Dear Mr. Tan,
Can you please organise another rally in Hong Lim Park (Speaker's Corner), so that the investors who were rejected by the FI or FIDREC can express their feelings? Many investors will like to attend. It has been too long since the last rally.
REPLY
If there is sufficent investors who are willing to attend, I will organise the gathering on a Saturday or Sunday in August at 5 p.m.. I also like some of the investors to speak and express their feelings. If you are interested to attend or speak, please complete this survey.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Excessive credit card charges
A year ago, I received a letter from my credit card company, informing me that the charge for a late payment is $X and for insufficient funds is $Y. I remember that the amounts are quite high, i.e. more than$40. They are excessive.
I called the credit card company and cancelled the credit card. I feel strongly that any charge should be fair and not excessive. The credit card company cannot make profit by over-charging customers. Already, they are making profit from the credit card fees and the transaction fee for each payment.
I hope that the regulator and the consumer association should take up this matter. I feel that business practices in Singapore is becoming very bad, and that consumers are being taken for a ride.
Tan Kin Lian
I called the credit card company and cancelled the credit card. I feel strongly that any charge should be fair and not excessive. The credit card company cannot make profit by over-charging customers. Already, they are making profit from the credit card fees and the transaction fee for each payment.
I hope that the regulator and the consumer association should take up this matter. I feel that business practices in Singapore is becoming very bad, and that consumers are being taken for a ride.
Tan Kin Lian
NTUC Income AGM, May 2009
At the AGM of NTUC Income held in May 2009, I raised a few questions on the cut in bonus and increase in premium rates on motor insurance. The answers provided by the management are shown in the attached document.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Tweak ATMs to do away with cheques
This letter was printed in Straits Times Forum Page. Do you agree with the suggestion? Give your views here.
Editor
Forum Page
Straits Times
MANY people are familiar with the use of automated teller machines (ATMs) to withdraw cash or transfer funds to another account.
The transfer funds facility can be used to pay a third party, in place of writing a cheque. If this is widely promoted and used, it will reduce the number of cheques that have to be mailed and cleared through the banking system, and improve efficiency of companies.
There is a drawback in the existing transfer funds facility that needs to be addressed. DBS and POSB ATMs do not allow the transferor to enter a reference number to notify the payee about the party making the transfer. I am not sure if other banks' ATMs have a similar restriction.
I suggest that the ATM system be modified to allow a reference number to be entered in making a fund transfer. This number can be entirely numeric, as the ATM does not have the facility to enter letters.
If this facility is provided, many companies will actively encourage their customers to pay by bank transfer via the ATM, instead of writing a cheque. It will benefit all parties involved in the transaction and reduce the cost of making a payment.
I also suggest that the banks provide a facility for the account owner to ask for fund transfer transactions to be downloaded daily for processing. This will suit companies that do not wish to give full access to their employees to view other transactions in the bank account.
I hope the Association of Banks in Singapore or the Monetary Authority of Singapore will take up this suggestion.
Tan Kin Lian
Editor
Forum Page
Straits Times
MANY people are familiar with the use of automated teller machines (ATMs) to withdraw cash or transfer funds to another account.
The transfer funds facility can be used to pay a third party, in place of writing a cheque. If this is widely promoted and used, it will reduce the number of cheques that have to be mailed and cleared through the banking system, and improve efficiency of companies.
There is a drawback in the existing transfer funds facility that needs to be addressed. DBS and POSB ATMs do not allow the transferor to enter a reference number to notify the payee about the party making the transfer. I am not sure if other banks' ATMs have a similar restriction.
I suggest that the ATM system be modified to allow a reference number to be entered in making a fund transfer. This number can be entirely numeric, as the ATM does not have the facility to enter letters.
If this facility is provided, many companies will actively encourage their customers to pay by bank transfer via the ATM, instead of writing a cheque. It will benefit all parties involved in the transaction and reduce the cost of making a payment.
I also suggest that the banks provide a facility for the account owner to ask for fund transfer transactions to be downloaded daily for processing. This will suit companies that do not wish to give full access to their employees to view other transactions in the bank account.
I hope the Association of Banks in Singapore or the Monetary Authority of Singapore will take up this suggestion.
