Dear Mr, Tan Kin Lian,
I have two concerns about NTUC Income's bonus restructure enforced on policy holders effective last year, 2008.
I have been paying about 11 years for an Income endowment policy. If I am not mistaken, my payout from NTUC Income at maturity date, 2011, will probably be badly affected by the recession. Had the bonus not been restructured in 2008, I would have a larger amount locked-in last year because the economy was bouyant in 2007 and the bonus for 2007 is distributed in 2008.
I think policyholders like me should have been allowed an opt out option last year when Income decided to restructure the bonus. This is because when I signed for my policy it was based on a different understanding of the bonus distribution. I have only two years more to pay my premiums so if I understood how my policy is affected by the bonus restructure, I should be allowed to opt out with no penalty. I find I cannot opt out now because of the financial penalty incurred, I have to continue my premium payments for this year and the next.
In conclusion, I expect my worst fears will be realised when I receive notification of downward revision on Income endowment policy after the end of Income's financial year.
I would like to hear from you. Thank you very much, your insights into these concerns I'm sure will be absolutely helpful.
I agree with your views. I believe that NTUC Income should have allowed policyholders to make a choice to stay with the old bonus structure.
But the management and board was adament about their right to change the bonus structure and not to give this option. The chairman made a promise at last year's Annual General Meeting about the future bonuses. At that time, the promise was quite reasonable.
Subsequently, the global financial crisis came, and made the situation worse for policyholders - especially with the restructured bonus.
I suggest that you write to the chairman of the board of NTUC Income to express your views. You can also write to MAS.
- ► 2013 (298)
- ► 2012 (1270)
- ► 2011 (1873)
- ► 2010 (2369)
02/01 - 02/08
- Survey: An active Parliament
- Challenges faced by alternative parties
- Class action on credit linked notes
- Compensation for the Credit Linked Notes
- SFC may use stick to force banks into minibond set...
- Minibond probe into several lenders expected to en...
- Opinion of Queen's Counsel
- Suggestion to stimulate the Singapore economy - Mo...
- Measures to stimulate the economy
- Jobs Credit Scheme
- Relief loans to replace loss of earnings
- TOC: Social Justice and Fairness
- Bonus restructure badly affected by the global cri...
- Advice on lodging complaint on FIDREC
- SCMP:Minibond settlement may start new troubles
- SCMP:Lawmakers want brokerage's role in Lehman pro...
- Ten of the worst ... scams to avoid
- Attend the interview with the bank now
- Insurance company reject claim due to non-cooperat...
- Forum, Sat 7 Feb 2009
- Distribution cost of life insurance policy
- Survey - Life Insurance policy
- Results - Where to live
- ▼ 02/01 - 02/08 (23)
- ► 2008 (2105)
- ► 2007 (1803)
- ► 2006 (696)
- ► 2005 (159)