Showing posts with label Land banking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Land banking. Show all posts
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Survey - land banking
If you have been caught in a land banking product, and you wish to meet other investors in the same situation, give your particulars here.
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Postings on Land banking
For investors who are caught in land banking investments or have been approached, you can read my postings on this topic by clicking on the label "Land Banking" on the right.
Tuesday, March 16, 2010
False hope
I spoke to an investor in a land banking product. He has invested for nearly two years and is still waiting for his invested sum to be returned to him. He has not even collected the interest payment of 12.5%. He has since lost his job and his money is tied up in this investment. He has been promised a few times that the company is finalising the sale of the land and expects to repay the investment in the near future. It never materialised but he still remained hopeful and naive.
He is reluctant to lodge a complain with the authority or talk to the newspaper as it might cause the company to collapse. He still harboured the hope that his money will be repaid to him in the future. He even hoped that the company would be successful in the sales to new investors, so that they can collect the money to repay him. This is a selfish attitude, which reflects a shameful character of many Singaporeans.
What this investor does not realise is that there is virtually no chance of getting approval to develop the land or for the land being sold at a profit. The company tells a false story to keep the naive investors from taking action to enforce their rights. As time goes by, their chance of recovering their invested money will diminish, and it will soon be too late. Even if the company is able to get new funds, they will not repay the naive and weak investors. They will just cook up another excuse to give false hope.
If you are caught in this situation and you wish to meet other investors in the same situation, give your particulars here.
He is reluctant to lodge a complain with the authority or talk to the newspaper as it might cause the company to collapse. He still harboured the hope that his money will be repaid to him in the future. He even hoped that the company would be successful in the sales to new investors, so that they can collect the money to repay him. This is a selfish attitude, which reflects a shameful character of many Singaporeans.
What this investor does not realise is that there is virtually no chance of getting approval to develop the land or for the land being sold at a profit. The company tells a false story to keep the naive investors from taking action to enforce their rights. As time goes by, their chance of recovering their invested money will diminish, and it will soon be too late. Even if the company is able to get new funds, they will not repay the naive and weak investors. They will just cook up another excuse to give false hope.
If you are caught in this situation and you wish to meet other investors in the same situation, give your particulars here.
Leaders should address important issues
For many years since its independence, Singapore has been a model of excellence in governance. However, the situation has grown to be quite pathetic during in recent years. Here are some of the problems:
a) rampant cheating, e.g. land banking, toxic products
b) escalating cost of living and housing prices
c) stagnant wages, stressful and poor quality of life
d) wastefulness, such as the episode on payTV platforms
It is time for our leaders to address these issues.
Tan Kin Lian
a) rampant cheating, e.g. land banking, toxic products
b) escalating cost of living and housing prices
c) stagnant wages, stressful and poor quality of life
d) wastefulness, such as the episode on payTV platforms
It is time for our leaders to address these issues.
Tan Kin Lian
Unwillingness to take responsibility
There is a company that advertises regularly on television that sells land banking and other products.
For the past two years, they have been offering their products to investors with an option for the purchaser to cash out at the end of 6 months with interest at 12.5%. On maturity, they find many excuses to delay the payment and kept some investors waiting for more than a year.
Several investors had lodged a complaint with the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Commercial Affairs Department, but were told to engage their own lawyer on this matter.
This company continued its mode of operation and more unwary investors are being caught in this type of investment. I was told that several millions of dollars are being collected each month. The company was even able to produce a certificate of "Singapore Quality" issued by Spring Singapore.
Some investors asked me, "Mr. Tan, why is the Government not willing to act on this matter, when many ordinary people have complained about being cheated? Does this company have strong connections with certain people in the Government?". I replied that this is not likely to be the reason.
The likely reason is that one agency will point finger that it is the responsibility of another agency, and nobody wishes to take responsibility to act. This is quite typical of Singapore and is a shameful state of affairs.
Tan Kin Lian
For the past two years, they have been offering their products to investors with an option for the purchaser to cash out at the end of 6 months with interest at 12.5%. On maturity, they find many excuses to delay the payment and kept some investors waiting for more than a year.
