I wish to give an update to the notebolders (i.e. the investors of the credit linked notes).
1. About 200 notebolders have appointed a specific lawyer to act in the class action. I am meeting this lawyer to discuss his approach and the possibility of involving an experienced senior lawyer to fight the case in the high court.
2. A separate group of noteholders have approached several lawyers. They advised that a "test case" be used to take a case in high court. This group is likely to recommend a lawyer and to present the proposal to the noteholders in January 2009.
3. I have approached two senior lawyers to study the possible defects in the prospectus and pricing statement and to obtain an opinion from a Queens Counsel from the UK. A recommendation is likely to be made in January.
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/12/legal-action-against-issuers-and.html
I hope that the investors will wait until February to decide on the strategy for the class action. It may be possible for two or three class actions to be pursued separately for the differtent types of notes.
once court case applied, Bank license should be SUSPENDED.
ReplyDeleteWhat you all say?
When borrowers default loans, his/her ife are so miserable. Reversely now, depositors suing the banks, what fair games?
"It may be possible for two or three class actions to be pursued separately for the differtent types of notes."
ReplyDeleteThats 5 million PER class action
the lawyers are having a field day
Finally... Justice is commencing!
ReplyDeleteJust do it!
"Blogger Chan J C said...
ReplyDeleteFinally... Justice is commencing!
Just do it!
3:31 PM"
Chan
i know you might WANT to take this the wrong way but
Justice and Seeking Justice are different proceedings with different outcomes
Kudos to TKL and those who organized the respective noteholder groups to fight for justice. I think the development of the toxic structured investment saga is now moving towards the right direction. Using the test case method seems the best way that will not use up too much of our resources and make the case more strait forward. Once the proceedings is commenced, I believe millions of people here and overseas will focus their attention on this issue. Let's do it!
ReplyDeleteThanks again Mr Tan!
I know Mr Tan KL post that about 200 note holders have commmited to one lawyer to fight the court case is based on one person's postings on the blog. I am not sure who that person is and if his posting is accurate. I attended the minibond meeting with a large group of affected people. From what I know, very few people have actually committed to the lawyer in question. In fact I got an email from a minibond group member stating that the lawyer in question has been ruled out. Just want to make sure that the facts are right so that people don't make the wrong decision and commit too fast since this is going to be a very important decision - which lawyer to go with. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Wilson. Test case is a better method whereas a class action is difficult as different investors bought the structured notes in different ways, the judge can throw it out of court citing technical breach. People in the legal industry I have spoken to says class action suit is weak in our case.
ReplyDelete"Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteI know Mr Tan KL post that about 200 note holders have commmited to one lawyer to fight the court case is based on one person's postings on the blog. I am not sure who that person is and if his posting is accurate. I attended the minibond meeting with a large group of affected people. From what I know, very few people have actually committed to the lawyer in question. In fact I got an email from a minibond group member stating that the lawyer in question has been ruled out. Just want to make sure that the facts are right so that people don't make the wrong decision and commit too fast since this is going to be a very important decision - which lawyer to go with. Thank you.
6:41 PM"
i think a really important factor is precedence. Has anyone got any news of that compensated case someone mentioned
"Anonymous Anonymous said...
I agree with Wilson. Test case is a better method whereas a class action is difficult as different investors bought the structured notes in different ways, the judge can throw it out of court citing technical breach. People in the legal industry I have spoken to says class action suit is weak in our case.
6:44 PM"
Without strong evidence, without impartial witnesses and without precedence, any case however way its fought will suffer the risk of more or less the same outcome...5 million legal fees or 50 dollar registration fees
My sincere thanks to you Mr Tan for all your great help!!! You have my support to be the elected President and I have signed up the petition list. I will not know what to do if not for all your advice in this blog. I have been interviewed by the Bank and am waiting for an answer. a) May I know when is a good time to join the class action? b)Can I still join the 200 investors on the class action later after I know the Bank's response? c)Who is the appointed lawyer? This is an important matter and getting a good lawyer for the class action is real crucial. d) Will a test case be better or a Class Action be better? Once again, many many sincere thanks for your GREAT JOB in helping us!
ReplyDeleteU.S lawyers work on a contingency fee; if you recover nothing, you pay no legal fees.
