Not another jumper on Mr Tan’s wagon.

Now that everyone knows it is safe to say something on issue (no midnight knocks), we have WP and SIAS saying something on their concerns.

Betcha CASE and SDP and Chiam will now have their say.

Where were you before last fri (before MAS MD media conference)?

Only TKL has balls of brass. Waz WP, SIAS, CASE, SDP and Chiam’s balls made of? They got any?

SDP are more on human rights and freedom od speech. WP may be too late to address issues. Each party has strong and weaknesses, anyway it is better than mee rebus bcos til now still as quiet as a mouse.

Think this press statement has two key points:

1. Legal action as last resort as it can be costly / counterproductive. Mr Tan Kin Lian has expressed similar view of legal action as last resort.

2. MAS need to do better in resolving the matter like “set a time frame for handling such cases”.

What gov / MAS can do is organize a working team to collectively helping investors to resolve matter with banks.

They already know many investors are not well educated, they should go out to help them with the complaint process. Compare the fact he gov had mobilized grassroots leaders to help old people to get Growth Dividends etc, why they are not getting CASE to have CDC / CC / grassroots to help these people to complain and get their money back.

I share Mr Low’s concerns over legal costs to investors. Most people don’t realise how costly such fees can be.

my first impression when i read that this lawyer had advertized his services for those Lehman linked investors was, wow… he is opportunistic & entrepreneurial! Obviously, he is encouraging a class action suit since that means more business for him, or if he is charging them a discounted fee, it will be raising his profile – good marketing move. Its that lawyer that wins either ways..

MAS has taken a position, which in government speak is – banks be fair, we’re watching you. It is rare for govt agencies to intervene in what most wld see as a private commercial transaction in Sg. I think that is a veiled threat to FI’s to play fair. As most execs from those FI’s are those from ‘the establishment’, it wld not be in their interest to blatantly short-change those investors & not toe the govt line.

If the mediation fails, then i say, sue them – but be prepared for a LONG, EXPENSIVE ride ahead.

I agree with Mr Low’s point that a class action suit will be costly and take a longer time to resolve. However, as an elected MP, I would expect Mr Low and his party to do more than to just issue a press statement. You dun need to be an elected MP to issue a press statment is what I am saying.

Looks like WP now has to compete with Activists and a bit too reactive ?

sigh…

Now, lets ask ourselves what is behind this surge in Activism which is not exactly doing WP too much good.

I have no idea.

Er, if people like Tan Kin Lian who can be considered to have a privilege life is prepared to come forward to help out. Why aren’t the Law Society?

Why aren’t lawyers prepared to waive their fees or the Law Society start a legal fund to help out?

Sometime threatening to bring a class action on banks might just force them to settle out of court. They might not want their dirty laundry air in court.

Has WP held any event to engage the people at Hong Lim Park?
What is WP doing?
What is their Effectiveness?
I am clueless, nice to meet you!

In the commercial world, there is no such thing as banks being fair to retail consumers. Example: like the way they paddle credit cards, the more you default, the more attractive a customer you become, cos of the snowballing interest. If all investors become like Warren Buffet, the banks would all go bust, cos no one would buy structured products and the crap they paddle.

I find it laughable, a wayang sort of thing, for govt to say “banks be fair”. It seems to me that the govt is genuinely worried about public reaction. The govt has no intention to over-regulate the banks anyway, even with the minibond saga, so its kinda like a circus show.

8) Tan Ah Kow

good point.
maybe walter woon can come lend a hand instead of chasing people wearing kangaroo tee shirts

Guys, here’s what happen develope in Hong Kong. Banks here are at least responding. http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/081022/4/8uls.html

Re: Tan Ah Kow

I think, as in the UK, the default cost rule in Spore follows the “loser pays” principle.

So if the investors lose in court they may face an action for legal costs by the banks.

Waiving of lawyer fees or a legal fund would not pay the legal costs of a billion dollar bank.