Several investors had lodged a complaint with the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Commercial Affairs Department, but were told to engage their own lawyer on this matter.
This company continued its mode of operation and more unwary investors are being caught in this type of investment. I was told that several millions of dollars are being collected each month. The company was even able to produce a certificate of "Singapore Quality" issued by Spring Singapore.
Some investors asked me, "Mr. Tan, why is the Government not willing to act on this matter, when many ordinary people have complained about being cheated? Does this company have strong connections with certain people in the Government?". I replied that this is not likely to be the reason.
The likely reason is that one agency will point finger that it is the responsibility of another agency, and nobody wishes to take responsibility to act. This is quite typical of Singapore and is a shameful state of affairs.
Tan Kin Lian
Professional fees and moral values
Several months ago, I received a letter from a big legal firm in Singapore threatening to take legal action against me for posting an article in my blog about a land banking company. The article was reproduced from the website of a UK newspaper. The article made several allegations about the operations of this land banking company that operates in Singapore.
The letter from the lawyer asked me to prove the facts that were contained in my blog. I asked if their client had written to the UK newspaper to correct the facts, but they refused to answer my question and continued to threaten and harass me.
When I related this matter to a friend, she asked the question, "Does this reputable legal firm feel ashamed of acting for a company that goes about to cheat the public?" Some time later, the legal firm suddenly dropped the matter for reasons that are not clear to me.
I now read a report about Lehman Brothers and the large fees earned by their auditors and lawyers in helping to hide the facts about the financial situation of the company during its last few months. Are the fees for these reputable firms more important than moral and ethical values?
Tan Kin Lian
The letter from the lawyer asked me to prove the facts that were contained in my blog. I asked if their client had written to the UK newspaper to correct the facts, but they refused to answer my question and continued to threaten and harass me.
When I related this matter to a friend, she asked the question, "Does this reputable legal firm feel ashamed of acting for a company that goes about to cheat the public?" Some time later, the legal firm suddenly dropped the matter for reasons that are not clear to me.
I now read a report about Lehman Brothers and the large fees earned by their auditors and lawyers in helping to hide the facts about the financial situation of the company during its last few months. Are the fees for these reputable firms more important than moral and ethical values?
Tan Kin Lian
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Land banking - more investors caught
An investor called me. She invested a large sum of money in a land banking project with the promise of 12.5% interest on maturity at the end of 6 months. On maturity, the company did not honor the promise to pay back the investment. They asked her to extend the investment by another 6 months.
She visited a section in Hardware zone and was horrified to learn that many other investors was caught in a similar situation. She refused to extend the investment but the company has not paid back her money, in spite of her repeated requests.
The investor said that she was deceived because the land banking company had a Singapore Quality class awarded by Spring Singapore. She thought that this classification indicate that the company can be trusted to honor its promise.
The land banking company is conducting more road shows and investment talks, and more investors would be caught in this type of investment.
Many investors had already complained to the Commercial Affairs Departments of similar investments during the past year. Apparently, the CAD had not acted on these complaints. During this time, more people are being caught in similar dubious investments. It seems that a few million dollars of investments are being collected each month.
I am really at a loss on how to help these investors who were deceived by these investments. I hope that the newspapers will write a story about it. It should be a crime for the company to take deposits with the promise to return the money with interest, when they do not have a banking licence. How can the Authority stand by and allow such operations to continue?
Tan Kin Lian
She visited a section in Hardware zone and was horrified to learn that many other investors was caught in a similar situation. She refused to extend the investment but the company has not paid back her money, in spite of her repeated requests.
The investor said that she was deceived because the land banking company had a Singapore Quality class awarded by Spring Singapore. She thought that this classification indicate that the company can be trusted to honor its promise.
The land banking company is conducting more road shows and investment talks, and more investors would be caught in this type of investment.
Many investors had already complained to the Commercial Affairs Departments of similar investments during the past year. Apparently, the CAD had not acted on these complaints. During this time, more people are being caught in similar dubious investments. It seems that a few million dollars of investments are being collected each month.
