Is Tan Kin Lian heading towards a collision course with the establishment ?

We are offering attractive cash rewards for any reliable information on the amount of sinking funds lost by any PAP Town Councils. Read more

By Fang Zhi Yuan, Chief Editor

As the adage goes “too many cooks spoil the broth“. The minibond debacle which has been dragging on like a soap opera for weeks saw no end in sight with various players now jumping into the fray causing more confusion amid investors desperately seeking for leadership and guidance.

For the past one week, various figures from the establishment has stepped forward one after another to exhort the investors to exercise patience and restraint and to go through proper channels to air their grievances, the latest coming from an external independent observer appointed by MAS to oversee the process, Mr Gerald Ee, who urged investors to “stay calm and follow the process.” (Straits Times )

They have been given the standard advice to lodge their complaint first to the financial institutions and if negotiations failed, to bring their case to FIDReC where the FIs are legally bound to accept and follow the decisions made there by an independent arbitrator.

Legal recourse or class action suit which has been mooted by some quarters were strongly discouraged and dismissed as time-consuming, expensive and unfeasible. Experts from both the financial and legal professions were brought in to express their concerns and doubts on such an option with the aim of dampening the enthusiasm and support of it amongst the investors.

The government has stated its stance explicitly in no certain terms: “Go through the standard procedures, there is no other way.” Yet one man seemed determined to defy their wishes and has been organizing the investors to do the exact opposite.

Mr Tan Kin Lian, a key figure since the fiasco erupted has contacted a lawyer, Mr Glenn Knight and a group of investors in an attempt to lodge a collection legal action against the financial institutions.

Writing in his blog, he “proposed that the investors should come forward and to say how they have been ‘misled’ and by which party meaning the banks or the other financial institution” before deciding how to proceed with the collective legal action which may include lodging a police report if the prospectus breach the disclosure standard expected under the Securities & Futures Act, leading to investors being cheated.

By choosing to sing a different tune persistently to the government’s with no absolutely no support of any sort from anybody within the establishment, Tan runs the risk of heading on a collision course with them. In short, it is one lone ranger taking on the might of the entire establishment with its machinery and axillaries.

For the time-being, the establishment has been cautious not to rebuke him, but knowing how ruthless the PAP can be in demolishing their opponents who are a threat to their interests, real or imagined, their patience may be wearing thin in Tan’s latest manoeuver to outflank them.

Prime Minister Lee reiterated MAS’s stance that the government should and would not step in to interfere with the process, citing it as a “moral hazard”, thereby leaving it entirely to the financial institutions to work out a deal with individual investors.

The protracted and onerous process which can take weeks or even months would have dashed the hopes of the investors sufficiently by then to pre-empt any further lobbying for compensation.

The banks know that the law is on their side. All investors had signed a contract stating that they have understood and accepted the terms and conditions before purchasing the investment products. The burden of proof would be on the investors to prove to that they have been misled into buying them.

By offering to compensate only the “vulnerable” investors, the banks have cleverly implemented a “divide-and-rule” strategem to further test the resolve of the investors to take up a class action suit collectively against them and to deflect criticisms at the same time that they are “heartless” brutes concerned only about making money.

A class action suit stretching for weeks or months attracting unwanted media attention along the way is both undesired and unneeded for a government which is finding itself increasingly under siege for its lacklustre approach at handling the issue.

Since when did the PAP ever back down to the demands of the people and listen to them ? In spite of widespread opposition to their atrocious salaries, they are going to raise it for a third time at the end of the year. Should we expect them to be any kinder to a much smaller group of Singaporeans who, technically speaking, have only themselves to blame for investing their money in a product they have little knowledge of ?

Singapore’s national bank, DBS whose stocks were already in free fall after its offer of compensation was announced, is set to see its profits drop further for this financial year. Who is going to answer to its shareholders if the government were to force it to compensate most if not all the minibond investors ?

Since Singapore gained its independence from the British in 1965, the PAP has always been more business-friendly than people-friendly. Between protecting the interests of one of its prized assets and defending the rights of a few Singaporeans, the choice is pretty obvious.

Tan Kin Lian is threading on increasingly dangerous grounds. The more prominent he becomes, the more the establishment appears to be inept and greater the embarrassment will be to the government which has not only been slow to react to the crisis in the first place, but has also shown itself to be completely clueless and lost.  

