http://www.pressdisplay.com/pressdisplay/showlink.aspx?bookmarkid=2J6I999CTEE4&preview=magnifier&linkid=fc71a779-d21c-4026-b0c6-af6bdeceec43&pdaffid=8HM4kDzWViwfc7AqkYlqIQ%3d%3d
Hong Kong banks yesterday rejected suggestions they were offering refunds to investors in minibonds backed by bankrupt US bank Lehman Brothers, after a report that one had agreed to pay back a customer.
Mevas Bank, a subsidiary of Dah Sing Bank, issued a firm denial that it had refunded a customer. Standard Chartered, Fubon Bank, DBS, Chong Hing Bank, Citibank, Wing Lung Bank, Bank of China (Hong Kong), Chiyu Banking Corporation, Nanyang Commercial Bank and Shanghai Commercial Bank all said they had not concluded any refund agreements with clients. Bank of East Asia and Citic Ka Wah Bank said only that they were handling complaints. Other banks did not respond.
Since Lehman Brothers, the fourth-largest US investment bank, filed for bankruptcy on September 15, hundreds of investors have been demanding refunds from the banks and brokerages that sold them the minibonds – high-risk credit-linked derivatives marketed as proxy investments in well-known companies – and similar complex derivatives.
Hong Kong investors have bought HK$15.6 billion in minibonds and similar derivatives backed by Lehman Brothers. They stand to lose most, if not all, their money. A Chinese-language newspaper this week reported that Mevas Bank had agreed to a refund for a minibond investor. It quoted Democratic Party legislator-elect Kam Nai-wai, who is helping a group of the investors, as saying that the investor had asked that their name be withdrawn from a list of those seeking help. Mr Kam would neither confirm nor deny the report.
In response to Mevas Bank’s denial, he said: “It’s no surprise … They don’t want the other investors to know.” The Mevas investor declined comment. No other investors have withdrawn their requests to the Democratic Party for help. Some investors drew hope from the rumours. “
There’s justice in this world,” said Grace Lau Ngar-pui, organiser of a group of investors who bought Lehmanbacked investment products from ABN Amro, She also believes Mevas’ denial is a tactic to ward off other investors who want a refund.
Yesterday, for the first time, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Chan Ka-keung discussed the complaints with representatives of the banks, brokerages, trustees, the Monetary Authority and the Securities and Futures Commission. The two watchdogs are, respectively, investigating the banks and brokerages which sold the investments. “I specifically urged the banks to seriously and quickly handle the complaints about the methods used for selling the minibonds,” he said.
The Hong Kong Association of Banks has decided to form a taskforce to deal with the minibonds issue. The authority has received 3,555 complaints about minibonds.
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Question for Member of Parliament
One question investors may want to ask MPs is What is the point of a regulatory system that does not lead to investor compensation?"
MAS has said "However, investors should understand that while regulatory actions are important to deter breaches and uphold the integrity of the system, they do not lead to compensation for investors"
MAS has said "However, investors should understand that while regulatory actions are important to deter breaches and uphold the integrity of the system, they do not lead to compensation for investors"
Immense pressure to sell the structured products
Dear Mr Tan KL,
In today's TodayOnline a certain L H Tang, who is a personal financial consultant gave a first person perspective, of his job in the forum letter. Below is an excerpt:
"......Consumers should understand that consultants are under immense pressure to think of ways such products can be“beneficial” to them."
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/279135.asp
The content is quite similar to that posted in the Straits Time Online Forum on 01/10/08 by Ms Geraldine Teng. If we are able to gather more of such statements from Relationship Managers /
Financial Consultants it would be evidentially beneficial in proving that these RM / FC were under immense pressure to push or hard sell such high risk products as 'low risk' products backed by the reputable banks.
Your kind assistance in this matter is highly commendable.