A class action suit requires a lot preparation and expenditure. One has to find a common grievance, a class of victims, gather evidence, select witnesses, etc

So any serious threat will have to at least reach court. Moreover the banks can object and have the action struck out on the first day of trial.

A bank would only wait after their objection failed to even consider settlement.

But if the banks are more concerned about their public perception they might wish to resolve this amicably soon.

manbeer

I think, as in the UK, the default cost rule in Spore follows the “loser pays” principle.

First of all the UK has two judicial systems: English and Scottish. I don’t know enough of the Scottish system to comment. Secondly, this is not always the case in the England.

There was a case of an individual, in England, bringing cases against banks and in one circuit of the court proceeding the individual lost but was not ask to pay cost. I think it went to appeal.

There was a case also of a big company bringing the case against a group of individuals, where the company won but the judge did not award cost to the group.

In cases of class actions on human right issues, there are a number of QCs ready to challenge with fees waived all the way to appeals.

So any serious threat will have to at least reach court. Moreover the banks can object and have the action struck out on the first day of trial.

In English judicial system, trying to cases struck out is not as, well straight forward. I am guessing it maybe simpler in Singapore.

But in any case, just because there is a chance it could be struck out, the legal fraternity should not try?

A bank would only wait after their objection failed to even consider settlement.

In the UK case, banks were prepared to offer the individual when he brought a case against overcharging even before it went to trial. The basic fact is that banks don’t want their dirty laundry exposed.

Maybe in Singapore banks are more garang or may be they trust the some, let’s just say, people to protect them.

A class action suit requires a lot preparation and expenditure. One has to find a common grievance, a class of victims, gather evidence, select witnesses, etc

And are you saying that with the FIs and Fidrec route as suggested by LKT it would require less preparations?

Do you think FIs and Fidrec will just say, oh well you look like a sad case, now here is your compensation, never mind even if you don’t have the evidence or witness?

In any case, why don’t lawyers, pro bono, prepared the cases to be presented to FIs and Fidrec like they would in a class action. That way if no satisfactory outcome, they could go the legal route.

@gemami

If walter woon stands on the side of investors, can the banks still win the case? ;)
But most probably he won’t lah. :/

James (#13),

What about Associate Professor Simon Tay from NUS Law Faculty? He is a well-known activist too. Associate Professor Tay founded the Singapore Overseas Volunteer Program (equivalent to the US Peace Corp) years ago.

Not another jumper on Mr Tan’s wagon. – Oh No (#1)

Looks like WP now has to compete with Activists and a bit too reactive ? - Mee Siam Mai Hum (#7)

This is what opposition parties are meant to do. They are to take up issues and position in parliament that the ruling party doesn´t take. An activist can be deemed as successful if his position/stand is taken to parliament for consideration.

”

Not another jumper on Mr Tan’s wagon.

Now that everyone knows it is safe to say something on issue (no midnight knocks), we have WP and SIAS saying something on their concerns.

Betcha CASE and SDP and Chiam will now have their say.

Where were you before last fri (before MAS MD media conference)?

Only TKL has balls of brass. Waz WP, SIAS, CASE, SDP and Chiam’s balls made of? They got any?”

Wah. Be opposition in Singapore damn hard hor?

Agree with govt? Don’t need to say liao…sure kena whack jialat jialat by bloggers and intelligent Singaporeans!

Keep quiet? Cannot also lah. They will still say we are ‘govt lackey’!

Hmm. Propose alternative viewpoints and issues! Sure can one like that!

…

Wah kao! Also kena shot…!

Perhaps this is why there’s so little ‘credible’ opposition around eh?

It is not useful for WP LTK to tell affacted people not to take legal action. Why say all these useless opinion and let a alone responded at such a late stage?

Don’t need to say anything about legal position until some clarity about compensation is known in the coming weeks or days, we all know legal battle is costly.

It is a disappointment to see a major opposition party do so little or nothing till now. Where is LTK when all the affacted people are at Hong Lim Park ??

WP ,
Got an Advice for you!
“BALEK KAMPONG!”

