Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Petition on Credit Linked Securities, Singapore

Sunday, October 05, 2008

Petition on Credit Linked Securities, Singapore

LATEST: The Petition is now closed. A total of 1080 signatures were received.

The Petition to the Singapore Government is now ready for signing at:
http://www.petitiononline.com/PSGCLS01/petition.html

Investors in the credit linked securities can now sign the Petition which will be delivered to the Singapore Government, tentatively by early October.

101 comments:

Anonymous said...: If we have more than one type of CLS, should we sign once or depending on the number of CLS we are holding? Thanks; September 27, 2008 12:00 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi,

I have not invested in any of the structured products, but I would also like the regulators to take action on behalf of the investors who were conned. Can I sign the petition?; September 27, 2008 3:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Mr Tan

How can we thank you enough for the tremendous effort that u have put in to help ordinary folks like us.

once again my sincere thank you :); September 27, 2008 4:33 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: I have 80 signatures within a few hours. This Petition is to be signed by those who have invested in the credit linked securities. If you have bought several types, you only need to sign once.; September 27, 2008 5:29 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Mr. Tan,
We the investors can not thank you enough for investing your time and effort in helping us to organise ourselves as nobody else in Singapore would so far.

I am not optimistic that we will achieve anything as we are facing very large financial institutions that have a lot of fire power.

The key to me is in two areas that 1)The sales aid materials and the "misleading prospectus". These are the written evidence. Otherwise the selling process is all verbal between the bank employees and the investors and it is difficult to prove one way or the other.
2) The other is the nature of the products which are extremely high risk now that we are aware of. Even a straight forward product like a local company bond, the retail investor has no access as you need to have S$250,000 as a minimum to invset in. So all other structure products that are available to the retail investors should have a lower risk level that a straight company bond. The financial institutions should not have sold these structured products to the retail investors.

I have read the sales materials and the prospectus before investing and I thought I was investing in the bonds of the referenced entities and the bonds are safely kept by the trustee bank HSBC. Now I know better.

I was prepared to take some risk as I believed that since there are several referenced entities, one failure will only hit the investment proportionately. I never expected that Lehman who is an arranger can wipe off my investment!; September 27, 2008 6:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Well done, and many thanks again, Mr Tan!; September 27, 2008 6:10 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Someone said that the particulars of the signatories (e.g. telephone number, etc) are displayed in the Petition.

I am not able to remove these sensitive information at this time. I have e-mailed to the Petition site to ask for their assistance.; September 27, 2008 6:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan,

My appreciation to all the work you had done.

I really hope the petition will move the government to help reclaim our hard earned money. This has given me sleepless nites lately.; September 27, 2008 9:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan

I was told by the investment officer that all these minibond was approved to sell to public by MAS. The cover, prospectus etc was fully approved by them.

The minibond series 3 cover which stress on the credit link to the banks was clearly a misguidance information. Swap was done only between the so called minibond ltd and Lehman. Expected, minibond ltd is lehman?

Anyway to highlight to MAS on this aspect since they approve the advertisement that was printed on newspaper and bank used these to sell to the public?; September 27, 2008 9:23 PM
Anonymous said...: dear mr tan

i like to pay my utmost salute & respect to u for all these efforts.; September 27, 2008 10:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Kin Lian,
Please ask the 'Online Petition' webmaster to QUICKLY make amends to the 2nd petition - deleting all case-sensitive fields. Otherwise its not fair for those already sign up to have their data exposed to public. I will sign in when this amendment is in placed. Thank you. They have to work really fast. i mean IMMEDIATE - in order to avoid spams.; September 28, 2008 12:14 AM
Hope said...: Just a word of THANK YOU to you and Lion Investor. I have lost almost 10yrs of savings in minibond. I was promised that this is a NO risk product by May Bank. I was not given any prospectus, only the sales brochure. I have been very helpless since I learned that my investment is down the drain. I have been calling May Bank for help / information but to no avail. I have been getting information from Lion Investor and your website to get information. Thank you!!!; September 28, 2008 12:37 AM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan,

Thank for your effort for helping us.

i would think that it is difficult to fight against with the big financial institutions and don't think that we are able to get any compensations from them. But at least, i hope that we can wake up the regulators and in hope that this kind of structure plan are to taken off from the retail markets.

i did not buy the minibond. but my mum brought it. Foolishly, she believe the banker and thot this is a low risk product just like any fixed deposit. She dumped in large potion of her life saving into it. I feel very sad for her.; September 28, 2008 12:43 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: I have 160 signatories now. I will keep the signatories as "pending" so that their particulars are not displayed.