I am really at a loss on how to help these investors who were deceived by these investments. I hope that the newspapers will write a story about it. It should be a crime for the company to take deposits with the promise to return the money with interest, when they do not have a banking licence. How can the Authority stand by and allow such operations to continue?
Tan Kin Lian
Sunday, January 03, 2010
UK Companies Investigation Branch
From UK Daily Mail
2 January 2010
Robert Burns has a blunt message for cheats who set up companies to con the public. 'There is an organisation that can take action against you and put you out of business,' he warns. That organisation is the Companies Investigation Branch. You may not have heard of it - much of its work is confidential - but it may have quietly taken action to stop you falling victim to sharp practice.
Some traditional types of malpractice recur. One involves 'land banking', where plots of land are purchased and sold to investors on the basis that planning permission will be granted.
'We find time and time again that the prospects of planning permission are south of zero,' says Burns.
'In one case, the land had everything wrong with it from a development point of view. It was green belt, a heritage site and was on a flood plain. There was just about every conceivable obstacle.'
2 January 2010
Robert Burns has a blunt message for cheats who set up companies to con the public. 'There is an organisation that can take action against you and put you out of business,' he warns. That organisation is the Companies Investigation Branch. You may not have heard of it - much of its work is confidential - but it may have quietly taken action to stop you falling victim to sharp practice.
Some traditional types of malpractice recur. One involves 'land banking', where plots of land are purchased and sold to investors on the basis that planning permission will be granted.
'We find time and time again that the prospects of planning permission are south of zero,' says Burns.
'In one case, the land had everything wrong with it from a development point of view. It was green belt, a heritage site and was on a flood plain. There was just about every conceivable obstacle.'
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Pushing the buck around
An investor, who was misled into investing a large sum of money in land banking plots made a complaint to his Member of Parliament. He provided documentation to support his complaint. The MP wrote to Monetary Authority of Singapore who referred the investor to the Commercial Affairs Department. He met with an officer of CAD who told him that they have received several similar complaints and were investigating the matter. Nothing was heard from CAD for the past two months.
The investor asked me what to do. He said that one party is pushing the buck to another party and nobody is interested to take charge of this matter. I wondered why the CAD did not wish to contact the complainant and get more facts. The complainants are kept in the dark. This seemed to be a habit in Singapore.
I asked the complainant to take the matter up with his elected MP again. I hope that the MP will follow up on this matter, rather than let sad state of affairs continue.
Tan Kin Lian
The investor asked me what to do. He said that one party is pushing the buck to another party and nobody is interested to take charge of this matter. I wondered why the CAD did not wish to contact the complainant and get more facts. The complainants are kept in the dark. This seemed to be a habit in Singapore.
I asked the complainant to take the matter up with his elected MP again. I hope that the MP will follow up on this matter, rather than let sad state of affairs continue.
Tan Kin Lian
Monday, December 28, 2009
Bad experience with land banking plot
Dear Mr. Tan,
Some years ago a good friend of mine purchased some UK Land Banking plots. She was so blinded by the opportunity that when I questioned it we fell out for a while. She could not believe that such opportunities could be allowed in Singpaore and advertised on the TV if they were not true. She was not particularly greedy in fact I found her to be a very kind and gentle person.
Like many of us she wanted an opportunity to help her get ahead in life and be secure. The upshot was she has lost a significant portion of her savings to a scheme that has no chance of success.
I felt ashamed that such things could happen in the UK. After investigating and contacting some UK local authorities I was horrified at the way these schemes are run. They are designed to have absolutely no chance of success and to extract as much money as possible from the unfortunate investor.
Unfortunately what i've also discovered is that defamation law makes it very difficult to criticise a scam unless it is almost 100% proved especially in Singapore. It seems the only way to prove a scam without time and huge resources is to wait for the company to fail.
Even then typically the company will restart 2 or 3 times under different names claim mismanagement by a single executive and take more money from their loyal customers.
