Here are my views about the decisions made by the banks on the complaints of mis-selling of the credit linked notes.
1. About 1,280 (25%) noteholders will receive full compensation. This is good news and is higher than I had expected. I like to know the amount of compensation to see if the full compensation is given mainly to the small investors or is well distributed among the small and large investors.
2. About 1,670 noteholders (33%) will be offered partial compensation. To help them decide on whether to accept the compensation, they should be informed the current value of their notes, so that they can make an informed decision.
3. Another 6,000 noteholders have not lodged their complaints yet. They should step forward to lodge their complaint now, if they have been mis-sold.
13 comments:
These figures are bullsh1t.
Defintely not true for DBS
How about those structured products, like HN2, that are at the edge of being terminated but are still held by investors ? Given the bleak outlook of the world economy, it is a matter of time that such products also lose all their value like HN5 and some series of the minibonds. So far I have not heard of any FIs offering any compensation to holders of these products although these products are also mis-sold to the public. Maybe the HNGroup can tell us whether any HN2 holders have been compensated or refunded.
According to newsreports, most complainants that do not get compensation for their investment in High Notes 2 are those "Treasure" accounts holders with the who have at least $200k with the bank. So it appears that if you have some money, you must be smart enough not to be conned by sellers of the notes. Is this logical? What's the point of maintaining the "Treasure" status when the bank treats you like goondu? I understand that if your balance falls below $200k with the bank, "Treasure" account holders will be charged a monthly fee of $50 just to keep the status, which means a lofty $600 for a year!! Goondu....
That is why I decided to be "struck off" the "Treasure status". I see not much value to it on top of paying a fee (if investment balance fall short of the required $200K). Yeah, you have the privilege of a shorter queue while banking at the counter but I usually e-transact. The RM usually have their own agenda and is not really of much of a help.
I remember once there was a fixed deposit promotion going on (3% pa, I think). The RM does not bother even to inform me and left me to leave my savings of several hundreds of thousand dollars idling in their dismal savings account of 0.25%. I eventually found this out while scanning their website.
MR TAN
Good summary. I am particular enlightened by point [3] of your comment that there are at least another 6,000 investors who have not lodged complaint. I guess there could be still people who have NO CLUE that they were mis-rep or mis-sold.
The classic maxim is that "you cannot know what you do not know", when you are in complete darkness. Especially, those who have no access to internet. Let us pray for those who are still in the dark, hopefully, they are not old folks.
From CASHEW NUT
In this case, we should look the gift horse in the mouth. Indeed, look very carefully.
MAS appears to have drawn the line at mis-selling (if there's such a word). That is, some FIs had messed up, they sold some products to some target customers they should not have. Hence, the compensation. But the products are not toxic.
What about the misrepresentation and fraud? MAS must be taken to task for not properly regulating the FIs in the first place and whitewashing the subsequent investigation.
1. Before we feel exhilirated, I believe much of MAS's news release is old news, more of a summary of cases based mostly on the last few months rather than additional new decisions made recently following MAS's investigation on the FIs.
This can be verified if we know the number of the 25% who received full compensation who are Non-Vulnerables. If the number is low, we can surmise that there has been little positive improvements on the Non-Vulnerable complaints, since decision to compensate Vulnerables had already been made.
2. When MAS deferred this announcement few weeks ago, the reason given was to complete the investigation on the FIs' selling modus operandi and the extent of their "faults". We are now still disappointingly none the wiser on their findings. But since(33%) are offered partial compensation, we can take it that the FIs have been found to be at least partially at fault. What are the findings?
For this group and those 42%noteholders who have been rejected outright, as well as the other 6000 noteholders who have yet lodged complaints, transparency on the bases of FIs' decisions on whether to compensate and the quantum of compensation will enable them to decide either to have a final closure (ie., accept FIs' offers or give up) or to fight on at FIDREC or in court. Why are such key decision-making info still held in secrecy by MAS after months of waiting and anticipation and when the noteholders are now at the crossroads of a critical decision-making?
I think a representation to MAS by the petition groups should be made directly or through the press to request for the release of its findings. As the saying goes, if you are to die you also want to rest in peace.
So far all those who bought from securities firms like UOB Kay Hian and OCBC got back nothing. It seems only the banks and finance companies are compensating and even then you get nothing if you are not old, is educated and invested a larger sum >20K. If you >50K they conclude you are rich enough to be ignored.
I am very frustrated by this outcome. I don't agree we have been fairly treated.
My mum is 77, Chinese speaking, always using FD before, first time in this type of "minibond investment", raised complaint and interviewed in Oct 08 but have not heard a squeak to this date. She did not invest throught a stock broking firm.
So what are we talking about? I am so disillusioned and skeptical!
I suggest those who bought from brokerage firms eg UOB/ Kay Hian , OCBC etc get together for possible class action.
Very unfair. So many get & yet I don't get??? This is going to make more & more victims unhappy.
The process is not transparatent & unfair.
Outsider may thot so many people got compensated & feel relief, & loss their sympatthy.
Those involved would feel unhappy or even angry.
This is just a smart number game.
i do not believe the compensation was so high for DBS.
My parents were sold the product when they went to the bank. They clearly stated they wanted an FD. Having qualified for Treasures, they were allocated an RM. She told them to park part of their money in High Notes 5, saying it was as safe as FD. My mom refused but they talked and talked until she gave in. She said she felt so stressed by their pressure.
Later, the statement of the HighNotes 5 came and it made a loss. My mom jumped, quickly went to the bank to see the RM; she wanted to cash out the remaining amt, even if it was nearly $20K less. The RM was on maternity leave, and her replacement kept convincing my mom to hold it to maturity so can get the principal back. Again my mom gave in.
When the saga broke loose, she went with my dad to file a complain with DBS. When she met back the RM who sold her, the RM kept telling her that SHE WON"T GET HER MONEY BACK. This was even before they had lodged their complain. She kept saying my parents would not get their money back, no use to complain. My parents went ahead anyway.
Now, after going for so many interviews, we got the letter saying our claim is rejected. My mom recalls how the RM kept telling her she won;t get, as if the decision was 'pre-decided' regardless. It gave me a feeling that the whole interview investigation was nothing but a show but the decision was all pre-drawn.
I also want to know who got compensated and WHAT FACTORS/CRITERIA was in the decision process. The issue is pple are complaining because of misselling and this IS REGARDLESS of a person's status - being treasures or living in a 4-5 rm flat or whatever. A person does not have to live in a 1-2 room flat, only have PSLE education, don't speak english, never had investment experience etc to be misled.
prudie said...
i do not believe the compensation was so high for DBS.....
So "Treasure" means something good for the bank itself because the bank does not need to compensate even if it is doing something bad to the treasure customer. This is why I am going to cancel my treasure account. It has no added value to the account holder actually.
Post a Comment