
I am looking for a tailor to help me do some work for my sofa. I will buy all the material and travel to the fellow's place, as long as he/she can take my instruction to do the work. I wonder if you could find a way (eg publicising on your blog on through the part time match portal) to help me find such a person.

Any contact? Send email to mengwee.tan@gmail.com


Easy Way of Getting a Car Insurance Quote Online

If you are looking at getting a car insurance quote online then there are a lot of companies out there that can help you find the best competitive rates. When searching for a way to save via the Internet you will want to check out the car insurance companies that are willing to share their rates against others. The best known for this is Progressive. If you are going to be checking places which