Tan Kin Lian's Blog: MAS push responsibility to Financial Institution

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

MAS push responsibility to Financial Institution

Dear Mr. Tan,

Being a investor of Minibonds, I got this feeling MAS is just trying to push all responsibility to the Financial Institution.

First, they suggest investors who feel that they have been mislead into buying those Lehman link product to file complaint at respective Financial Institution.

So now those investors will just file the complaint for the sake of filing, just with a hope of getting back their investment if the Minibonds were to be liquid off when come to the stage where there isn't any new swap counter party.

With a mixed of real complaint and fake complaint, the FI are certainly pressured on resolving it, maybe by ways of paying off the losses. Guess this is what all investor like me want in the end.

In the first place, this product is lodged and registered with MAS, so now they are saying they did not approve it. So I wonder why they call them governing body of the regulation?

MAS have said that they are looking at various possibilities of new swap counter party. So the deadline is on this Friday. How true are they doing it? When they know that even if there's no new swap counter party, end of the day the FI will have to be pressurized to pay up the loses in order to let all the saga end.

Is there any proof for investor to know that they are really various potential proposer? Or is it just covering up them that they are doing something about it.

P.S keep me as anonymous thanks.

6 comments:

GOHCT said...: Think many investors have also missed out Jubilee Pte Ltd from Merrill Lynch. Jubilee Series Notes, most of the Money have went into their account and stand aside and keep quiet now.

Should the FI also go after Jubilee Pte Ltd.; October 22, 2008 7:20 AM
Parka said...: If I'm the FI, I WILL NOT PAY OUT unless I'm forced to legally. The cost of hiring the lawyer to defend the case is lower than paying out. No FI in their right mind will pay out.

Basically, the last resort for investors to get back their money is through legal action.

gohct - Only parties named on the contract are legally bound. Meaning if FI's name is on it, one can take legal action against the FI, and not anyone above. It's up to the FI to then take further legal action against their side.; October 22, 2008 10:08 AM
sbw said...: Did anyone already attended the interview conducted by Hong Leong in response to your complaint letter?

I call them to follow-up on the progress status and was told they(HL)will schedule a date for me to go down their headquarter office for interview and answer those questions from MAS.

So I am still waiting for their call....sigh.; October 22, 2008 11:15 AM
Unknown said...: Hi all,

All i am writing here is the perception i gathered from the reading of the media in recent weeks. I have not spoken to anyone in the regulatory, FI etc. And i m not an investor of these FInancial instruments.

I am a pessimistic person.
If I were to list all the events chronologically, basing on what has happened in recent wks,i tell you, nothing will happen in favour of the investors.

MAS is pushing blames to FI, saying they hv exercise their so-called "due diligence" (if I sensed them correctly). FI pushes blames to investors saying they hv signed all the documents (designed to protect the FIs). Investor shd know the RISK! oh come on, with all that jargon, NO one really understands it even if they READ IT.

So in short, all that has been happening in the last few wks, over the media, is all pushing blames here and there. Taichi-ing.

WHat have we REALLY accomplished this far?

ALL i hear is words to pacify the public by MAS. Excuse given - is to give them more time & more time. As i have said, i am not optimistic abt all these.

I am obviously disappointed with MAS of their perception in their role as regulator. Shifting all responsibility. If we were to have a public poll on whether MAS has done a good job this far on this Saga, I am not sure if they will score well at all.

I shall read MORE indepth, on all these, and follow closely on this issue here. And i wish to remain anonymous.

Finally, thumbs up to MR TKL. Keep up the good work.; October 22, 2008 5:11 PM
Anonymous said...: I used to have good faith on MAS. However, the actions (or rather non-action) MAS has taken over this incident are absolutely disappointing. Besides asking the FIs to do the right thing, MAS must also admit that it has lapsed as a regulator and it must also do the right thing immediately. MAS’s own reputation is at stake.; October 23, 2008 6:19 PM
Unknown said...: FOr now,I have yet to see MAS showing any remorse for its incapability to forsee this. Its non-actions right now, just goes to damaging its so-called reputation even more.

If only CNA is willing to do a public poll over its website on MAS's performance on this Minibond issue.; October 24, 2008 1:42 PM