SF
Some years ago a good friend of mine purchased some UK Land Banking plots. She was so blinded by the opportunity that when I questioned it we fell out for a while. She could not believe that such opportunities could be allowed in Singpaore and advertised on the TV if they were not true. She was not particularly greedy in fact I found her to be a very kind and gentle person.
Like many of us she wanted an opportunity to help her get ahead in life and be secure. The upshot was she has lost a significant portion of her savings to a scheme that has no chance of success.
I felt ashamed that such things could happen in the UK. After investigating and contacting some UK local authorities I was horrified at the way these schemes are run. They are designed to have absolutely no chance of success and to extract as much money as possible from the unfortunate investor.
Unfortunately what i've also discovered is that defamation law makes it very difficult to criticise a scam unless it is almost 100% proved especially in Singapore. It seems the only way to prove a scam without time and huge resources is to wait for the company to fail.
Even then typically the company will restart 2 or 3 times under different names claim mismanagement by a single executive and take more money from their loyal customers.
SF
Friday, December 25, 2009
Why roulette is better than land banking
Dear Mr. Tan,
Read this article
http://www.learnmoney.co.uk/advice/advice-87.html
Land Banking Companies
Why the majority of them are (legal) scams
UK land sold by Land Banking firms have about a 1% chance of receiving planning permission over the next 20+ years.
That means you have a 99%+ chance of owning a piece of land that is almost completely worthless.(the land is typically marked up by 1500% when you buy it and resale on the open market without planning permission is almost impossible)
In roulette you have a 2.7% chance of winning if you put all your money on a single roulette number.
You will also find out immediately that you have lost all your money and should learn very quickly not to gamble. If you win Roulette will also give 35 times payout not the two to three times offered by the land banking companies.
If I were to sell a single roulette number with a 3 to 1 payout for winning as an amazing investment opportunity I am sure I would be shut down and probably put in Jail.
Can anyone explain why are Land Banking companies not subject to the same scrutiny ?
Read this article
http://www.learnmoney.co.uk/advice/advice-87.html
Land Banking Companies
Why the majority of them are (legal) scams
UK land sold by Land Banking firms have about a 1% chance of receiving planning permission over the next 20+ years.
That means you have a 99%+ chance of owning a piece of land that is almost completely worthless.(the land is typically marked up by 1500% when you buy it and resale on the open market without planning permission is almost impossible)
In roulette you have a 2.7% chance of winning if you put all your money on a single roulette number.
You will also find out immediately that you have lost all your money and should learn very quickly not to gamble. If you win Roulette will also give 35 times payout not the two to three times offered by the land banking companies.
If I were to sell a single roulette number with a 3 to 1 payout for winning as an amazing investment opportunity I am sure I would be shut down and probably put in Jail.
Can anyone explain why are Land Banking companies not subject to the same scrutiny ?
Saturday, December 19, 2009
UK: High Court action to shut down five "Land Banking” companies
Dear Mr. Tan,
Watch out for these companies setiing up in Singapore soon !
http://www.whitehallpages.net/
High Court action to shut down five "Land Banking” companies.
Action taken in the public interest
The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills has presented petitions in the High Court to wind-up, in the public interest, five companies involved in marketing plots of land as investment opportunities.
The application to appoint a provisional liquidator was first heard on 8 October 2009, but at this hearing the companies, through their directors (see notes below), offered to give undertakings to the Court as to their future conduct and to cease trading pending the determination of the petitions. The Court accepted that these undertakings were sufficient to protect the public interest pending trial of the petitions.
The undertakings however were not fully complied with and accordingly the Secretary of State returned to Court on 17 December 2009 with a further application to appoint a provisional liquidator. The companies did not oppose this further application. The Court accepted there had been a failure to comply with the undertakings and ordered the appointment of the Official Receiver as provisional liquidator of the companies.
Watch out for these companies setiing up in Singapore soon !
http://www.whitehallpages.net/
High Court action to shut down five "Land Banking” companies.
Action taken in the public interest
The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation & Skills has presented petitions in the High Court to wind-up, in the public interest, five companies involved in marketing plots of land as investment opportunities.