TKH
REPLY
Financial advisers or relationship managers who face similar pressure to achieve sales results can send an e-mail to me at kinlian@gmail.com
In today's TodayOnline a certain L H Tang, who is a personal financial consultant gave a first person perspective, of his job in the forum letter. Below is an excerpt:
"......Consumers should understand that consultants are under immense pressure to think of ways such products can be“beneficial” to them."
http://www.todayonline.com/articles/279135.asp
The content is quite similar to that posted in the Straits Time Online Forum on 01/10/08 by Ms Geraldine Teng. If we are able to gather more of such statements from Relationship Managers /
Financial Consultants it would be evidentially beneficial in proving that these RM / FC were under immense pressure to push or hard sell such high risk products as 'low risk' products backed by the reputable banks.
Your kind assistance in this matter is highly commendable.
TKH
REPLY
Financial advisers or relationship managers who face similar pressure to achieve sales results can send an e-mail to me at kinlian@gmail.com
Meet your Members of Parliament
I am compiling a list of investors (who signed the Petition) according to their residential postal code. This allows them to contact other investors in the same constituency and meet the members of Parliament.
Call for volunteers: If you are willing to call other investors to meet the MP, please send an email to me at kinlian@gmail.com giving your name, mobile phone, and postal code now.
It is better for the investors to meet the MP during the weekly "Meet the People" session and tell your MP how you were misled into investing in the high risk structured products.
If the MP meets several of the investors personally, they will better appreciate the problem. They may ask MAS to be pro-active in helping the investors to deal with the financial institution that sold the structured products.
You can find out your Member of Parliament and the venue, day and time of the "Meet the People" session from this website:
http://www.parliament.gov.sg/cgi-bin/new-mpsearch.pl
Call for volunteers: If you are willing to call other investors to meet the MP, please send an email to me at kinlian@gmail.com giving your name, mobile phone, and postal code now.
It is better for the investors to meet the MP during the weekly "Meet the People" session and tell your MP how you were misled into investing in the high risk structured products.
If the MP meets several of the investors personally, they will better appreciate the problem. They may ask MAS to be pro-active in helping the investors to deal with the financial institution that sold the structured products.
You can find out your Member of Parliament and the venue, day and time of the "Meet the People" session from this website:
http://www.parliament.gov.sg/cgi-bin/new-mpsearch.pl
Send feedback to NTUC Income
Dear Mr Tan,
Do you have the NTUC Income CEO's email address for me to file a complaint to? Their call centre and email service are useless and they do nothing to help me.
My wife's total hospitalisation bill is $9k. She has an operation on (date). Till now, the claims department only paid out $250 Medishield claims. My wife has a Income Shield Insurance Preferred Plan with Rider Plan and they only paid out $250 in claims so far. I have called the claim department and they keep saying they will get back to us as they are processing it or wait for their letters. I have already paid $3k in cash upfront before her operation. Now the hospital has deducted $3k from my wife's medisave and now the hospital is demanding us to pay the remaining 3K. What is happening to NTUC now?
The irony is right now they have just sent me a letter to ask me to renew my incomeshield policy stating the benefits and advantages of signing up with them.
EL
REPLY
I suggest that you send a registered letter addressed to the CEO of NTUC Income:
Bras Basah Branch
75 Bras Basah Road,
NTUC Income Centre
Singapore 189557
Or you can send a fax to 67883777
If there is delay in settling your claim, you can file a complaint to FiDREC, www.fidrec.com.sg
Do you have the NTUC Income CEO's email address for me to file a complaint to? Their call centre and email service are useless and they do nothing to help me.
My wife's total hospitalisation bill is $9k. She has an operation on (date). Till now, the claims department only paid out $250 Medishield claims. My wife has a Income Shield Insurance Preferred Plan with Rider Plan and they only paid out $250 in claims so far. I have called the claim department and they keep saying they will get back to us as they are processing it or wait for their letters. I have already paid $3k in cash upfront before her operation. Now the hospital has deducted $3k from my wife's medisave and now the hospital is demanding us to pay the remaining 3K. What is happening to NTUC now?