Knowing how intolerant the PAP is of any public show of dissent, activism and civil disobedience in the form of protests, rallies and marches, he has already pushed the OB markers to its limits by organizing 4 consecutive protests at Hong Lim Park so far.

As the unofficial “ringleader” of investors who have been most vocal in pressurizing the banks for compensation, he will inevitably become the scapegoat for any “mishaps“, intended or otherwise, for example, if the investors decide to emulate their Hong Kong counterparts by protesting outside DBS Central Office in Shenton Way.

In 1988, then Singapore’s Solicitor-General Francis Seow was arrested under the Internal Security Act for 72 days on charges of “being a willing partner to acts of inteference in Singapore’s internal affairs by representatives of a foreign power.”

After 20 years, most Singaporeans seem to have forgotten who is in control of the army, the police and the media. Mr Tan had better watched his back carefully for the signs are increasing that the authorities will not sit idly by and allow him to continue to run the show. Contrary to appearance, the PAP of today is essentially still the PAP of 1988.

EDITORS’ NOTE: we will be publishing more news from Hong Kong including a radio podcast in the afternoon, so stay tuned here.

Daily news and CNA headlines can be found at The Singapore Enquirer

Singapore Kopitiam feature: Interview on Tan Kin Lian

In your dealings with him, what kind of person does Mr Tan strike you as?

I worked with Tan Kin Lian since 15 August 2003 until his retirement on 1 April 2007. I did not report directly to him. I reported to the present general counsel of NTUC Income, Vincent Yeo.

Tan has often believed in doing what is right and in helping those that really do need help. In doing these things, he is pragmatic and he takes calculated risks. He also has this remarkable ability to simplify matters. I guess these qualities come from his background as an actuary.

I remember, when I first joined NTUC Income, a manager had put forward a proposal to Tan. The manager painted a very rosy picture and provided enticing figures to support that image. Tan replied, “Our goal as a cooperative is not make too much money. We only need to make a reasonable amount of money. Our goal should also be to help people and to create jobs so that they can help others.”

Read rest of article here

What the hell is Tan Kin Lian doing ?

By Fang Zhi Yuan, Chief Editor

“DBS begins compensation process” screams the Straits Times headlines on 24 October 2008.

“I am deeply concerned about the anguish our customers are experiencing. DBS is committed to doing the right thing and my colleagues and I are working as hard as possible to resolve the situation” DBS CEO Richard Stanley said in a press statement a day earlier.

More than 2 weeks after DBS Hong Kong announced its plans to compensate local minibond holders, DBS Singapore suddenly sprung into action, trigging off a cascade of activities that have taken even the most optimistic observers by surprise.

For the past one month since the minibond fiasco first erupted, the Singapore authorities have been keeping relatively mum, preferring to let the individual financial institutions handle their customers themselves.

Even the events which had transpired in Hong Kong had been kept secretly under wraps till this blog exposed the mainstream media’s complete news blackout.

One man whose name has been synonymous with this entire saga is ex-NTUC INCOME Chief Mr Tan Kin Lian who have been hogging the limelight by lending both a ear and a voice for the affected investors, many of whom are not financially savvy.

Mr Tan wrote on his blog daily, answered questions filed by anxious Singaporeans and organized 3 protest rallies at Hong Lim Park for the investors to meet one another and to discuss their common course of action.

3 petitions for the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) to take concrete actions to assist the investors were submitted with the 4th in the pipeline.

The seemingly endless impasse was finally broken last Wednesday with the surprise announcement by 3 banks – DBS, Maybank and Hong Leong Finance to compensate “vulnerable” customers.

Appearances are often deceiving especially in Singapore where nothing happens without a good reason. The joint declaration by the three banks in unison to compensate affected investors is too well-timed and choreographed to be attributed to mere coincidence without raising one’s suspicions if they were instructed by somebody “up there” to do so.

The mantra for Singaporeans to deal with the government had always been this since time immemorial: “GO THROUGH PROPER CHANNELS.” There was never any allowance given for short cuts which will be frowned upon immediately as deviant behavior.