ReplyDeleteHello,
ReplyDeleteyou people think it is wise to have a test case first, but who is willing to pay the hefty fees while you people watch how the case revolves. Are you willing to be THE ONE? PLEASE THINK BEFORE YOU suggest.
"Anonymous Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteU.S lawyers work on a contingency fee; if you recover nothing, you pay no legal fees.
10:59 PM"
That said do you have ANY idea how much of a cut they get if you WIN?
"Anonymous Anonymous said...
Hello,
you people think it is wise to have a test case first, but who is willing to pay the hefty fees while you people watch how the case revolves. Are you willing to be THE ONE? PLEASE THINK BEFORE YOU suggest.
11:13 PM"
Thats not a big issue, who pay the risk, who earn the risk, fair game
anyway this pioneer fellow will have the full support of the Investors community behind him/her becos to them, he/she is the Icon of Hope
that said, but i did consider ONE issue, what if he lost and no one dare step up next
in that, he/she is MORE than a test case. He/She is actually the Make-Break case (least psychologically)
Pressure
"Justice" or "Seeking Justice"?
ReplyDeleteWho cares!
Win or Lose, I'll be happy going to my grave knowing I've tried my best to get justice!
Bring it ON!!!
http://www.straitstimes.com/Breaking%2BNews/Singapore/Story/STIStory_310452.html
ReplyDeleteWith the help of Mr TAN KL and many self-less folks, at least there is progress on this saga.
ReplyDeleteGoing through the legal battle does not guarantee a win, but it is better than to sit back, doing nothing and accept whatever
outcome determined by the FIs.
Thanks so much Mr TAN KL and the self-less folks who are involved in one way or another.
Jasmin
I am glad to know Mr Tan does not give up. THe newspaper is quite now for this saga. I thought people start to forgot our helpless suffers.
ReplyDeleteI hope that all investors still withhold actions till Mr. Tan Strategy committe come up with the recommendations.
ReplyDeletei notice some 'Anonymous' postmakers are more 'Passionate' about throwing down legal gauntlets, at whatever the costs.
ReplyDeleteThis shows 'They' must certainly be very VERY Determined and the LEAST Fearful. They must also be very VERY Intelligent to be this confident that They will win.
Could 'We' suggest these Passionate Crusaders as the first line of Test Cases
Surely They could not decline to be a proud leading pack of a victimized Investors community.
I give my full support They WILL NOT decline. Becos the First Mouse that put the bell on the Cat must be a Good Mouse, even tho He might be heading for his grave.
If we set a cap of $5000 for 200 ppl its 1 Mil for the lawyer .That sound reasonable for the legal team to start with. Ofcourse more ppl is better. Also show we mean business.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, thanks so much to Mr Tan and the selfless folks who have been helping and commenting in a constructive manner.
ReplyDeleteMAS, despite being the central bank staffed with the brightest and most well educated elites, also need to spend huge $$$ to engage financial and legal consultants to untie the knot of Lehman Brothers minibond. I wonder how MAS would expect ordinary folks like us to understand the intricacy of such products and have invested in them with "opened eyes". LOL.
Thanks, Mr Tan. Please help us pursue the legal option. I've ran out of patience with FI/MAS.
ReplyDeleteBy taking legal action, this may force the FIs to come out with a compromise, otherwise the FI will not take seriously the complaints by the investors. The legal fees will not come to 5 million as alleged by Wayangnologist. The figures quoted is way, way out. FIs will have to consider seriously the damage to their reputation should they lost the case and the disruption to their business during the hearings. Ordinary citizens will avoid banking or having any business to do with the relevant FLs being sued.
ReplyDeleteHuray!!!!!
Doing nothing is not an option if you still want your money back.
ReplyDelete***That said do you have ANY idea how much of a cut they get if you WIN?***
ReplyDeleteIts base on complexity of the case, normally is between 20% and 50% but its can be arranged in writing before hand. They are experienced investment fraud lawyers unlike some here who talk about money even before they open their mouth. What are their track records in investment fraud cases one must ask. Moreover they don't say they will discharge themselves without giving any reason.
The biggest problem with class action is " too many people hence too many mouths'. Suggest let ONE person rep ALL, and handle the whole case with appointed lawyer.He communicate with the 200 odds, or whatever no. of investors, and as a sole rep of the class, decide with lawyer what to do, from start to end. The choice is obvious who that person might be?
