Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Suggestion: how to approach legal action

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Suggestion: how to approach legal action

Dear Mr. Tan

I would like to suggest the followings:

1) Use the online petition, one for each product (Minibond, High notes ....), to gather all investors who are in favor in legal action

2) Call a meeting for all interested investors to have a preliminary discussion and to select a committee to conduct a feasibility study.

3) The meeting will identify the scope for the feasibility study.

4) The feasibility study may include :
a) study the sales brochures/newspaper advertisements/prospectus to identify common grounds for the law suit (consult financial experts/lawyers if necessary)
b) cost and return analysis
c) study other similar class action cases (US, Hong Kong, Taiwan …)
d) identify the parties for the law suit (Lehman Brothers, FIs, MAS…)
e) identify where to file the law suit (local or US)
f) work out an action plan

Pang

REPLY
I agree with you. I shall organise the survey (using online petiton) to gather the investors willing to take action.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...: sounds army trained =); November 25, 2008 9:46 PM
Anonymous said...: I support this. I read that in US, the investors were compensated, led by the federal government. But in S'pore ours let you fan for yourself. How can we small people handle the FI let alone the big US investment banks? I think LB, ML and MS should all be sued.; November 25, 2008 9:49 PM
Anonymous said...: These my views, they may be correct, or they may be "correct".

1) Use the online petition, one for each product (Minibond, High notes ....), to gather all investors who are in favor in legal action

- Online petition nowsadays is like a silent protest in a gigantic fan filled shopping mall. Thats as much ripple effect it would be able create. Its so much yet so little and the problem is its strength is its weakness - anyone can see it, Including those who dont wan to see it.

2) Call a meeting for all interested investors to have a preliminary discussion and to select a committee to conduct a feasibility study.

- yes to meetings, yes to discussions, yes to committees
but we ALL know what gets done with committees in discussions at meetings. i suggest you find ONE or TWO Power Leaders. Meaning they talk, everyone listen AND accept

3) The meeting will identify the scope for the feasibility study.

- The Power Leaders will decide the scope, no argument.

4) The feasibility study may include :
a) study the sales brochures/newspaper advertisements/prospectus to identify common grounds for the law suit (consult financial experts/lawyers if necessary)

- reading or cutting stuff from any common sources would not be helpful, they had either been filtered, watered down or re-stated, simply they do not form an absolutely rock reliable source of information, at best they can be reference

b) cost and return analysis

- this can be done quite quickly
find out the range of the costliest expense for an all out legal proceeding (INCLUSIVE of possible countersues and counterclaims etc etc). keep asking every member of that group (or committee) until someone says its too much to bear. THATS your cut away line, its safe to assume any one below that line would be risk averse, any one above that would be risk inclined. the risk this entire committee would be undertaking.

c) study other similar class action cases (US, Hong Kong, Taiwan …)

- again like the media, cases and contexts are different, at best they are reference. even as sources of info their subjectivity and objectivity are questionable, unless actual parties involved there are equally involved here. tricky

d) identify the parties for the law suit (Lehman Brothers, FIs, MAS…)

- you can drag down anyone you like, but if you bite the Hand that actually fed you (or trying to), then be prepared for more enemies than allies future and present. as Forest Gump said, "You never know what you gonna get [in Life]" careful

e) identify where to file the law suit (local or US)

- this is a moot point think about it

f) work out an action plan

- get your prerogatives straightened out, have everyone chip in equally to meet up with the most expensive lawyer EVERYONE can afford and present your findings.

then disregard whatever that lawyer says, everyone chip in once again, look for the second most expensive fellow.

This is what it takes now.

Anything lesser means the margin of dismissal is higher by a step.; November 25, 2008 10:23 PM
Anonymous said...: i missed out an impt detail

First thing first, Everyone in that group pay a sum, invite One or Two renowned characters to lecture in securities, linked notes, and in most of the financial instruments found especially in the Asian markets. Speak to them, bomb them questions, get to the bottom of things but dont arrow them they are not the enemy. Can try all the major international institutions and education centres, ie invite Dept Heads, Executive Directors. PAY THEM PAY THEM PAY THEM to come and teach you what to think, what to pick up, what to say, what to respond in ANY financial dispute setting.

PLEASE, get your bearings straight!; November 26, 2008 12:06 AM
Anonymous said...: The difficulty is how to identify a good lawyer with reasonable legal fee.

Zhong; November 26, 2008 12:07 AM
Anonymous said...: in the mean time, people should campaign ,gossip in Kopitiam..boycott...American Branded Products..Let tourists enjoy their own.