The application to appoint a provisional liquidator was first heard on 8 October 2009, but at this hearing the companies, through their directors (see notes below), offered to give undertakings to the Court as to their future conduct and to cease trading pending the determination of the petitions. The Court accepted that these undertakings were sufficient to protect the public interest pending trial of the petitions.
The undertakings however were not fully complied with and accordingly the Secretary of State returned to Court on 17 December 2009 with a further application to appoint a provisional liquidator. The companies did not oppose this further application. The Court accepted there had been a failure to comply with the undertakings and ordered the appointment of the Official Receiver as provisional liquidator of the companies.
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Authority has to act to stop investment scams
Mr Tan
I note that in the Madoff case the prosecutors are considering prosecuting the programmers and perhaps the heads of the feeder funds. Presumably this is on the basis that they must have been aware that
something was not right but did nothing about it. They also took huge payments for supporting a scam..
It takes many parties to operate a scam. I am often amazed that when investment schemes fail that the sales people and agents blame the owners. The owners blame the agents and salepeople. All parties claim
complete innocence of any wrong doing. With some of the investment schemes such as land banking plots, various oil Investment schemes, sunshine investments etc it is obvious that many people involved know
that the investment scheme cannot work but choose to be involved anyway.
These people enable the scam and give it credibility by their involvement.
Singapore has a reputation for providing rigourous punishment to a few individuals to discouorage anti-social or criminal behaviour by the rest of the population. As an example:- jail sentences being applied
for using mobile phones while driving.
Perhaps applying very stiff penalties to one or two company directors, sale people and agents for their involvement in fraudulent investment schemes would encourage others to think more carefully about what they
allow themselves to be involved in and earn commission for.
REPLY
I agree with your views. I am unhappy with the passive response of the Authority in Singapore towards these investment scams. I will do my best to argue the case for the Authority to be more actively involved in stopping these scams.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
How to spot an investment scam
Mr Tan
This article may be useful to some of your readers from the UK FSA . It also points out the issues with prosecuting overseas fraud and why recovering funds is very difficult. I think a key question for an investment scheme should be who is independently auditing on an annual basis and what are they auditing. http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2009/04/30/transcript-how-to-spot-an-investment-scam.aspx
I was disappointed that he didnt mention land banking but did feel that this quote represents the issues with many investments (stock scams, ponzis, land banking, oil etc) where big returns are offered annually (Minimum 12% return etc). Most people lose of the actual money and just see numbers on a statement or page.
David:
It strikes me that the guys who actually get in early are the ones who are going to make the most amount out of it.
Jonathan:
No, because what actually happens is, normally the con man is good enough to convince the first guys to leave their money in, and that normally happens, they might take out a bit of interest, but essentially they leave their money in as well, and what everybody sees is a paper profit; we see the conmen, they'll give a fancy spreadsheet, they'll open up a laptop, show a graph, and say, "That's what your money was at the beginning" (pointing to the low point of the graph) "and that’s what your money is now" (pointing to the high point of the graph), it looks fantastic.
Steve
This article may be useful to some of your readers from the UK FSA . It also points out the issues with prosecuting overseas fraud and why recovering funds is very difficult. I think a key question for an investment scheme should be who is independently auditing on an annual basis and what are they auditing. http://www.fool.co.uk/news/investing/2009/04/30/transcript-how-to-spot-an-investment-scam.aspx
I was disappointed that he didnt mention land banking but did feel that this quote represents the issues with many investments (stock scams, ponzis, land banking, oil etc) where big returns are offered annually (Minimum 12% return etc). Most people lose of the actual money and just see numbers on a statement or page.
David:
It strikes me that the guys who actually get in early are the ones who are going to make the most amount out of it.
Jonathan:
No, because what actually happens is, normally the con man is good enough to convince the first guys to leave their money in, and that normally happens, they might take out a bit of interest, but essentially they leave their money in as well, and what everybody sees is a paper profit; we see the conmen, they'll give a fancy spreadsheet, they'll open up a laptop, show a graph, and say, "That's what your money was at the beginning" (pointing to the low point of the graph) "and that’s what your money is now" (pointing to the high point of the graph), it looks fantastic.