ReplyDeleteLatest minibonds development in Hong Kong - working to sue HSBC(USA)
ReplyDelete迷債事主擬告美匯豐
曾助安然事主索回561億 美律師行來港商集體訴訟 2008年12月5日
【明報專訊】正當特區政府與雷曼迷債分銷銀行就回購安排的法律觀點爭持不下之際，事件突然有重要發展。本報記者獲悉，曾經協助美國安然集團股東向相關金融機構取回多達72億美元(約561億港元)賠償的一群美國律師，正準備代表香港迷債事主在美國以集體訴訟的方式入稟美國法院，向身為迷債信託人的美國匯豐銀行提出巨額索償，理據是美國匯豐「沒有忠實地履行作為一個信託人的應有責任」。
民主黨立法會議員涂謹申昨日只允證實正與一批美國律師商討類似行動，但拒絕透露進一步詳情。
涂謹申雖沒有透露該批美國律師的名字，但本報記者翻查資料，發現一家名為Coughlin Stoia的美國律師行，曾於2002年4月代表安然股東，以集體訴訟方式，入稟美國法院，控告安然集團曾經僱用的一大批投資銀行、會計師、董事和曾借錢給安然的銀行，指他們曾經直接或間接地協助安然欺騙股東，導致安然要清盤。結果在其後的6年裏，該律師行為安然股東追回72億美元的巨額賠償，並從中得到了6.88億美元律師費，創下了全球最高律師費的紀錄。
指控「沒忠實履行信託人責任」
消息人士昨日透露，曾積極參與安然集體訴訟案的一批美國律師，近月主動接觸正協助數千名雷曼事主索償的民主黨，希望民主黨能提供一些事主的資料給他們，以便他們可以代表這批事主在美國採取集體訴訟行動，控告身為28隻雷曼迷債系列信託人的美國匯豐銀行，理據是後者沒有依足迷債章程，「忠實地履行作為一個信託人的應有責任」，令債券持有人變相持有一些「有毒」的資產。
與民主黨商討 稱已夠法律依據
消息人士續稱，該批律師與民主黨的商討已進入十分仔細的階段，包括已談到一旦勝訴如何分配賠償的細節，並且聲言已找到足夠的法律依據控告美國匯豐。由於美國打官司的成本很高，以致很多美國的集體訴訟案件在排期階段已達成和解，因此有關的律師正以此作為他們行動的其中一個目標。
大聯盟月中號召大型示威
另一方面，「銀行苦主大聯盟」召集人陳光譽表示，昨晚雷曼事主緊急開會下了兩個決定，一是12月中會號召大型示威，希望規模是有史以來最大的；二是他們亦打算到美國控告銀行，目前正試圖找出數個有代表性的個案，主要是購買了迷你債券的事主，「因迷債相對簡單，之後再推廣到其他產品」。他希望12月中前能明確選出合適事主，屆時會再有公布。他亦指出，明白集體訴訟所需的金錢和時間不菲，會由一批事主共同負擔。
明報記者
A group of US lawyers help HK investors to take the legal action :
ReplyDelete早报导读: 债事主拟告美汇丰
曾助安然事主索回561亿 美律师行到港商集体诉讼
（香港） (2008-12-05)
（联合早报网讯）香港明报报道，正当特区政府与雷曼迷债分销银行就回购安排的法律观点争持不下之际，事件突然有重要发展。本报记者获悉，曾经协助美国安然集团股东向相关金融机构取回多达72亿美元(约561亿港元)赔偿的一群美国律师，正准备代表香港迷债事主在美国以集体诉讼的方式入禀美国法院，向身为迷债信托人的美国汇丰银行提出巨额索偿，理据是美国汇丰“没有忠实地履行作为一个信托人的应有责任”。
民主党立法会议员涂谨申昨日只允证实正与一批美国律师商讨类似行动，但拒绝透露进一步详情。
涂谨申虽没有透露该批美国律师的名字，但本报记者翻查资料，发现一家名为Coughlin Stoia的美国律师行，曾于2002年4月代表安然股东，以集体诉讼方式，入禀美国法院，控告安然集团曾经雇用的一大批投资银行、会计师、董事和曾借钱给安然的银行，指他们曾经直接或间接地协助安然欺骗股东，导致安然要清盘。结果在其后的6年里，该律师行为安然股东追回72亿美元的巨额赔偿，并从中得到了6.88亿美元律师费，创下了全球最高律师费的纪录。
指控“没忠实履行信托人责任”
消息人士昨日透露，曾积极参与安然集体诉讼案的一批美国律师，近月主动接触正协助数千名雷曼事主索偿的民主党，希望民主党能提供一些事主的资料给他们，以便他们可以代表这批事主在美国采取集体诉讼行动，控告身为28只雷曼迷债系列信托人的美国汇丰银行，理据是后者没有依足迷债章程，“忠实地履行作为一个信托人的应有责任”，令债券持有人变相持有一些“有毒”的资产。
与民主党商讨 称已够法律依据
消息人士续称，该批律师与民主党的商讨已进入十分仔细的阶段，包括已谈到一旦胜诉如何分配赔偿的细节，并且声言已找到足够的法律依据控告美国汇丰。由于美国打官司的成本很高，以致很多美国的集体诉讼案件在排期阶段已达成和解，因此有关的律师正以此作为他们行动的其中一个目标。
大联盟月中号召大型示威
另一方面，“银行苦主大联盟”召集人陈光誉表示，昨晚雷曼事主紧急开会下了两个决定，一是12月中会号召大型示威，希望规模是有史以来最大的；二是他们亦打算到美国控告银行，目前正试图找出数个有代表性的个案，主要是购买了迷你债券的事主，“因迷债相对简单，之后再推广到其他产品”。他希望12月中前能明确选出合适事主，届时会再有公布。他亦指出，明白集体诉讼所需的金钱和时间不菲，会由一批事主共同负担。
News from Hong Kong newspaper The Standard:-
ReplyDeleteMinibond investors to sue HSBC
(1 hr 5 mins ago)
Lehman Brothers minibond investors plan to sue the minibond trustee, US-incorporated HSBC (0005), after Hong Kong banks postponed buying back the structured products.