Without Mr Tan Kin Lian’s interjection, the financial institutions will have a much easier time dealing with individual investors separately. Now that they have found solidarity and strength together, they are emboldened to take drastic actions previously unheard of such as protesting at DBS’s headquarters and taking up a class action suit against the banks.

The banks appeared unprepared for this new-found civil activism which had led to persistent lobbying by the investors for compensation and the authorities have no choice but to step in to defuse the tension before it explodes in their face.

According to insider sources which I can’t verify independently, senior officials in MAS conceded they had made a mistake in giving Tan Kin Lian the opportunity, freedom and time to speak to the investors who now regard every single word he said as the gospel truth.

Uncertain of Tan’s motives and worried that matters may get out of hand with rising anger and angst amongst the investors, they are now moving in in double-quick time to reverse the damage which is most evident from the recent media reports and news broadcasts:

1. Authoritative figures from the finance industry such as Mohd Salim and David Gerald were roped in to offer their views which essentially implore investors to have patience and go through proper channels such as lodging a complaint to the financial institution or FIDReC first.

2. Lawyers including a PAP MP were interviewed on the prospect of taking legal action against the banks which were discouraged by all. Even the opposition MP Mr Low Thia Kiang issued a press statement urging investors not to resort to legal means.

3. Mr Tan Kin Lian was conspicuous by his absence and his views were no longer sought after and published by the mainstream media.

4. Suddenly the media carried reports and advice for the investors daily filling up at least 2 pages of space while it was previously a no issue for the last 3 weeks or so.

5. Government leaders began to speak up on the issue including MAS’s Managing Director Mr Heng Swee Keat and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong which leaves one wondering why they had not bothered to do so earlier.

Some senior officials distrust Tan Kin Lian and have expressed their displeasure privately at his “antics” which has not been helping their work. During a high level meeting last week, one official was said (unconfirmed) to have uttered the expletive ”What the hell is Tan Kin Lian doing ?” to his colleague.

Mr Heng Swee Keat let loose a freudian slip in Sunday Times alluding to Mr Tan Kin Lian subtlely when he said this:

‘I understand that affected investors are anxious and looking for solutions. Unfortunately, I think some of the advice they are receiving is not helpful because it has generated anxiety and confusion.’

The authorities now find themselves stuck in a quagmire. They cannot reprimand Mr Tan Kin Lian openly without incurring the wrath of ordinary Singaporeans many of whom now rever him as the “Champion of the underdogs”, yet it is becoming a torture to allow him to continue stealing the show which rightfully belong to them.

The only recourse they can find is to make him a “persona non grata” through denying him the media space and air time to have his views heard in order to dilute his influence. Judging from the size of the crowd at last Saturday’s Hong Lim Park 3 days after the announcement of the banks’ offer of compensation, it may be a case of too little, too late.

Daily news updates and CNA headlines can be found at The Singapore Enquirer

More photos of minibond protest at Hong Lim Park, 25 October 2008

Photos by Eugene Yeo and Cheng Siew Peng

Read Wayangparty Club’s coverage of yesterday’s protest at Hong Lim Park:

Field report and photos

Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech Part 1

Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech Part 2

Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech Part 3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

EDITORS’ note: Daily news headlines and updates can be found at The Singapore Enquirer .

Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech at Hong Lim Park, Part 3 (25 Oct 2008)

Video and editing by Eugene Yeo and Cheng Siew Peng, uploaded at 10pm.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBp_JhTrUQM&hl=en&fs=1]

Excerpts from Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech:

“Somebody asked me, Mr Tan, is it possible to get back 100% ? Honestly, I don’t think so. Because already the underlying assets, so many have already failed. Before Lehman Brothers went under, the value has dropped below 50%.”

“Hong Kong asked the banks to buy over, is that good or no good. But it depends buy over for how much. According to what I read, buy over at market value is no good. Market value today is only 10 to 15%. You might as well take the risk and wait. But if they over 70 or 80%, I think it is worthwhile.”

