Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Poll on the Collective Protest

Monday, June 02, 2008

Poll on the Collective Protest

I decided to withdraw the Collective Protest after receiving the assurances from Income's chairman and deputy chairman and the chairman of NTUC's social enterprise development committee. These assurances address the two key concerns regarding the payment of the special bonus and that the future bonuses will reflect the actual experience.

I carried out a Poll on this matter. 76% of visitors (90 replies) to my blog disagreed with my decision. They must have felt strongly that policyholders should be given an option to stay under the old bonus structure. I wish to apologise for disappointing these policyholders.

I have agreed to withdraw the Collective Protest (670 signatures) in return for the assurances. I believe that we will not be able to achieve more by lodging the protest. It will affect the reputation of Income, and is not good for Income or the policyholders.

I believe that these assurances are important for the policyholders. I will continue to monitor the developments to make sure that they are implemented within the near future.

It is more important to policyholders that they should get bonuses that reflect the actual experience. I believe that the good investment yield of 7.8% earned over the past 10 years should allow Income to restore the cut in bonuses that were made during the bad years. If these bonuses are restored, even as a non-guaranteed special bonus, it will be good news to the policyholders.

Although the special bonus is non-guaranteed, Income has given an assurance on the payment of these bonus. I believe that this assurance can be accepted. Income has further assured policyholders that they will be fairly treated and given good value on their polciies.

6 comments:

zhummmeng said...: This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.; June 02, 2008 9:54 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: zhummmeng
i have removed your posting as you have a reference to "rubber stamp", which may be considered to be defamatory.; June 02, 2008 10:32 AM
zhummmeng said...: It is alright with me, Mr. Tan. I don't wish to put you in difficult position. All that I wanted to say was what i thougth was the truth.
Anyway, let us not relent in our campaign against malpractices, lest we send a wrong message that bad practice is acceptable.We must continue to protect policyholders' interest and expose the companies' and their agents collusion to con them.
We should now focus to expose the bad products which are being pushed down the throats of consumers and using high incentives to get the greedy agents to be their collaborators. You have been a great champion of the people especailly the poor people who are the easiest prey of insurance agents. Thank you for your care, sincerity and honesty. You are very rare to find.; June 02, 2008 11:02 AM
TanCS said...: Dear Mr Tan
I am very disappointed that you have withdrawn the Collective Protest. You often said that policyholders should be given a choice to opt for the new bonus structure. However I feel that those who have submitted their names to you for the Collective Protest should also be given the choice to withdraw from the collective protest.
Tancs; June 02, 2008 4:40 PM
zhummmeng said...: Mr. Tan, from now you will face a lot of taunting from the press. They will embarrass you.Anyway they have never been any kinder to you.They give you coverage becuase it is news scoup for them.
The treatment for ntuc is different . It is publicity.They add bigger ads in the future.They will not put their advertising revenue at risk. So asking difficult questions is out.. It is wayang with all the financial writers as the cast.; June 02, 2008 8:40 PM
hongjun said...: I myself am not really familiar with financial or insurance products. I do hope you guys out there to study how the various products work and tell the world which are "good" and which are "bad".

At the same time, I hope we can tell the world how to differentiate between ethical/unethical advisers. Actually, I do think even those who recommend traditional life insurance, they are not unethical. It's just a different school of thought.

Cheers
hongjun; June 02, 2008 11:39 PM