Dear Mr Tan,
I also attended a fact-finding session at the bank, and there were 2 bank officers present.
I was quite surprised by the way it was conducted. It felt as if the same questions were repeated over again but in different words, many times.
And each time I raised a query, the officer reacted by pointing to my signature on the back of the form, in support of the bank's position and the RM.
I also asked for a copy of the thick risk profile form with my signature on it but they refused to give me a copy for me to take home and run through. It looked totally unfamiliar to me and I wanted to see what the RM could have written about me then as I was with the RM for less than 30mins one year ago.
All the forms they had in their file were filled in by the RM, comments, ticks...etc (not my hand writing) On the main application form, there was however a slight difference on their copy compared to the one I had.
I understand from the bank officers that the independent person appointed by MAS to oversee the investigation has the authority to select case files to take a look but it does not mean that all cases will be looked into by this independent person.
MAS should assign independent assistants (not employed by the bank) to help review all cases to ensure each case is given due attention and justice, afterall our Government should try its best to help us citizens as much as possible.
REPLY
You have the right to ask for a copy of the document that you were supposed to have signed. You can challenge statements that are written by the representative, if they do not reflect the true situation, e.g. the representative write on your behalf without checking with you. Or if the representative ask you to sign first, and fill in the details later.
same like the insurance agents they fill up the forms after the sale.
ReplyDeleteit means there was no conduct of need analysis which should be done first and not last.
this was product selling.
Must ask them for one if you have not received one.
Hi Mr tan,
ReplyDeleteFrom the petition,the Nos of victims involve, 80% are from HLF and MB,both are belong to foreign banker.From here you can see Sgp Fls still very kind to their own
peoples,is it?
Then what about DBS?
ReplyDeleteyes...agree. mostly foreign FI trying to con singaporeans.
ReplyDeleteStill a lot of uncles/aunties don't know what's happening. Also don't know should go Speaker Corner.
ReplyDeleteKind meh??.. how about DBS high note. it from local bank. it is more toxic than minibond
ReplyDeleteHi Mr Tan,
ReplyDeleteThere is a class action lawsuit against Wall street Banks and Firms for underwriting Lehman Brothers Preferred Stocks. This is again a case of misrepresentation and lawsuit is pending.
Hope this is helpful. Let's hope justice prevails...
According to Press release
http://biz.yahoo.com/iw/081009/0441470.html
"...The class action lawsuit alleges that the statements made in the Offering Circular by the underwriting syndication were materially false and misleading. Many investors were advised by their financial advisors that the Lehman Brothers Preferred Stock, Series J was a suitable investment for risk adverse investors.
Brokerage firms are obligated to give and investors are entitled to rely upon brokerage firms for, competent, suitable investment advice in accordance with the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rules and Regulations. Sales practice violations by financial advisors, such as the recommendation of unsuitable investments and concentration in a particular security or sector, are both violations which may qualify an investor for an individual arbitration claim with FINRA."
senmc
It is a waste of time making a representation to officers of the 'Investor Care Centers'set up to look into the complaints of misrepresentation of their respective products by their RMs. Firstly they are representative appointed from within the FI and this negates the neutrality of their facts finding. Their line of questioning is bias and often hides behind the fine print of the propectus to counter your complaints and argument rather than what transpired between the RM and the investor. According to them, the appointed independent person is to see proper handling of each complaints. How does he do this? He is not even present at the complaint sessions. Granted he or she may reads the case files but the reports are compiled by the FI representatives and what stops them from slanting the case reports to the interst of the FI. I see this process as just an attempt of a'stop gap measure' to soothe and pacify the flood of investor complaints with no sincere interest to address the real issue of misrepresentation. I hope the relevant auhthorities are not treating the aggrieved investors and citizens as to be so naive that they cannot see through this "pull wool over the eyes" process.
ReplyDeleteI also bought Minibond series 3 and same thing, I was only looking at low risk product.. but stable return. the RM at Maybank say Minibond is very safe.. I thought we are surported by the risk analysis profile.. but apparently, that is not given to us.. Why is this so? I thought it's MAS regulation that all customer should have a copy. I asked the Bank and apparently, they try to act innocent by saying the RM will normally mail out to the customer if they don't give to customer on the spot.. Now I am hearing so many did not get a copy of the risk profile analysis.
ReplyDeleteCan we also request MAS to investigate on this? I understand for Insurance, MAS is very strict about this.. Any agents failed to give the client the copy will be terminated. How is it MAS adopt different expectation between insurance and bank when comes to adherance to regulation
Complaint handling process is a SHAM. It is farcical . How can the FI's representatives be used for this.
ReplyDeleteIt is definitely going to be biased.
Why are the investors not given a copy of the Fact Finding forms or KYC?.
Why aren't the investors allowed to look at the forms they purportedly signed.
What is all this ? Are the 3 MAS appointed officers aware of this unfairness?
How can investors get fair treatment and hearing if the process and interview is skewed towards the FIs?
MAS, stop playing the taichi game.
Sick and tired of MAS
Last time mas was a very well respected, world class org.
ReplyDeleteEven in pcci case, no one in spore was hit.
Where have all the good people gone to?
So many people trying to feign ignorance and claim they do not know what they are buying now...the ugly side of singaporeans who wants to invest and yet not able to take the risk..end of the day,its your words against the RMs and i simply do not believe that 100% of the investors are not aware of what they are being sold and it is so easy to say that the RM did not share with you all the facts. If you can be typing a blog here,im sure you are far more educated than uncles and aunties who are illiterate. So dont just pretend to say you all dont know and assume it is a fixed deposits.
ReplyDelete