I am still waiting for the website owner to reply to my request to hide the particulars of the other signatories. They are on weekend and have not replied yet.; September 28, 2008 8:59 AM
Anonymous said...: HK-Hope for minibond holders?
Let's keep our fingers crossed. Please see attached link: http://finance.thestandard.com.hk/en/business_news_view.asp?aid=72231; September 28, 2008 10:15 AM
Parka said...: In the meanwhile, please email this link to your friends who have also bought the product but have not yet signed the petition.; September 28, 2008 1:03 PM
Anonymous said...: To improve the chances of petition, can consider:

1)Collecting the general patterns of selling. Individual case is weak, but collectively, there is strength.

2)Explore including investors who were "missold" other investment products

3)Consider taking action against individual sales person

4) Collect and consolidate evidences such as emails, voice recordings....; September 29, 2008 11:01 AM
Anonymous said...: I believe many old "uncles" and "aunties" really treasure the times in 70s, 80s & 90s when there is strong bond between the people and the govt.
Really hope that the govt can do somethings to help these old people.; September 29, 2008 12:02 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: There are 320 signatures now. I am still waiting for the website owner to reply to my request to hide the particulars of the signatories. (They are still on weekend and have not replied to me).; September 29, 2008 12:23 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi, Mr Tan
I would like to ask u if the agreement I signed is incomplete, can I consider the agreement as void?. The reason is that Iwas writting to DBS and found that the agreement have no DATE wriiten on.

Thanks; September 29, 2008 1:59 PM
Anonymous said...: SM Goh said yesterday - No high return without risk. “That’s life, if you want good reward you have to take risk, else put your money in CPF.”

Finally the chairman of MAS was saying something but be prepared for disappointment. He sounded like the government is not going to do anyting. Better luck next time. Sigh...; September 29, 2008 3:00 PM
Anonymous said...: I bought Minibonds based on a briefing by Lehman Brothers. The impression given was that it is a very low risk product. But it appears that Lehman Brothers have not been honest in the way they represent the risks to would be investors. They were peddling principal guaranteed products one month before their bankruptcy!:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aPQXoCH.fIa0&refer=exclusive; September 29, 2008 4:11 PM
Unknown said...: They will regret on next election
because of him.; September 29, 2008 4:27 PM
Unknown said...: Dear Mr Tan,

Following are the additional areas which require investigations and answers:
1)Were there any violations of MAS regulations for ML Jubilee 3, DBS High Notes 2 & 5 and Pinacles with such lopsided risk-to-yield ratio to be sold to retailers.
2)If the above is Yes, what action is MAS going take against the issuer/arranger?
3)Were there any weaknesses in the current MAS requlations allowing such products to slip through their fingers?
4)Is MAS going to robustify the regulations to prevent such risky products from being marketed to the retailers in future?
5)If there are weakneses in the current regulations, those who have invested in such products will be most grateful if the government can help in one way or another to mitigate their losses.

Thanks....S8Neo; September 29, 2008 5:31 PM
Anonymous said...: What has CPF got to do with minibonds
and notes?
Did he join the Chinese Astronauts in the space walk?
He hasn't come back to earth. Maybe someone did brief him about the situation but his brain isn't back from space.
There is still some hope. When he gets back his brain maybe we have good news, to sue the banks upside down.; September 29, 2008 5:36 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan
Thanks so much for all your effort. I am one of the victims as I had invested in both the minibond and the pinnacle notes. I had actually placed the money in FDs for more than 10 yrs. When I went to renew my deposit, a staff member encourage me to invest in the above 2 products. I was told also that it is a very low risk product because the 8 reference entities are big and well established banks and so will not collapse. Also, I will only lose all or part of my investment only if there is a credit event in any of these 8 entities. I was not told that credit event involving Lehman (the arranger) would also affect our investment. Even in the advertisements during their launch states that only a credit event involving the 8 reference entities would affect our investments. I had also indicated in the investment analysis profile that I prefer low risk investments. Therefore, I am misled and the staff should not have encourage me to invest in such high risk products. Hope something can be done even though the chances of recovery is extremely slim. There goes my hard earned savings!; September 29, 2008 7:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Haha, it is typical comment from SM Goh. Remember some years ago he even said that when there are no retrenchments, he worry for Singapore.
PAP won the elections too easily, that's why those types can afford to say such things and often.; September 29, 2008 7:11 PM
Anonymous said...: I recall LKY saying that all it takes is five years down the road to ruin if you vote the wrong party. How long was it after the last election? Is it five years already?; September 29, 2008 8:17 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Tan KL,
I notice you have collected about 428 names by now. I can only a small number of the names. Why the rest are marked "pending approval". Are there conditions to have one's name included in the petition?; September 29, 2008 9:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Mr Tan KL,
Firstly thank you for making a concerted effort for all those affected to seek redress for an independent inquiry.
Secondly, i am v disappointed by SM's comment in Today's paper. If he has nothing good to say he should keep his mouth shut. It's like "you want higher returns, you deserve it". He doesn't really know the circumstances how most of us got involved. i was under the impression that they (minibond) were safe and low risk. And one cannot get 4% returns when the retirement account breach the minimum amount.