Otherwise, no message will get over to Paulson-Bush or New Obama-XXXX team.

suing will take years...Boycott is so effective.
1. Fly no boeing plane.
2. Eat no MacD,Pizza,...
3. Drink no cocacola...
use no VISA MASTER...
what else?
wthout these, we cannot die..; November 26, 2008 4:15 AM
Anonymous said...: Withdraw all your funds from DBS. Ask your friends and relatives to do so too. Why continue to put money in the very same bank that had cheated you?; November 26, 2008 8:11 AM
Anonymous said...: "Anonymous Anonymous said...

The difficulty is how to identify a good lawyer with reasonable legal fee.

Zhong

12:07 AM"

Actually my hint is already in there

Good Lawyers are NEVER reasonable
Cheap Lawyers are.
Cheap Lawyers make their clients feel good.
Good Lawyers make their clients feel cheap.
So the Clients will know what they are in for.
Because they will get worse treatment from their opposite Lawyers.

Looking for the most expensive and second most expensive lawyers means they have to be REALLY good or REALLY arrogant. By paying more its of course best and better chance they are BOTH all at one go

What the Investors needs are Bullies

on THEIR SIDE finally; November 26, 2008 8:50 AM
Anonymous said...: Thanks Pang who had given good suggestion. It's time to act legal action now. I suggest must get a experienced and brave lawyer who dare to fight for the investors.; November 26, 2008 11:04 AM
symmetrix said...: Pls see today's Straits Times (26-Nov-08), pg A2. There is an article titled "Suing banks not that easy." Whoever is coming up with a legal plan should consider the points raised in the article.

One challenge we will face in a collective legal suit is that our case is not homogeneous across 10,700 investors, like the Raffles Town Club saga. We have several products, several series, several FIs, several different channels of sale etc. We may have to classify investors into numerous different groups, with each group having a common denominator. The groups will then become smaller and smaller, and be less cost-effective.

Notwithstanding the challenge posed above, I'm all for a legal suit as I believe we won't be treated fairly by the FIs nor FIDREC nor MAS. And yes, I'm prejudging the outcome.; November 26, 2008 12:01 PM
Anonymous said...: No further prompting needed. Earlier we moved 250K NZ FD out into OCBC. Paper lost quite a fair bit but we accept this as part and parcel of investment.; November 26, 2008 12:35 PM
Anonymous said...: To 10:23pm

Your suggestion to have "ONE or TWO Power Leaders. Meaning they talk, everyone listen AND accept" might not be workable and may even bring the whole exercise to ruin if the WRONG or INCAPABLE leaders are selected.

Instead, we suggest to have a small committee made up of volunteers from the legal industry and effective team members who as a TEAM work out the strategy, make decisions and implement the plan. Decisions should be on a concensus basis and not rest in the power of 1 or 2 persons who may not have the right expertise/knowledge to make the right judgement.; November 26, 2008 12:48 PM
Anonymous said...: "Instead, we suggest to have a small committee made up of volunteers from the legal industry and effective team members who as a TEAM work out the strategy, make decisions and implement the plan. Decisions should be on a concensus basis and not rest in the power of 1 or 2 persons who may not have the right expertise/knowledge to make the right judgement."

Surely you heard about Sales Committees from End Bloc Tales

Good Luck!; November 26, 2008 4:28 PM
Anonymous said...: Stop all trading at UOB Kay Hian, terminate your trading account.
UOB Kay Hian betrayed their customers badly this time.; November 26, 2008 4:34 PM
Anonymous said...: It's much more than Lehman Bros, Pinnacle & High Notes etc

There are a lot more people losing heavily by buying a number of other products from the FIs.

Boycott the FIs; November 26, 2008 6:52 PM
Anonymous said...: I agree that we stop trading with UOB Kay Hian. What they said during the interview and they do now are 2 different matters.; November 26, 2008 7:06 PM
Anonymous said...: "What they said during the interview and they do now are 2 different matters."

Oh Come on! YOU know thats not true and thats not fair.

THEY NEVER SAID ANYTHING.; November 26, 2008 9:58 PM
Anonymous said...: MAS asks all parties to adopt a less legalistic approach, but look at the ground for their decision to reject the claim-full of legal language.; November 26, 2008 10:55 PM
Anonymous said...: How long do we still need to wait. Think those organisation are trying to delay the process until we all have no more energy.

We might want to consider legal suit soon. The soomer the better.; November 27, 2008 1:36 PM
Anonymous said...: "We might want to consider legal suit soon. The soomer the better."

my concern is they have been jostling for that.; November 27, 2008 1:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Dear "pro-Legal" Action Investors,

I have explored with 2 Senior counsel and one senior lawyer. Thaye all say we may have a case based on misrepresentation - under contract law is actionable. As for costs, if we are groped on a Series by Series basis for each product (e.e. Minibond/Pinacle), and for each group we get at least 500 to join in the action at $1000/- per head- its an affordable sum. The $0.5 mln budgt is about enough to cover the case even if we lose.