“Actually when I started talking to you 3 weeks ago, I thought the banks should compensate a bit more, but you looked at these three weeks, the stock markets dropped by 30%. So investors you must take this into account so that you can reach an agreement with the banks. I would like to thank you all and let’s welcome Mr Goh”

Mr (?) Siew Ong Koh (rushing to the stage before Mr Tan left to hand over a “plaque” to him):

“Ladies and gentleman, let’s thank Mr Tan. I have one word. Now I have one way. Through legality, we are all lost. But we are looking for a response from the people. Who are responsible ? The Top Top, the Fat cat, or MOF or another honest mistake !”

More photos of today’s event will be published tomorrow, so stay tuned on our blog for the most up-to-date news. This news coverage is proudly presented to you by the Editorial Team, Wayangparty Club – the FASTEST news blog in Singapore.

EDITORS’ note: Daily news headlines and updates can be found at The Singapore Enquirer .

Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech at Hong Lim Park, Part 2 (25 Oct 2008)

Video and editing by Eugene Yeo and Cheng Siew Peng, uploaded at 9pm.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpkskHi0Vxk&hl=en&fs=1]

Excerpts from Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech:

“MAS, don’t do case by case, not fair, sometimes the bank is not so generous. So the petition is to ask MAS to see so many people are involved, do it together according to which category, what is the fair compensation, so I hope to write this, and I hope I get the support, so it become easier if the bank agree.”

“Let me explain the process. If you go to the bank after you lodge a complaint, they call you for an interview after which they will give you an answer – sorry, you have no case or okay, we will compensate you 30%. If you accept, the case ends. If you don’t accept or they don’t compensate at all, you can go the dispute center or FIDReC. You only pay $50 to the dispute center and they will form an independent people to listen to your side and the bank’s side and they make a decision. That decision they made, the bank must follow, but as a consumer, if you still don’t accept, you can still go to court, it is not binding on you.”

“I also want to suggest that the investors should go and see the top management of your financial institutions. Over 100 people already sign a letter to DBS asking to meet them and the management has agreed to meet them, give coffee and meeting room somemore.”

“When you meet the financial institution, there are two things you need to tell them. One, how you were misled into investing. So if the senior management hear so many of you tell the same story, then they may know they make a mistake. Next is to ask them how they want to compensate. Here, err…so carry on with this while I organize the petition, whether the MAS agree to give some standard approach will be another matter.”

“Some investors wanted to take legal action. All right, legal action you should wait after the dispute center then you consider. Legal action is not easy. I ask the lawyer to tell me the steps and how much it is going to cost. One lawyer tell me it is a bit difficult as everybody’s circumstances are different.”

“Now every case will cost about at district court level will cost S$80,000, quite expensive, you go to high court, extra money, you lose the case, the bank want to ask you to pay, also extra money, so you have to be careful as it will cost a lot of money.”

Part 3 of Mr Tan’s speech will be uploaded before dawn, so stay tuned to our blog and forward the URL to everybody you know as this will NOT BE REPORTED by the mainstream media. This news coverage is proudly presented to you by the Editorial Team, Wayangparty Club – the FASTEST news blog in Singapore.

EDITORS’ note: Daily news headlines and updates can be found at The Singapore Enquirer .

Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech at Hong Lim Park, Part 1 (25 Oct 2008)

Video and editing by Eugene Yeo and Cheng Siew Peng, uploaded at 8.10pm

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ct1HmI3r1TM&hl=en&fs=1]

Excerpts from Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech:

“The main purpose of the meeting is for the investors to get together and according to which bank you buy from, so some of them will put up their signs, ABN Amro, DBS, Hong Leong, so that you can go and meet them and exchange your opinion on how to lodge the complaint.”

“It is very important you should lodge your complaint. You don’t lodge your complaint, you get nothing. You lodge your complaint, you still get nothing. Maybe you will get something. Only 1000 people have lodged their complaints which means there are still 9000 people who have notlodged yet.”

“These are the complaint forms. You can ask them from my volunteers later. You can fill up the form here or bring the form go back and fill up. These forms are to complain to the banks you buy from. So take this information and go and complain to the bank. You must fill up these questions honestly.”

Complaint on Mis-selling of Structured Product:

1. Your name, NRIC, address and telephone.

2. Which financial institution, branch, bank of representative.

3. Product, amount invested, date.

4. How did you get involved in the investment ? What happened ?

5. Were you alone or accompanied by another person ? Who ?

6. What did the representative (who sold the investment to you) tell you about investment ?

7. Did the representative tell you about any guarantee on your investment ?

8. Did they make you sign any form regarding the investment ? Did you understand the content of the form ? Was it given to you before or after you agreed to make the investment ? Did you read the form ? Did you understand the content ?