cj retiree; September 29, 2008 10:27 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan, thank you so much for your help? Why are the MPs and Ministers so quiet?

If you ever consider running for the next presidency or start new opposition party? Sure support you! Any supporters?; September 29, 2008 11:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan, you are a real good man.
Looking at the feedback from the banks and MAS, looks like they are dragging their time. Just a wild idea here : since there are so many global minibond victims, can we form a global retail investors alliance and sue all the financial insitutions in international court? Our combined forces will be very hugh and I feel internatinal court will be more impartial.; September 29, 2008 11:53 PM
Anonymous said...: How can he not know the circumstances? He is the expert in financial hubs. How else can he be in China advising them how to be a financial hub? Of course he knows how it is done, he is the Chairman of MAS and is re-elected as Chairman for another term.; September 30, 2008 12:00 AM
Anonymous said...: Thank you for enabling retailers to use your platform. Ordinary folks do not have direct access to engage the Authorities who at the moment are working with distributors at facts gathering stage. Yes, MAS may come up with new regulations and penalties and fine for the misdoers. But more importantly, we want MAS to represent our interests by being proactive in negotiating with the Issuer and Trustee for am alternative option to manage the Minibond portfolio. They can put pressure to involve Nomura as Arranger takeover from Lehman (the same team in fact!). As investor, I am prepared for a reasonable substitution with new terms and conditions. Immediate liquidity in such market conditions are going to cost us dearly!

gpg; September 30, 2008 9:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Unlike government from HKG & Taiwan, our Ministers and MPs all "disappeared" when we need help now???? How??; September 30, 2008 10:02 AM
Anonymous said...: Our ministers have the highest pay in this world. If they say something wrong, then their paychecks may be affected. They feel safer to keep quiet...; September 30, 2008 10:52 AM
Anonymous said...: Financial product distributors and financial advisers owe a fiduciary duty to their clients to ensure that the recommended investments are suitable on a risk and reward basis. FI should share part of the responsiblity as they were ones who recommended and distributed the products to their clients. The investors like us have the right to seek compensation from FI when there is clear evidence of misrepresentation, mis-selling as well as failure of advisers to understand the risk appetite of the clients and thus recommending the products. Any compensation from FI may be slim unless there is clear support from the aunthorities. Without the government support, private lawsuits against the banks & distributors are likely to fail.; September 30, 2008 11:16 AM
Falcon said...: Yes, I support and nominate Mr Tan Kin Lian for the post of the people President.; September 30, 2008 12:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Please refrain from bashing the political leaders and MAS as the investors need their goodwill to help without which the investors have no way of winning the firepower that the FI possessed. It may let you feel good and let off steam but it is not helpful to investors.; September 30, 2008 2:37 PM
Anonymous said...: Good Day Mr Tan,
Is the online petition website's problem retified?; September 30, 2008 4:22 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: There are 589 signatures to the Petition.

I have left most of the signatures as "Pending Approval" so that their details are not displayed.

Some people do not like their telephone number or other particulars to be displayed - in case it is accessed by other people.

I have asked the website owner to block the display of the information, but they have not replied to me, in spite of three reminders. Their service has been disappointing.; September 30, 2008 5:11 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Tan,
Suggest from the petition list to identify the RETIREES (e.g by age). The CLS products are clearly NOT suited for them, they have been MIS-INFORMED by the bankers. We should collectively voice their plight to the press, MPs, Police, Case, Fidrec, MAS, PM, SM, President etc. until JUSTICE is done and they are suitably COMPENSATED.