The irony is right now they have just sent me a letter to ask me to renew my incomeshield policy stating the benefits and advantages of signing up with them.
EL
REPLY
I suggest that you send a registered letter addressed to the CEO of NTUC Income:
Bras Basah Branch
75 Bras Basah Road,
NTUC Income Centre
Singapore 189557
Or you can send a fax to 67883777
If there is delay in settling your claim, you can file a complaint to FiDREC, www.fidrec.com.sg
Proposed Commission on Life Insurance Products
Dear Mr. Tan,
I have a proposal. In future the products will have a low cost(commission and expenses) and reasonable profit margin for the company.
Commission will range between 5-10%
1. whole life and endowment products will pay 10% for 1st year and 5% next 2 years.
2.Term products will pay 5% for 2 years.
3.Other products 5% for 1 year.
The commissions above are to be paid to agents who sell and push products and do nothing but soliciting and form filling.
Those who are qualified and competent and who can prove professional competence in specific area to provide financial planning advice can charge a NEGOTIABLE FEE (hourly or piece rate)with customers.
This will keep the cost low for the consumers and the company. The products can charge low premium for larger coverage and higher return of about 4% after 10 years.
This model will attract those advisers who are serious about helping people to upgrade themselves and to be paid according to service and work done for the customers.
For agents who sell only, they get the commission as in the products.
This will be akin to other professions where fee commensurate with professional advice and work and not for form filling, legwork or solicitation and some other non financial services.
This is the most equitable and agents who think of 'get rich quick' are nor suitable for this trade.This will stop mis-selling and misrepresentation, unethical selling , conflict of interest and malpractices.
This will weed out agents who are in the business just for the money and who not interested in helping the customers. This will elevate the profession .
Fair Dealing
REPLY
Under the current market price, the commission paid to agents is 5 to 10 times of the above proposed rates. I agree that the current commission rates are too high and unfair to consumers. I advice consumers to look at the commission rates stated in the Benefit Illustration and avoid life insurance products that pay comissions of $1,000 or more to the insurance agent.
I have a proposal. In future the products will have a low cost(commission and expenses) and reasonable profit margin for the company.
Commission will range between 5-10%
1. whole life and endowment products will pay 10% for 1st year and 5% next 2 years.
2.Term products will pay 5% for 2 years.
3.Other products 5% for 1 year.
The commissions above are to be paid to agents who sell and push products and do nothing but soliciting and form filling.
Those who are qualified and competent and who can prove professional competence in specific area to provide financial planning advice can charge a NEGOTIABLE FEE (hourly or piece rate)with customers.
This will keep the cost low for the consumers and the company. The products can charge low premium for larger coverage and higher return of about 4% after 10 years.
This model will attract those advisers who are serious about helping people to upgrade themselves and to be paid according to service and work done for the customers.
For agents who sell only, they get the commission as in the products.
This will be akin to other professions where fee commensurate with professional advice and work and not for form filling, legwork or solicitation and some other non financial services.
This is the most equitable and agents who think of 'get rich quick' are nor suitable for this trade.This will stop mis-selling and misrepresentation, unethical selling , conflict of interest and malpractices.
This will weed out agents who are in the business just for the money and who not interested in helping the customers. This will elevate the profession .
Fair Dealing
REPLY
Under the current market price, the commission paid to agents is 5 to 10 times of the above proposed rates. I agree that the current commission rates are too high and unfair to consumers. I advice consumers to look at the commission rates stated in the Benefit Illustration and avoid life insurance products that pay comissions of $1,000 or more to the insurance agent.
Posting comments in my blog
I like to ask readers who post comments in my blog to observe the following:
1. Write your full name at the bottom of your comment
2. Avoid defamatory statements against any person
3. Avoid political statements
I will disallow any comment that fail to observe the above requests.
1. Write your full name at the bottom of your comment
2. Avoid defamatory statements against any person
3. Avoid political statements
I will disallow any comment that fail to observe the above requests.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)