9. Did you rely on the advice of the representative in making the investment ? Which were the important aspects of the advice ?

10. Do you have any other statements to make regarding this matter ?

“Some people are worried that when they go to the bank and show them the form, the bank will say that you have no case as you have already signed the form. Don’t believe them, just believe honestly in what you said and let somebody else judge the case.”

“After you lodged the complaint, within 4 weeks the bank will call you. Don’t worry, you honestly go and you just stick to whatever you say. They ask you, you clarify. If they tell you no case, don’t believe them, of course they tell you no case.”

“If you are asked to sign anything, read carefully and get a copy. If they ask you to go for interview, just go for it. If they ask you to clarify, just honestly give your statement”.

“I will organizing another petition and I hope I can get at least 1,000 signatures for my petition”.

Part 2 of Mr Tan’s speech will be uploaded before midnight, so stay tuned to our blog and forward the URL to everybody you know as this will NOT BE REPORTED by the mainstream media. This news coverage is proudly presented to you by the Editorial Team, Wayangparty Club – the FASTEST news blog in Singapore.

EDITORS’ note: Daily news headlines and updates can be found at The Singapore Enquirer .

LATEST from Hong Lim Park: Over 500 disgruntled investors turn up to protest against MAS’s inaction

Article and photos by Eugene Yeo and Cheng Siew Peng on site from Hong Lim Park, 6.15pm

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNSTHTs-wRw&hl=en&fs=1]

Mr Tan Kin Lian preparing for his speech. The 15 minutes speech will be uploaded in 3 parts on our blog in the next few hours

In spite of the latest offer by 3 banks – DBS, Hong Leong Finance and Maybank to compensate the “vulnerable” group of investors, over 500 Singaporeans still turn up at Hong Lim Park today at 5pm to express their unhappiness over the handling of their cases by the banks and in solidarity of one another.

Investors gathered at Hong Lim Park, 5pm.

Mr Tan Kin Lian urged the investors to stay united and lodged their complaints together even if the banks claim that they have no grounds to stand on. He is also planning to submit a third petition to MAS and implored the crowd to give him at least a thousand signatures.

Walking towards the “podium” to hear Mr Tan’s speech

In his 15 minute speech, Mr Tan reminded the investors to lodge their complaints to FIDReC first before considering the legal route. He has spoken to a lawyer and the estimated legal costs if the hearing is held at the District Court is about S$80,000.

Is this chiobu May Wong from CNA ?

Towards the end of the speech, a man named Siew presented Mr Tan with a paper “plaque” with the words “Mr Tan Kin Lian – Champions of the underdogs” which received a round of applause from everybody present.

 

Mr Tan Kin Lian in his characteristic smile posing for the cameramen.

We were able to interview a few investors after Mr Tan’s speech:

Wayangparty: Hi, we are from the news blog wayangparty and we would like to take up a few minutes of your time to interview you. What do you think of the banks’ offer to compensate the “vulnerable” group ?

Darren Pang, 45: “Talk cock lah, it’s their way of shirking responsibility. Tell how many ‘vulnerable’ people are conned by them ?”

Lim H C, 56: “Wah, like that means I don’t qualify to get a single cent, siao, die die will fight them to the end to get my money back !”

Mr Tan Kin Lian and Mr Andrew Loh Hong Puey of TOC

Wayangparty: “The government has been urging investors to go through FIDReC, will you consider that as an option ?”

Cheryl Chin, 36: “What to do ? Even Mr Tan asked us to lodge our complaint at FIDReC first, will do so and see how it goes.”

Chan S F, 40: “No use one lah, who is in charge of FIDReC, waste of time only, just protest everyday outside DBS till they pay up !”

This was hung from a lamp-post nearby urging investors to file a law suit against the banks

Wayangparty: “Are you grateful to Mr Tan Kin Lian for organizing these sessions ?”

Lin X L, 39: “Of course ! He’s a hero for the people ! Better than those fat cats up there who are shaking their legs and asking for money.”