Tan Kin Lian
Comments in my blog
I like those posting comments in my blog to sign off with their real name or a pen name. This makes it easier for toher readers to refer to their posting by name. Do not post anonymous comments.
Insurance company has a duty to render a clear statement on ILP
Hi Mr Tan,
I'm writing regarding a recent blog post "Full refund of premium under ILP". I was surprised and envious when I read this.
For the past 6 months, I have been pursuing X for two ILPs I bought a few years ago. I wanted to track my investments and insurance, but was not given the full disclosure of fees involved.
The total contribution I make every month goes to 1) policy charges, 2) mortality charges, 3) insurance, and 4) investment funds. The fees and charges were not disclosed to me explicitly. I learned about these fees only very recently when I started to track my investments. I realised that the numbers cannot balance month to month. Then I read the policy booklets in detailed, and learned of all the extra charges.
X was also not able to give me the number of fund units that I buy every month, after the deductions of the charges. Hence I am unable to track the performance of my investment. I tried to contact them several times. But every time I'm told this is
not possible.
The company sends a yearly statement on the "Average" no. of units I have, and I'm told that is the only best info they can provide me. Unfortunately, it is not clear how many units are deducted for charges, and how many are added. I've spent many nights on Excel spreadsheets, running the statements, the info they provide, and the amount deducted from my bank. I tried to balance the numbers to the current units I hold, to no avail.
I get a lot of pressure from X and my financial advisor. They told me I'm being unreasonable when I ask for the funds' units every month, and that no insurance or fund companies can give me this information. I cannot imagine being stuck with these two policies for the next 36 years, not knowing where my money is going every month.
I am considering bringing my case to MAS and FIDREC. Is my request for more transparent information an unreasonable one?
REPLY
I support your idea to bring up this matter with MAS and FIDREC.
The insurance company owes a duty to the policyholder to provide details of the charges and a clear statement of how the money is being invested. No policyholder, regardless of how well educated, will know what is happening, unless a clear statement is rendered each month. It is not possible to know at the end of the year from a consolidated statement.
Many insurance companies fail to provide a clear statement, and in the process the policyholder is unaware about the high charges that are being deducted. This is an unacceptable practice, from the consumer's point of view. This shabby practice cannot be condoned.
All the best in lodging your complaint.
I'm writing regarding a recent blog post "Full refund of premium under ILP". I was surprised and envious when I read this.
For the past 6 months, I have been pursuing X for two ILPs I bought a few years ago. I wanted to track my investments and insurance, but was not given the full disclosure of fees involved.
The total contribution I make every month goes to 1) policy charges, 2) mortality charges, 3) insurance, and 4) investment funds. The fees and charges were not disclosed to me explicitly. I learned about these fees only very recently when I started to track my investments. I realised that the numbers cannot balance month to month. Then I read the policy booklets in detailed, and learned of all the extra charges.
X was also not able to give me the number of fund units that I buy every month, after the deductions of the charges. Hence I am unable to track the performance of my investment. I tried to contact them several times. But every time I'm told this is
not possible.
The company sends a yearly statement on the "Average" no. of units I have, and I'm told that is the only best info they can provide me. Unfortunately, it is not clear how many units are deducted for charges, and how many are added. I've spent many nights on Excel spreadsheets, running the statements, the info they provide, and the amount deducted from my bank. I tried to balance the numbers to the current units I hold, to no avail.
I get a lot of pressure from X and my financial advisor. They told me I'm being unreasonable when I ask for the funds' units every month, and that no insurance or fund companies can give me this information. I cannot imagine being stuck with these two policies for the next 36 years, not knowing where my money is going every month.
I am considering bringing my case to MAS and FIDREC. Is my request for more transparent information an unreasonable one?
REPLY
I support your idea to bring up this matter with MAS and FIDREC.
The insurance company owes a duty to the policyholder to provide details of the charges and a clear statement of how the money is being invested. No policyholder, regardless of how well educated, will know what is happening, unless a clear statement is rendered each month. It is not possible to know at the end of the year from a consolidated statement.
Many insurance companies fail to provide a clear statement, and in the process the policyholder is unaware about the high charges that are being deducted. This is an unacceptable practice, from the consumer's point of view. This shabby practice cannot be condoned.
All the best in lodging your complaint.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)