Thank you.; September 30, 2008 5:50 PM
Anonymous said...: Anon said:
"Please refrain from bashing the political leaders and MAS as the investors need their goodwill to help without which the investors have no way of winning the firepower that the FI possessed. It may let you feel good and let off steam but it is not helpful to investors"

What a pitiful lot. During election, vote because afraid if not do not get flat upgrading. Now, afraid cannot get help to get money back. People like you deserve to lose your money. More good years!!!; September 30, 2008 7:54 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr.Tan,
If the website ownen does not respond to you, when the petition is closed, is it possible for you to remove it as a petition owner?; September 30, 2008 8:06 PM
Anonymous said...: so upset with SM Goh's comments. he simply did not understand the plight of the ordinary folks n how difficult for us to save a bit of extra cash. Govt ministers are jux too rich, they can afford the loss i reckon. but wat abt the man on the street? one bad misleading investment n we r done for!

yes, will vote for for u, Mr Tan as the People's President.

none of the ministers speak for us! for the effort n time u put in, u put those ministers to shame.

now i m truly dissappted with the current gov.

if only now is election time, we may stand a better chance in our fight.

since it is not, i reckon it will b an uphill task. but when next election comes, guess where my vote will go to?; September 30, 2008 10:40 PM
Weng Mao Fa said...: 688 signatures..689...999 ?

Well, I can help you. If you can not sleep well and wish to practice meditation, please first click my picture and click "e-mail" in my Blog. FREE OF CHARGE.
(Note. Meditation is not a religion.); September 30, 2008 11:08 PM
Anonymous said...: It's not just about the retirees. Young people who have high-risk portfolio in stocks or properties, placed a subtantial sum into this as it's supposed to be low risk. This is part of "diversification".

As for myself, I helped my mother placed a good sum in this as I couldn't bear to see her savings from hard work idling in 0.2% interest. Even FD was just 2%.

My sore point is why was such products allowed over-the-counter to the general public with such misleading brochures/newspaper advertisements?; October 01, 2008 12:17 AM
Anonymous said...: I don't think we should separating people by age or whether they are retired or not. We do not know people's particular circumstances to make valid judgements. For example, some may be younger, but they may have heavy financial obligations and therefore they want a safe haven for their funds. Some people may be old, but they still work because of need. Some may be retired, but they may have invested in these products using their retirement funds.

What matters is what various people expected out of this investment, and what they thought or what they were told is the nature of the product.; October 01, 2008 12:48 AM
Anonymous said...: Anon,
You are probably not an investor and you are posting comment in the wrong website, go to the political website instead.

You are just a pathetic guy trying to politicise the issue.; October 01, 2008 11:49 AM
Weng Mao Fa said...: How to reach out those illiterate and minority?; October 01, 2008 3:16 PM
Anonymous said...: HI,
MrTan,i just saw a news about the HK banks willing to compensate to the investor
http://realtime.zaobao.com/2008/10/081001_25.shtml; October 01, 2008 3:30 PM
Anonymous said...: Even without all these CLS, a lot of customers are losing money buying these financial products, including a lot of elderlys. No one knows the magnitude of it.; October 01, 2008 4:10 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Tan,
Post notices of group meetings eg at Speakers' corner on your blog headings so that everyone can see it easily. Otherwise, we may miss your group meetings because such notices are mixed with so many other comments. In the next group meeting, see whether we can group people by constituencies so that the MPs can receive groups rather than individuals; that's more effective.; October 01, 2008 8:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi,Mr. Tan
Thank you for your generous efforts and time in helping small investors . You deserved to be nominated to be people President.; October 01, 2008 11:20 PM
Anonymous said...: Maybe this is how the Minibonds product came about.

Lehman Brother: Nowadays, very hard-up for cash!

Advisor: Make something and sell to the Aunties, Uncles, Ah Gong, Ah Pek, Ah Mah and the KIASI customers. They have tons of money.

Lehman Brother: They not stupid you know! They also not greedy! They only want LOW RISK and PEANUT INTEREST.

Friend: Sell them WHAT they want: "LOW" risk and LOW interest with a "LOW-risk" brandname - Mini-bonds.

Lehman:Gotcha!; October 02, 2008 12:13 PM
Lucky Tan said...: Guys,

In reply to a comment from me in his blog, Siew Kum Hong said that this is going to be a hot topic in the next parliament sitting. Many questions have been put up...

I hope our MPs push as hard as they can. Also, the Minister has to be open to more direct fact finding by the MAS otherwise where is the accountability?

It looks like Hong Kong will proceed to clamp down on structured products given the outcry there. In Taiwan the govt is twisting the arms of the banks to buy back these products.