Poona, 42: “Mr Tan doesn’t need to do all these for us. I am sure many of us want to give him a treat after this whole mess is cleared up.”

Fierce words indeed. Obviously the author isn’t quite impressed by MAS’s “help” so far

The videos of Mr Tan’s speech will be uploaded in 3 hours’ time. Please forward this site to all your friends. The Wayangparty Club aims to bring you the fastest news at the tip of your fingertips. No other media or news blog in Singapore is able to provide you with such instantaneous updates.

Who are the real winners and losers of the Lehman minibond fiasco ?

By Fang Zhi Yuan

In spite of my initial misgivings of the government’s handling of the Lehman minibond fiasco, I must applaud them for bringing about a faster than expected closure with the latest announcement by Hong Leong Finance, Maybank and DBS to compensate “vulnerable” buyers for their losses.

If the outcome was expected, the government certainly did not betray its intention during the last parliamentary sitting in which Deputy Trade and Industry Minister Mr Lim Hng Kiang defended MAS’s approach to the fiasco so far and urge the investors to be patient.

What makes the banks come to such a collective decision in double-quick time when they have been dragging their feet during the past 2 weeks is anybody’s guess.

Is it due to a possible class action suit mooted by some investors or the endless brickbats hurled by netizens and bloggers at MAS for its impotence and inaction in comparison to the Hong Kong Monetary Authority ?

Irregardless of the real reasons behind this sudden reversal of fortunes, the affected minibond investors, especially retirees who lost their entire life-savings should heave a sigh of relief by now.

Though the exact details have not been worked out, they can now be assured that they will get some if not all of their initial investments back – not quite a winner, but not complete losers either. 

The government and MAS, in particular has redeemed itself timely in the eyes of ordinary Singaporeans who were previously peeved and frustrated by its lassie-faire attitude.

In spite of the numerous criticisms this blog has levelled at them, we are willing to forgive and forget now that justice has been served in a sense that vulnerable investors targetted for hard-selling by unscrupulous financial agents will be given a partial if not complete compensation after all.

Mr Tan Kin Lian, who has been fighting hard for the rights of the investors since the very beginning has seen his profile raised considerably in the eyes of the public, many of whom viewed him favorably as a hero of the people which will come in handy if he decides to run for the post of the Elected President in future.

Perhaps the only loser in this entire saga is the mainstream media which have lost substantial credibility over its deliberate blackout of DBS Hong Kong’s offer to compensate its local customers.

The government may well have decided it is time to stop providing us and other pesky blogs with free cannon fodder to fire at them.

Are we winners as well ? In terms of viewership, the minibond issue didn’t really boost it by much. As for public relations wise, it has definitely generated much goodwill about us from netizens.

This really should have been the government’s call to score some precious brownie points. What a shame it chose to let it pass and allowed uninvited third parties to steal the limelight instead.

EDITORS’ note: Daily news headlines and hourly updates can be found at The Singapore Enquirer .

Comparison of how MAS and HKMA are handling the complaints of Lehman investors

By Fang Zhi Yuan

In parliament yesterday, Deputy Trade and Industry Minister Mr Lim Hng Kiang claimed that MAS is already doing everything that it can for the affected minibond investors.

“It is fully understandable he said, that investors are anxious but the process must be allowed to take its course as rushing into a “fire-sale” would not be in the interest of investors.

The MAS approach, allows for a wider range of Singapore investments options to cater for diverse needs while keeping the regulatory framwork.”

(Well, Mr Lim, can you really understand how anxious the investors are when you are earning in excess of S$1.9 million dollars a year, S$100K is peanuts to you !)

Let’s compare what MAS has done so far with its counterpart in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA):

Hong Kong Monetary Authority:

Compiled a list of telephone enquiry lines established by banks (or their related organisations) for answering questions on Lehman-Brothers-related investment products.

Established a dedicated telephone line to assist individual investors who might have complaints in relation to the sale by banks of investment products related to Lehman Brothers.  The number is 8100 2314 (operating hours: 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Monday to Friday except public holidays).  They may also contact the HKMA by email at bankcomplaints@hkma.gov.hk.

There is a Chinese section for those who are not English iliterate especially Chinese educated retirees.