Steve
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Land sales are not protected by Financial Services Authority of UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2009/nov/07/landbanking-investment-scheme
Over the past five years, Guardian Money has warned that, despite taking in tens of millions of pounds from investors, no landbanker has ever delivered the expected profit bonanza that comes with planning permission.
Instead, we have reported how several landbankers have gone bust, including Land Heritage (UK)* and United Land Holdings, leaving buyers with virtually unsellable plots. These investors had no chance of getting their cash back from a compensation scheme, as land sales are not protected by the Financial Services Authority. In 2007 the FSA declared that although it does not regulate land as an investment, "there is a risk that many of these schemes are in breach of the financial regulation regime if they are structured as a 'collective investment scheme'. To operate and promote such a scheme legally, the operators would need to request and obtain authorisation from the FSA, which would then regulate these firms."
Over the past five years, Guardian Money has warned that, despite taking in tens of millions of pounds from investors, no landbanker has ever delivered the expected profit bonanza that comes with planning permission.
Instead, we have reported how several landbankers have gone bust, including Land Heritage (UK)* and United Land Holdings, leaving buyers with virtually unsellable plots. These investors had no chance of getting their cash back from a compensation scheme, as land sales are not protected by the Financial Services Authority. In 2007 the FSA declared that although it does not regulate land as an investment, "there is a risk that many of these schemes are in breach of the financial regulation regime if they are structured as a 'collective investment scheme'. To operate and promote such a scheme legally, the operators would need to request and obtain authorisation from the FSA, which would then regulate these firms."
Thursday, October 29, 2009
Not allowed to withdraw the investment
Dear Mr. Tan,
An investor who is now unemployed and in her late 50s has put a large amount of her life savings on an investment which "pays on yearly basis" with a land banking company X. On maturity, she wanted to cash out part of her investment but was told by X that she must renew all into the 6 months investment. When she insisted that she want to take out some, she was scolded by X's director, that she was a fool.
Upon hearing this from her, I am very angry about this company. I could not understand why they treat their customers like that. If we put our money in banks fixed deposits or any regulated investment products, nobody can stop us from renewing or surrendering our investment upon maturity because it's our money.
REPLY
Please ask the investor to lodge a complaint with the Commercial Affairs Department. I believe that there is a law to prevent companies from taking deposits on interest, unless it is licensed as a financial institution.
An investor who is now unemployed and in her late 50s has put a large amount of her life savings on an investment which "pays on yearly basis" with a land banking company X. On maturity, she wanted to cash out part of her investment but was told by X that she must renew all into the 6 months investment. When she insisted that she want to take out some, she was scolded by X's director, that she was a fool.
Upon hearing this from her, I am very angry about this company. I could not understand why they treat their customers like that. If we put our money in banks fixed deposits or any regulated investment products, nobody can stop us from renewing or surrendering our investment upon maturity because it's our money.
REPLY
Please ask the investor to lodge a complaint with the Commercial Affairs Department. I believe that there is a law to prevent companies from taking deposits on interest, unless it is licensed as a financial institution.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
Price chart of land in UK
Dear Mr TanI notice that many Singaporeans seem to fail to grasp the problem with land banking. The argument is always that land increase in price and since you own the land you cannot lose.
I have created this chart to explain my case. This is based on real land banking company data. I used a starting plot price of 10,000 UKP in 2006 converted into S$.
The green belt land value is based on land registry data in 2006 The value with planning permission is based on a land banking company estimate of 250% returns adjust by the recent fall in property prices.
I have adjust all prices using both currency and the recent boom and bust in the UK property market. I have made an assupmtion of 5% per annum increase in the value of land from 2011 forward.
Since there are no recorded successes with UK land banking plots I cannot see how any company can make claims for expercted, estimated or anticipated returns on this investment.
You will note according to this graph that in real terms land banking plots have got cheaper since 2006 as the UK currency declined in value. However many land banking companies have increased their UK pound price of their plots so that they still get the same number of Singapore dollars. As an example X increased their plot price from 5600 Pounds to 8000 Pounds in 2008.