We are told all our lives we have a world class govt one that work for the good of Singaporeans. We should get no less that what the Taiwanese and Hongkongers are getting from their govt in terms of help....our govt cannot do less....not acceptable.; October 02, 2008 12:55 PM
Anonymous said...: Now is a good time to ask them to lower their salaries. Reason is because too high salary has demotivated them. Just like a cat that is too fat is too lazy to catch mice. They say raise the salary to beat corruption. I say lower the salary to motivate them to do a better job.; October 02, 2008 4:05 PM
Anonymous said...: i know there are already a lot of victims out there and i we are not the only ones. but i would still like to share that my father was an uneducated, hard working person who worked his whole life at a supermarket. he left us with $100K when he passed away due to cancer at age 56. my sis & i left the money in a savings account at Maybank and it was fine for over a year. But the financial people there persuaded us to invest in minibond. Said it was safe and better returns than just putting in savings account. we were very ignorant and foolish to have trusted them. you can imagine how terrible we feel to have lost this sweat and blood money which we counted on for our retired & jobless mother. As working class adults, we have our own bills & ever increasing expenses to take care. not to mention that we are frugal with our money. this is heart wrenching and we just hope we could have our money back.; October 02, 2008 5:22 PM
Anonymous said...: To anon @5:22pm
Thank you for sharing.
After reading your story, I really feel very sad.
Are the sales people feeling guilty?
Luckily I have not recommended such products to anyone, otherwise I would be feeling guilty for the rest of my life!; October 02, 2008 7:15 PM
Anonymous said...: Just want to find out if this petition is specific to CLS only. How about misrepresentation in unit trust purchases from the same bank tellers?

JK; October 02, 2008 7:32 PM
Anonymous said...: The title Wealth Manager means their duty is to generate wealth for the banks and not for the customers. Still want to see them?; October 02, 2008 7:51 PM
Anonymous said...: To Luckysingaporean and all the victims.

Have you ever wondered why the RMs or salesmen at the banks or the insurance agents are pushing hard on products?
At the banks product sale means high commission from the products as profit to the company and to pay the RMs' high salary.
What about fixed deposit? The bank got to pay interest to the customers.
Why push products? If need analysis is used they may not be able to sell anyhting because the products may not be suitable because of risk, the financial circumstances of the clients, their needs. Products pushing ignores all these perimeters.

At Insurance companies.
Pushing expensive and high commission products means high annual premium income(API) to the company. API is used as production figure for ranking and market share and good profit for the company.
Why insurance agents push products?
No need to look into the needs of the client.If they do they may NOT be able to sell a high commission product. They cannot justify.
Without the need analysis any product can do and normally the product is whole life with high commission.
What does it mean to the agents.
High earning and can qualify for mdrt. cot or tot.
What does it mean to the customers?
Wrong product, insufficient coverage ; allocate too much money in this area at the expense of other needs, ie other needs suffer.
What does it tell us?
Products pushing is bad and shortchanges the customers.
Mis-selling, misrepresentation and conflict of interest and other other unethical practices can arise.
Bad and rotten products need a lot of pushing, right? They need greedy and unscrupulous salespeople to use unethical means
to do for the company with promise of high rewards.
Do you hard push a good product?
The current debacle is due to this.
To MAS
Eradicate selling for financial products. Stop bad products to be sold in the market.

The Concerned Singaporean; October 02, 2008 9:12 PM
Falcon said...: I recall Mr. Tan has written, about a year back, on the changing positions of financial institutions. He is spot on on the changing attitudes and integrity of these financial institutions, which included banks and insurance companies. There are alot of information and knowledge which are gems if you bother to go through his blog. Words of wisdom and it is all free for all to benefit from.
I have taken his advice and my investments are safe. Thank You Mr. Tan.; October 03, 2008 2:16 AM
Tan Kin Lian said...: A total of 882 people have signed the Petition. However, some of the signatures may be invalid. I am arranging for my team to telephone all the signatories to check that their signature and particulars are valid. I shall also ask them for their NRIC and invested amount.; October 03, 2008 4:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Hi Guy

Please refrain from involving Mr tan to politic movement, we are glad for his help and involvement in time of needs.

Comparing to the FI whom i bought the minibond with. I already have a bad taste in the mouth with H X Finiance, especially their selling pitch, bad attitude and customer service after lehman incident.

Try not to link him to other motive.; October 03, 2008 7:58 AM
Weng Mao Fa said...: I am not a signatory. I share the same concern with all signatories.

Before 1980, many underground "Silver Club 银会" dissolved with lum sum of investor's money to nowhere. Small investors reported to Police. I learned this lesson when I was a secondary student.

Today's situation is NOT the first case in Singapore history. It will NOT be the last case either. Please share these lessons with children and friend to creat awareness of sound investment.