But problem is how to go ot and get the support form investors since we do not have name/address list of investors.

The Speakers' Corner way is not effective. Any ideas on how to reach out for in principle support at $1000/- per investor flat ?

Tks; November 27, 2008 1:50 PM
Tan Kin Lian said...: Hi 1:50 PM
Can you send an email to kinlian@gmail.com. I wish to discuss with you about the next step.; November 27, 2008 2:44 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi Mr. Tan ,

Please read the ‘ Letter To the Editor ‘ on page 19 ,of Business Times dated 27 Nov,titled ‘Can TCs invest in structured products’ by Tan Sin Liang,Compliance & derivatives lawyer of SL Tan & Co.
I quote few sentences from the Letter as follows:

“…...It may be of interest to the public to know that town councils in England entered into all kinds of derivative transactions with banks in the 1980s…...The most famous and most authoritative case is Hazell v Hammersmith & Fulham Borough Council & Others (the 'Hammersmith case') which was decided by the House of Lords, the highest court in England.
Briefly, the facts of this case are as follows: In 1983, the Hammersmith Borough Council established a capital market fund for the purpose of conducting transactions involving interest rate movements. Between 1987 and 1988, it entered into interest rate swaps, swap options, caps, floors, collars, forward rate agreements, gilts and cash options with Midland Bank, Security Pacific National Bank, Chemical Bank, Barclays Bank and Mitsubishi Finance International.
.... In 1988, the district auditor of Hammersmith Borough Council, Mr Hazell, challenged the legality of these derivative transactions on the grounds that they amounted to speculative trading, rather than hedging.
The entire case was decided on one key point: whether Hammersmith Borough Council had the legal capacity or power to enter into these derivative transactions. To address this legal issue, the court had to examine the all-important provision: Section 111(1)of the Local Government Act, 1972.
Based on the wordings of this statutory provision, the House of Lords held that Hammersmith Borough Council did not have the legal capacity or power to enter into these derivative transactions. They were declared to be 'ultra vires' transactions i.e. exceeding the powers of Section 111(1) of the Local Government Act. Hence, all these derivative transactions were void and unenforceable. This landmark decision triggered a string of 'restitution' cases in which the courts had to decide what could be recovered from such unenforceable transactions......”

Is this Case applicable to ‘ FIs push complex structured products to their retailed customers ‘ ?; November 27, 2008 3:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Hi,

The Speakers Corner way is not not effective, it continues to alert the victims and victims to be to become more aware of their plight and stir them to fight for the RIGHT.

To analyse a little more, the DBS HN5, ML Jubilee 3 & Pinnacle CLN 9 & 10 are gone and the noters will have no alternatives but go for class legal suit on the ground of misrepresentation.

LB Minibond all series concern, there are other alternatives other than taking legal suit, and if a new swap counterparty will come to the rescue the notes continue to run till maturity subject to no credit event in the three major areas of risk.

Pinnacles CLN 1,2,3,5,6 & 7 had 4 to 6 REs in the Synthetic CDO CDS basket defaulted but the notes continue to run till maturity or in the event that their respective subordinate level of the specified capital thresolds have been breached hence a mandatory redemption.

It is very difficult to UNITE all the CLN noters for an unified action.; November 27, 2008 3:11 PM
Anonymous said...: I have spoken to several legal experts as well and they have confirmed that the claims made are valid for legal action and that investors have a strong case.

However, as strong as the voice of 10,000 echoing the same, the legal eagles have all stressed that the respective FIs, having 'inch thick' written documentary evidence as support that investors were duly advised in the prospectus and other documents, have an equally strong defense in law.

Whatever the outcome, if this matter does make it to our courts, the results will be keenly watched by all parties.; November 28, 2008 3:22 PM
Anonymous said...: i dont understand why are 'most of the legal experts' painting an 'ok lets go for it' picture after just listening some, at best a handful, surface stories.

this is further compounded by the fact they are immediately asking for 500 a group at 1000 a piece. or least this is WHAT was put to us with a certain ring of urgency on this site.

i am just abit concern if this has become an 'all for grabs' sort of buffet for the 'beat the down market' lawyers, surely some of whom would have SOME personal losses in the recent market turbulence

i really hope its not a case of the desperate people seeking lucky lots from equally desperate soothsayers (quite literally, there seems to be a visible increase of such characters loitering around religious, even non religious, sites, if one pay some attention); November 29, 2008 12:08 AM
Anonymous said...: Perhaps we can advertise in local morning & evening English & Chinese newspaper calling all those interested in class action legal suit to come forward, join forces, unite to fight together.; December 06, 2008 9:50 PM

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Suggestion: how to approach legal action

27 comments:

Blog Archive