Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Why MAS should handle complaints

Wednesday, December 24, 2008

Why MAS should handle complaints

Letter in Straits Times Forum

I REFER to the article last Thursday, 'Lehman-linked investors to get news in Jan', which reported that almost 5,000 formal complaints had been filed and that the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) was satisfied that all 10 institutions involved were reviewing complaints based on principles of fairness.

I appeal to MAS to consider taking over the handling of complaints. There are already a large number of formal complaints as the report stated. Furthermore, the final number may be higher because non-Lehman-linked complaints were not part of the 5,000 stated and many other complaints may be expected. Hence, MAS may want to take a more cautious approach when a large number of ordinary citizens are affected.

Secondly, the complaint handling process should be undertaken not only to determine fairness but also the integrity of the financial institution.

Thirdly, the process should be handled directly by an independent party. Having such a party to oversee the complaint-handling process may not be sufficient.

It should be handled by an independent party from the start. This may involve a significant investment in resources by MAS.

It is also true that MAS is not in a position to guarantee the profitability of financial products.
But, it is MAS which Singaporeans trust most to uphold the integrity of a financial institution.

Leong Kok Ho

9 comments:

Anonymous said...: "It is also true that MAS is not in a position to guarantee the profitability of financial products."

This isn't a question about profitability, it's a question about misrepresentation.; December 24, 2008 3:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Such appeals will not make any difference to how MAS handle it. Basically MAS has not changed in their approach and actions since the problems started with the Lehman collapse. We have suggestions, petitions, appeals etc but has MAS listen?

Maybe MAS has their "own" reasons to do the way they did and maybe also not convenient to tell you why their way and not your way.

So the FIs also has not progress much in resolving with the victims as can be seen a few days ago, one lone cancer striken victim even wore a placard protesting outside DBS HQ!; December 24, 2008 4:29 PM
Anonymous said...: MAS hopes that you guys lose interest and the whole thing dies a natural death.It betting on who will last.It is not interest in regulating.; December 24, 2008 5:10 PM
Anonymous said...: They shd, but do not want to.
What can u do?; December 24, 2008 6:02 PM
Anonymous said...: I would say even before MAS made the first statement, they and the banks and all the high authority in papee already strategised how to diffuse the situation.
What happened thereafter is just to put up a good wayang show and release the statements slowly ..... until the whole thing die a natural death.; December 24, 2008 9:07 PM
Anonymous said...: "A" reported to the police that "B" cheated him of S$5000,believing that the police being the watchdog of social security, will step in the help. The police however just sat back comfortably numb and told "A" to complain to "B" and resolve the problem by themselves. Is this not what we are experiencing now?; December 24, 2008 10:05 PM
Anonymous said...: Interesting how Hong Kong Monetary Authority handled the investors' cliams and bear half the costs. See below link

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/djf500/200812220455DOWJONESDJONLINE000122_FORTUNE5.htm; December 24, 2008 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: When the chairman of MAS made the speech in 2000 he outlined the plans to turn Sing into a financial hub.
First was to 'educate' the consumers to play the game. Second, was to make the game accessible and "simple" to everyone .Third, no rules to restrict the players.
All the players abide by the principle of caveat emptor and in addition make sure you enter the game with your eyes open big.
Any conflict please resolve among yourselves and we just provide the oversight.; December 25, 2008 12:37 PM
Anonymous said...: MAS should bear of MOST of the responsibility. E.g. If the Gate Keeper do not open the Gate for the tiger to come out , the tiger will not come out and harm people.

THESE PRODUCTS ARE APPROVED BY MAS. If MAS don't understand the product well please do not anyhow APPROVED it.; December 28, 2008 11:14 AM