GOOD LUCK TO YOU.; October 03, 2008 8:44 AM
Anonymous said...: Agreed.
We are only interested in minimising our loss.
No politics please. This is a money matter!! It is closer to our heart.; October 03, 2008 8:56 AM
Weng Mao Fa said...: To: fiery (7:58am)

I agree with you. Mr Tan Kin Lian is a Visiting Professor of SMU. He deserve academic opinion in his professional field of study. Readers and bloggers must show due respect to him.; October 03, 2008 9:32 AM
Anonymous said...: In respect of the latest MAS statement, if there is only a reprimand then for 500 million, I dont tink the FI would mind a reprimand. If it is a fine, unless it is also 500 million, I also dont think the FI would mind either.

Ho; October 03, 2008 11:11 AM
Anonymous said...: Dear Mr Tan,

I'm really amazed at how you far you are willing to go to reach out to the hearts of us commoners.

However, in view of the entire picture of us Singaporeans, I think a petition of the recent electricity prices hike would benefit us better rather than spending time and energy trying to retify something that have been already lost. If we all could blame everything except ourselves, then my question is, can we blame the government for the increase in the prices of electricity now?

Please do consider taking this on as it will affect everyone, and not just those who have the money to burn on investments.

Mr Myers; October 03, 2008 11:20 AM
Anonymous said...: To Weng Mao Fa:
"Silver club" is illegal.
Today's situation is legal and involving people / Institutions we trusted most. What a world of difference!!!
You can't compare the two.; October 03, 2008 11:31 AM
Anonymous said...: A really BIG "THANK YOU", Mr Tan for all your efforts and encouragement for disheartened investors.
We really need someon to lead us in such complicated financial matters.; October 03, 2008 12:06 PM
Anonymous said...: People like us are literate & at least we have a venue ...like Mr.Tan's blog to turn to ... I m very sure many other old folks / illterate on the streets are being talked into parking their life-savings into these "mini-bombs" . Wondering whether they even know that Lehman had already collasped ?? More sad stories unfolding in times to come.......; October 03, 2008 12:40 PM
Anonymous said...: Sometimes, it is quite common sense to note that when someone wants to borrow money at a higher interest rate from you carries certain risk. From past history, banks also do fail. Nevertheless, i hope those really mislead investors are able to seek help from the relevant authority. I wish you guys and myself good luck though.; October 03, 2008 12:44 PM
Unknown said...: Can we, investors collectively, with the help of the government recover our money in similar ways:

BoA sues Lehman units over collateral

NEW YORK - Bank of America Corp has sued three Lehman Brothers units to recover nearly US$500 million provided as collateral for derivative transactions.

The lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court on Sept 26 is one of several legal actions pending against Lehman since it became the largest bankruptcy in US history on Sept 25 amid Wall Street's worst financial crisis in decades.

Bank of America's lawsuit said it sought US$468,028,363 plus accrued interest of more than US$350,000 from three Lehman affiliates.

It said none of the three had filed for bankruptcy and are not restricted by the holding company's bankruptcy from returning the money provided for derivative transactions.

'Although the transactions were terminated on Sept 15, 2008, and although the Lehman Entities have not requested any payment or collateral from BoA, the Lehman Entities have refused repeated demands to return the collateral to BoA, stating only that the accounts have been 'frozen',' the lawsuit said.

A spokesman for Lehman declined immediate comment.

One hedge fund, Bay Harbour Management of New York, has said it will challenge the Lehman bankruptcy and its sale to the brokerage arm of Barclays Capital Plc in federal court.

Two other hedge funds, Amber Capital Investment Management in New York and European hedge fund GLG Partners Inc have objected to the sale, according to court documents.

They alleged US$8 billion may have been transferred by the holding company from Lehman Brothers International (Europe) just before the holding company filed for bankruptcy.

Bank of America's lawsuit cites an affidavit in the bankruptcy proceedings asserting the US$8 billion was intended for other Lehman affiliates.

One entity, Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc of New York had US$356.7 million in collateral provided by Bank of America, the lawsuit said. It said Lehman Brothers Finance SA of Zurich, Switzerland had US$59.6 million and Lehman Brothers Commodity Services Inc in New York had US$51.7 million. -- REUTERS/Business Times - 03 Oct 2008; October 03, 2008 1:56 PM
Anonymous said...: There may be a lot of uncles, aunties with no children,or single who bgt these "low risk" products but not aware what's happening.; October 03, 2008 3:41 PM
symmetrix said...: Mr Myers,

I take exception to your statement "...those who have the money to burn on investments."

