Tan Kin Lian's Blog: Flaw in MAS Fast Track Process

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Flaw in MAS Fast Track Process

Dear Mr. Tan,

I came across this paragraph in the Q&A issued by MAS regarding the Fast-Track process:

"Under the fast tract process, the FI is required to help me prepare a written statement, taking guidance from a checklist of questions (which incorporates inputs from FIDReC. Similarly, the representative/RM who sold me the product is also required to give a written statement, again taking guidance from a checklist (incorporating inputs provided to FIDReC).

To me, this fast tract process seems rather odd and does not make much sense. Here is a situation where I am complaining against the FI, and under this fast tract process, the FI is required to help me prepare a written statement .........

Why should the FI in this instance help me. I would have thought that the FI would try make my statement as weak as possible and at the same time make use of my statement to defend their position against my complaint.

JL

REPLY
I agree with your view. I suggest that you bring this point up with MAS.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...: Dear friend,
The complaint handling process is "flawed" from the beginning. See this illustration. "Imagine you are raped. You go to the police. The police tell you to talk in fairness with the rapist. The rapist now have a FAST TRACK complaint handling by asking his brother to lodge the complaint report."

This situation is exactly what you lamented about that "... FI would try to make my statement as weak as possible and ... to defend their position ..."

FROM CASHEW NUT; March 14, 2009 10:47 AM
Anonymous said...: There is a trap. So be careful.; March 14, 2009 11:09 AM
Anonymous said...: You would probably be wasting your time. I lodged my complaint letter against OCBC Sec in October 2008. The letter contained all facts required to make a decision. Yet they insisted on an interview. I declined a few times as I felt that I had already stated all the pertinent facts and I felt that it would be a mere waste of time. Finally last month, on their insistence, I agreed to a phone interview. They asked me a few questions over the phone, prepared a statement for me and asked me to sign if I agreed or amend if I didn't.

I amended it and last week they sent me a standard letter rejecting my claim. I asked them what additional information did they base their decision on. They asked me what made me think it was the additional information that determined their decision. If it was not the additional information, then they were merely wasting my time in insisting on the interview and the signed statement. My only conclusion is that by insisting on the statement they could say they followed "due process" as required by MAS. Ultimately it will make them look good but they had already made their decision. How can we rely on Fidrec? You will likely get the same answer. Has anyone whose claim had been rejected able to get a positive outcome from FIDREC?; March 14, 2009 5:38 PM
Anonymous said...: Is MAS making all Singaporeans looks stupid? Is MAS also run by FT? Is there no more sensible Singapore talent around?; March 14, 2009 7:09 PM
Anonymous said...: Could you make a survey on people went to the Fidrec and find out their level of satisfaction with the processing in Fidrec ?

RJ; March 16, 2009 12:04 PM