Peter Chan Kwong-yue, chairman of investors action group Allied Victims of Lehman Products, said the action group has been approached by US legal firm offering to represent minibond investors in Hong Kong filing the lawsuit.
Meanwhile, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority has received 19,196 complaints concerning minibonds as at Thurday. HKMA today referred 21 complaints of alleged misconduct tied to Lehman Brothers financial products to the Securities and Futures Commission for possible action.
STAFF REPORTER Friday, December 5, 2008 17°C 47%
Not doing anything is a dead end. Minibonds, high notes and other CLN holders has been undergone talks, interviews, risk profiling etc etc, processes and procedures used by governmen and FI to tire everyone out, so that we give up. They even send their frens to the all blogs to talk down and discourage pple to start legal action.
ReplyDeleteI think the best way is to start legal action in US where influence from local governmen is much lesser, and that lawyers in US have proven track record.....very much like what is reported in HK papers.
There are some many of us, if we unite, we should have enough resources to go through the case.
Mr Tan has demonstrated clear leadership, let's wait for his final recommendation first.
Mr. Tan
ReplyDeleteMay I suggest you can help to post the article of "Minibond investors to sue HSBC" as a new posting?
Thank you sir.
JC
for the possible Singapore "Class Action", will it be similar to the US way ? i.e. no up front fee until wins ? or: plaintiff pay a reasonable (fixed0 fee up front ?
ReplyDeletewhat is the singapore legal requirement on the fee?
I would like to understand this. Thanks.
email: hkVictims@live.com
I dont think that US system of lawyers and legal proceedings might fit well here, even if its allowed
ReplyDeleteClass Action here is very very different from anywhere else
The primary reason is simple.
If a class action case goes thru and that case context is particularly intangible with the one of the key industries, the very one this island is trying to build AND STAKE a reputation on - Finance
you can imagine the 'MANY UNDERLYING CONCERNS'
so if the lawyers know thats a good chance it be thrown out at the FIRST sensitive conjuncture, do you think they will happily agreed to work on it and sit around waiting for a shared cut??
Again HK are steps ahead of us. Let's follow our HK brothers and sue the FI/HSBC/MAS to recover our money
ReplyDelete