Hi Mr Tan
It is encouraging that MAS has submitted a consultation paper on investment in structured products. The review should be studied very carefully and the comments collated and set to MAS.
However, I feel that the April deadline is too short. MAS should give at least 3 months for comments.
I wish to carry out a survey and collate the feedback of the participants. I also feel it would be worthwhile to run a seminar for the public to voice their views.
J
I am glad that MAS has seen the light at the end of this long tunnel now that malpractice and unethical selling have been due to systemic failure. For the first time I am giving credit to MAS for recognising the areas that need to be addressed especially in the advisory process.Currently there is NO advisory process but product pushing and which caused the fiasco and immense damage to the financial well being of consumers.
ReplyDeleteMAS 's concern about remuneration is long over due. Commission has been the cause of conflict of interest. MAS should adopt the model by the UK FSA to remove commission and introduce fee as a negotiable reward for the advisory work provided. This will eliminate the unethical practice and misrepresentation.
Another safeguard and a very important one is to make need based or need analysis or fact finding compulsory before the recommendation of the product or solution and the adviser to be responsible for reasonable basis of the recommendation.
It is applaudable that MAS sees failure to make reasonable basis recommendation as breach of the FIT AND PROPER REQUIREMENT.Hope that this will be enforced to get rid of incompetent and dishonest insurance agents and to clean up the industry of the fly by night agents who have no interest to give the best to consumers.
Another safeguard is to check and audit the insurance companies for compliance and internal control of the processes.Also to make the CEO liable for breaches of the FAA by the salespeople. The top down approach to regulation will ensure a culture of putting the consumers first as opposed to the current malpractices within the insurance industry where everybody, from CEOs to the salespeople, is thinking of how to squeeze the consumers of their hard earned money.
I wish MAS well and hope that it will live it up to their concerns and not another pulling the wool over our eyes exercise to placate the aggrieved consumers.
MAS, please be seen too to be serious and enforce the regulations to level the playing field and to make Singapore a safe place for consumers.
Another thing should be addressed is misuse of titles by insurance agents.
ReplyDeleteToday, insurance agents have fanciful titles, from financial consultant to senior or executive or master financial consultants.
The titles misrepresent because the insurance agents don't live up to the titles. They are at best salesmen if not product traffickers.
MAS should stop the FIs from giving unsuitable titles to their salesmen when they are not fit to use the titles.It breaches the FIT AND PROPER criteria.
Zhummmeng
ReplyDeleteIn response to your comment that "It is applaudable that MAS sees failure to make reasonable basis recommendation ..."
Supposing the MAS recommendations are the OCCURRENCE of current complaints, which did not receive compensation. What is your view of below:
[a] Does it mean it is okay to mis-sell in the past, but not the future?
[b] Does it mean there were wrongs in the past that the govt does not want to pursue?
[c] Does it mean that the govt is happy to see the past wrong escaped judgement?
Will you still say it is applaudable?
FROM CASHEW NUT
By recognising that the current system failed minbond investors but not seek fair compensation for them, I agreed MAS failed miserably by only trying to fix the future but ignore past mis-selling.
ReplyDeleteI remain lost in trust of MAS and our system
Hey, Cashew Nut, don't get me wrong. I was applauding MAS for waking up to the fact that the system was flawed and needed fixing.
ReplyDeleteYou should continue to pursue your rights to full compensation