I have adjust all prices using both currency and the recent boom and bust in the UK property market. I have made an assupmtion of 5% per annum increase in the value of land from 2011 forward.
Since there are no recorded successes with UK land banking plots I cannot see how any company can make claims for expercted, estimated or anticipated returns on this investment.
You will note according to this graph that in real terms land banking plots have got cheaper since 2006 as the UK currency declined in value. However many land banking companies have increased their UK pound price of their plots so that they still get the same number of Singapore dollars. As an example X increased their plot price from 5600 Pounds to 8000 Pounds in 2008.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Articles in my blog
I post several articles in my blog every day.
A few regular visitors to my blog send articles to me, usually of news clippings from other newspapers on insurance, finance and other issues covered in my blog. If I find them relevant, I post them into my blog with my comments.
Some contributors have a specific purpose. For example, they had bad investments in land banking products and send articles to me to warn others about the bad experience.
Some had a bad opinion about insurance agents. They continue to post comments to attack insurance agents. I find these comments to be unjustified and have blocked many of them.
I write some articles on my own based on my knowledge and research. These articles will usually carry my name.
A few regular visitors to my blog send articles to me, usually of news clippings from other newspapers on insurance, finance and other issues covered in my blog. If I find them relevant, I post them into my blog with my comments.
Some contributors have a specific purpose. For example, they had bad investments in land banking products and send articles to me to warn others about the bad experience.
Some had a bad opinion about insurance agents. They continue to post comments to attack insurance agents. I find these comments to be unjustified and have blocked many of them.
I write some articles on my own based on my knowledge and research. These articles will usually carry my name.
Friday, October 16, 2009
Article about Profitable Group
Hi Mr. Tan
Why did you withdraw your blog? Are you a coward?
What are you going to do with the defamatory statements in the Profitable Group website that are attacking you personally? Will you sue them?
Did you do any research before you post the article?
REPLY
My blog article was extracted from the Guardian website. Someone, presumably an investor, sent the article to me, requesting for it to be posted. I checked against the link and found that it was posted in the Guardian website.
Several of the statements refer to land banking in general and not specifically to Profitable Group. There were a few statements referring directly to Profitable Group but they looked quite factual to me. So, I posted the article in my blog.
When Profitable Group said that the article contained untruths, I removed it from my blog immediately. I also offered to post any correction that they wish to send to me. In particular, I asked for any correction that they sent to the Guardian article to be sent to me.
It is not a matter of cowardice. It is a matter of being fair. I do not hold any malice towards Profitable Group or any of its directors and do not wish to damage their reputation through any unintended mistake.
I have seen the statements made by Profitable Group in their website that do appear to attack me personally. I do not intend to take legal action against them for these statements. I will let the public make their own judgement about my character. Let the truth prevails. Let the facts speak for themselves.
Tan Kin Lian
Why did you withdraw your blog? Are you a coward?
What are you going to do with the defamatory statements in the Profitable Group website that are attacking you personally? Will you sue them?
Did you do any research before you post the article?
REPLY
My blog article was extracted from the Guardian website. Someone, presumably an investor, sent the article to me, requesting for it to be posted. I checked against the link and found that it was posted in the Guardian website.
Several of the statements refer to land banking in general and not specifically to Profitable Group. There were a few statements referring directly to Profitable Group but they looked quite factual to me. So, I posted the article in my blog.
When Profitable Group said that the article contained untruths, I removed it from my blog immediately. I also offered to post any correction that they wish to send to me. In particular, I asked for any correction that they sent to the Guardian article to be sent to me.
It is not a matter of cowardice. It is a matter of being fair. I do not hold any malice towards Profitable Group or any of its directors and do not wish to damage their reputation through any unintended mistake.
I have seen the statements made by Profitable Group in their website that do appear to attack me personally. I do not intend to take legal action against them for these statements. I will let the public make their own judgement about my character. Let the truth prevails. Let the facts speak for themselves.
Tan Kin Lian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)