Publishes Statistics on processing of complaints concerning Lehman-Brothers-related products which lays down the four stages of action explicitly:

Stage (1) – Initial processing: The HKMA formally registers each complaint and writes to each complainant to confirm receipt of his/her complaint, assigning him/her a complaint number to facilitate subsequent communication and follow-up. 

Stage (2) – Establishment of allegations: The HKMA makes follow-up contacts with each complainant (mainly by phone) to obtain or clarify allegation details.

 

Stage (3) – Assessment for further actions: The HKMA reviews and decides whether there is prima facie evidence to open investigation in each case.  

 

Stage (4) – Referred to SFC: The HKMA decides whether, after investigation, a case should be referred to the SFC for further action.

 

The actions taken by HKMA so far had forced the banks to accept a government’s proposal to buy back the minibonds from investors at current market value (hear South China Morning Post podcast here)

 

Monetary Authority of Singapore:

Provides a list of hotlines for relevant institutions.

There is a Chinese section dedicated to Chinese-educated investors.

No dedicated phone line for investors to complain directly to MAS. (I tried calling the main line which is forever engaged).

Did not publish any statistics on the processing of complaints so far.

Delineate a 3-step guide for affected investors:

1. Investors are to lodge their complaints directly to the financial institutions which sold them the products.

2. Investors should provide full details of their case to allow the financial institutions to make a fair assessment.

3. Accept the decision of the financial institution or refer your own complaint to the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Center(FIDReC)

 

We can see for ourselves from the above while HKMA is proactively seeking redress for Hong Kong investors by acting directly on their behalfs to liaise with the banks the moment they file a complaint to them, MAS has chosen to adopt a hands-off approach in which Singapore investors are “advised” to settle their grievances with their banks.

In short, MAS appears reluctant to involve itself to adjudicate for the affected investors who were asked, to put in bluntly, to “swim on their own.”

Imagine if you are a 70 year old retiree who does not understand or speak English and had lost your entire life-savings just because you were told to sign on a piece of paper by a bank staff promising higher interest.

Right now, you are feeling angry, anxious and depressed and instead of the government rushing to help you, you were told this is your own “business” and the onus is on you to deal with the very bank who sold you the products ! Won’t you feel even more lost and aggrieved ?

MAS should have shown more empathy and compassion to ordinary Singaporeans who lost their hard-earned savings in such a short span of time to no fault of their own.

By making the financial institutions the adjudicator in the dispute which involves them in the first place, the investors are completely at the mercy of these powerful institutions.

What makes MAS believe that these financial institutions will handle each complaint fairly when it concerned their own profit margins and vested interests ?

MAS’s exhortation to investors to “accept the decision of the financial institutions” or refer their complaints to FIDReC is downright insensitive and callous. MAS did not even bother to put down the full name of FIDReC. Does it expect laymen like us to know what it stands for ?

We are talking about devastated people who are now clutching at straws and yearning desperately to get part of their investments back and MAS is telling them to accept whatever decision made by the banks even if that means not getting a single cent back.

I did a brief check on FIDReC and found out that the entire process can be quite cumbersome and tedious. A case manager must first decide if the case is within FIDReC’s jurisdiction before mediation can even commence. If mediation fails, the case will be referred to another adjudicator for final decision. How long this will take is anybody’s guess.

In the meantime, how are those retirees who lost their entire life-savings going to live on ? While the government has no right to dictate to private financial institutions on the handling of the fiasco, it should have and could have done much more to alleviate the anxiety of the affected investors.

Surely it is within the means of MAS to set up a special committee staffed by a full-time manager to attend to the concerns and needs of the 8,000 investors who have lost a substantial sum if not their entire savings.

If MAS has taken more initiative like HKMA to reach out and assist the investors, we will not need an ex-NTUC INCOME Chief to hold weekly Saturday protests at Hong Lim Park which is surely an affront to the government’s moral authority and a source of embarrasment to our status as a first world economy.

While Hong Kong has already taken a gigantic step forward to resolve the minibond saga, Singapore remained mired in it and things are set to become more messy as some investors are now pondering taking out a legal suit against the banks.

EDITORS’ note: Daily news headlines and updates can be found at The Singapore Enquirer .

Next Page »