Are you implying that investors have nothing better to do than "burn" their hard-earned money on investments? These investors are just trying to get slightly better returns on their savings the safe way, but have somehow been misled into buying these so-called "secure" products.

One would go to a casino if one has money to burn.

VS Lingam; October 03, 2008 4:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr Tan,
Is it possible to contact the media - TV and especially the 3 Chinese Press informing them of your scheduled talk at the Speaker's Corner. So that they will publish it ahead of your talk, this will benefit those who are not aware of this on-going petition.; October 03, 2008 4:53 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr. Myers,
I take exception to your statement too.

I have invested 50,000 on minibond because I thought it was a safe investment.

I invested in shares, bond and currencies and with the economic chaos, I lost more than 50,000 but I do not complain because I know the risk.

Investing in minibond is supposed to be my safe portfolio and loosing it due to misrepresentation is not acceptable to me while my other investment losses are acceptable to me because I know the risk and it is part of the diversification investment strategy.; October 03, 2008 6:26 PM
Monsoon said...: Sir,

Is it possible to sue or take the MAS to task for allowing such investment products to be sold here in Singapore? Are they not reading Mr Tan blog and Dr Money column, both of whom has highlighted and warn against such products (also many unfair insurance policies) for so many months now? are they unaware that these products are being sold in such an unethical way? We are paying the officials hundreds of thousands of dollars and they just say "buyers beware"? they just say they cannot control everything?

Whenever we get faced with such problems, we are mostly directed to blame firstly ourselves, then the frontline people (relationship managers) instead of the system behind them like the bank who pressurised their RM to sell such products which earns them high profit against the interest of theie customers and the MAS who is supposed to regulate and look after the public/consumer interest.

MAS will most likely push the blame or limelight away from themselves and just make more damage control statements and policies. They will try to put the blame on the banks or the consumers.; October 03, 2008 10:45 PM
Monsoon said...: Sir

The MAS is the government organisation who let the wolves into the chicken coop in the first place and we are looking to them for help against the wolves? They will try to make the wolves more acceptable to us in the future. In future the wolves will look like sheep.; October 03, 2008 10:47 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Myer,
Why don't you start the petition on electricity rate rise and drive the effort?; October 03, 2008 11:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Monsoon,
MAS just said they don't want over regulation.BUt have they regulated in the first place? If they had then we wouldn't have such problems.Every FI seems to have free a rein, from the banks to the insurance companies.
Look at the products and the way they have been sold is evident of no regulation at all.
The RMs had a field day conning the ah pek and ah sohs , aunties and old uncles and the insurance agents scrambling for the old folks, old passers by at the roadshows to sell them revosave as annuities and endowment as risk free investment.
They always talk only abd no action.; October 03, 2008 11:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Mr Myer,

You are just out of contaxt, wating our time and your electricity.

Quickly go turn off your computer and light, go sleep.; October 04, 2008 1:18 AM
Anonymous said...: Life is unfair. You win some and you lose some. Get over it.; October 04, 2008 3:59 AM
Anonymous said...: In difficult times, the law allows people to make a citizen's arrest.; October 04, 2008 5:39 AM
Anonymous said...: The rich gets richer, the poor gets poorer. Very sad!; October 04, 2008 8:43 AM
Anonymous said...: I believe that this issue will drag for a long time, FI will keep mum. Let time flies and dies down.

I already expect the worst outcome of losing all the money, i still insist to see the FI get punished appropriately for misrepresentation and miguidance of the product.

The monday morning after lehman chap 11, called the HX finance investment officer up on the incident, she replied the credit link with the bank is still intact and minibond should be ok. It already showed that the FI do not know what they are selling.

After a week, the same officer start talking about swap credit, structure notes, minibond ltd. My foot, all these things wasn't mentioned when FI sell the product.

All these ordeals actually come from a reputable bank in singapore instead of a MLM company. This so called world class financial hub paying huge money to these unqualified saleman or women to misguide the public in passing the money and deny all charges after things surfaced is quite a spectacular circus show.; October 04, 2008 9:02 AM
ym said...: i wonder why this mini-bond debacle is getting so little attention in the tv news?..

isnt this big news that local investors are hit so badly by these products??...; October 04, 2008 9:14 AM
Anonymous said...: To be very objective... surely there is a difference between the lowly savings interest rate of 0.25%, the FD rate of between 0.5% to 1% and these structured toxic bombs that pay more than 5%. All the while the savers with 0.25% say nothing, while those on 5% happily squirrel their higher interests away.

Now only when something happens, they start to cry foul play?!!! Want to play safe, go for the 0.25%or 1% FD interest rate instead.

Remember: LOW RISK DOESN'T MEAN LOW RISK!; October 04, 2008 10:07 AM
Weng Mao Fa said...: When I invest with UOB Life 4 years ago, I was given one set of questionaire by an Independant Financial Adviser (not the seller) to fill in. UOBL then approved my investment on this material facts.

I supposed this is the standard practice under Financial Adviser Act Section 27 or relevant law.

Dear Signatories, have you received and answer the questionaire from an INDEPENDANT Financial Adviser (not the seller) before you sign a contract with your seller (be it DBS/Hong Leong or any financial institution)?; October 04, 2008 10:53 AM
Anonymous said...: 10.07am,
fyi, 0.25% to 1% also not safe as your principal is guaranteed up to 20k only. So I hope u wake up.; October 04, 2008 11:51 AM
Anonymous said...: Everytime U step into a br, staff tell you int very low. Why not invest in dis or tat product? At the end, either stuck with dis or tat product. No end.; October 04, 2008 12:23 PM
Weng Mao Fa said...: Dear Prof Tan Kin Liang and Signatory,

With the material fact given by 1000+ signatories, you may make a feedback to:

SPF_Service_Improvement_Unit@spf.
gov.sg; October 04, 2008 12:37 PM
Anonymous said...: In other words, ALL products that are "Approved" by MAS does NOT mean:

The prospectus is accurate;
It is legal;
It has merits

To put it in short, MAS doesn't need to take any responsibilities for anything or whatever that Approved.

http://www.wilfredling.com/content/view/479/43/; October 04, 2008 12:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Let me quote what a RM said to me in the midst of a presentation to sell me a structured fixed income note early this year.

Quote:
"Lehman, Merrill Lynch all these very established and much larger than any of our local banks, you know. How can they fail? Also the worst is over for US sub-prime so it is good time to buy."
Unquote:

On hearing this, I cut short her presentation and excused myself.

Unfortunately I think many didn't and even proceed to sign on the dotted line.; October 04, 2008 1:32 PM
Anonymous said...: As a letter dated 15/08/2008 from Minibond to series 1,2,and 3 Notes holder disclosed, Series 1 has US$40.6M, Notes, Series 2 has US$78.4M, Series 3 has US$108.75M. These 3 series total US$227.75M. Suppose each family invest US$50k, there are about 4500 family affected by these three series Notes.
Not to say other series, other Notes, so can we figure out HOW MANY SINGAPOER FAMILY affected??; October 04, 2008 3:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Does the following stories sound familiar:

RM try to sell products claiming that capital is guaranteed with potential of good yield due to .... but we need to keep for a no. of year.

At the end of period, customers always find the returns very miserable and also the RM no longer working in the bank.; October 04, 2008 4:13 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear Anonymous 10.07 AM,

I need to correct your comments.
5% return is just a reasonable return. It should not be considered as high return and definitely not tie with 100% downside risk. You can get the 5-6% return from the foreign currency market with atmost 30% downside risk. The reason for so many ordinary investors fell into the trap is because the FIs presented these junk products as if it is has only 10% downside risk.; October 04, 2008 7:14 PM
Anonymous said...: CNBC's short video on Minibond.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=876393192

Chee Onn
http://onnzhai.blogspot.com; October 05, 2008 2:07 AM
Anonymous said...: I come from the banking industry and I am really ashamed about how these people from the consumer banking side conduct themselves.

It is the banking industry's secret that the lower calibre people in the bank are always chuffed into the consumer banking side. Managers from the consumer banking side also doesn't care about qualifications or training of the people they recruit as RMs or Investment Consultants. These unqualified people who join the consumer bank for the vain reason of being able to boast/ pose that they are "bankers" or "investment experts", even when they don't really have the substance or depth.

However, the conduct of the consumer banking divisions over the CLS scandal is downright unethical and heartless. It shows they don't care about the common folk, they just want to retain their undeserved titles.

We don't see such short-term-oriented and unscrupulous conduct occuring in the bank's Treasury dept/ Institution dept/ Corporate Bkg dept. Even in Private Bkg, I heard that Private Bkg RMs (those who serve customers with more than S$5m cash) refused to promote the structured investments to their customers cos they are afraid to lose their customers' long term business. In fact the Private Bkg RMs cannot see any reason why they should lock their customers' money into a 7-year, illiquid, fishy, structured investment.; October 06, 2008 12:51 AM

Sunday, October 05, 2008

Petition on Credit Linked Securities, Singapore

101 comments:

Blog Archive