After so many weeks and after Mr Tan took leadership and Mas came out and everything …

YOu start coming out …

You know..in war movies.. we see… enemy front got a lot of bombardment, some will defend their positions.. some will hide until coast is clear and then come out .. charging …or boasting…

Please.. BALEK KAMPONG .. I hope you got eliminated from Hougang next election. YOU DON’T DESERVE THE MP PAY LIKE Most of the other PAP MPs!

Manbeer is right. Whether WP steps out to speak or not, it is wise for investors to let FIDREC and MAS resolve first.

I think Lee Hsienn Loong is right – WP go AWOL long long time until now.

Everything cost go up – WP say nothing.

Bus fare hike – WP say nothing.

Electricity go up – WP say nothing.

Minibonds – WP say nothing until now more than one month already.

Make me wonder: Did Low Thia Kiang or Sylvia Lim also invest in minibond? Low TK got $14,000 MP allowance leh. Why everything say nothing but only when minibond then say something?

I think, as in the UK, the default cost rule in Spore follows the “loser pays” principle.

So if the investors lose in court they may face an action for legal costs by the banks. – manbeer (#13)

If the bank accepts the court´s decision that the investors should pay for the bankś legal cost, there will be a lot of social repercussion on the bankś day-to-day operations. Either way, it is not too great for the bank to win the class suit too.

This blog has no Forum for readers to create any topic. So, I like to use this space to suggest can TOC write something about TW’s money laundering cases and lessons all democratic citizens can learn from it?

1. Democracy alone is important but not enough – it has to be refined. Absolute power ….. absolutely. Also, there are many forms of Democracy leaders of each country has innovated / engineered to suit their needs.

2. Without the Freedom of Speech and strong culture of voicing up on social issues and the public spirited experts and commentators, how much progress could the investigations achieve?

3. alleged collusion nvolving basically the entire gov hierarchy : Commander-in-chief to head of Ministry of Justice Investigation Bureau (MJIB) to the Ministries . Also involved are large corporations that are alleged to have helped ‘money transfer’ to Bian.

Luckily, we are in Singapore, where such things will NEVER happen (u believe me ? ). We dont have absolute power and control in 1 man right? Fortunately, we have such a unbiased court and legal system. Look at also our public serving law society. Also MAS, so due-diligent and fast responding contributing to building of a world class financial hub. No money laundering wan. Financial products sold very well and safe wan. Transparency wan. Either there is Full Transparency or there is No Transparency.

Nevertheless, as democratic citizens, I believe the TW story can serve as an excellent educational material for all other countries.

Thus, I would be grateful if in future TOC can write about this lesson learnt.

Regards
Selamat wong

[...] http://theonlinecitizen.com/2008/10/wp-concerned-about-class-action-suitby-investors/ [...]

Being WP is difficult.

If they come out too soon, they will be labeled as taking advantage of the situation to politicize the events for polical cause.

19) MS on October 22nd, 2008 11.48 pm It is not useful for WP LTK to tell affacted people not to take legal action. Why say all these useless opinion and let a alone responded at such a late stage? ……………….
————————————————————
Maybe Tan has said all that can be said?
Maybe like this he can offer something different?
i really am clueless, nice to meet you!

… is : “how much WP support has eroded or will be eroding come 2011 ” ?

i oso no idea. may be no effect at all. zilch.

when someone says ‘maybe’ it can also mean ‘maybe not’.

Tan Ku Ku said:

Being WP is difficult.

To me it is certainly ok for political parties to “jump” on the bandwagon of work done by activist so to speak. If the WP can leverage on its presence in Parliament to add pressure on the government so much the better.

However, in my opinion, WP lot seemed to have often act with no punch. Take the this particular instance.

Instead of urging people not to use class action, they should have been more strewed to have left that as an option. For example, they could have easily have urged people to use the non-legal route first and, if all else fail, then use the legal route.

Telling people not to used the legal route upfront is like in the battle field you expose the size of the reserved and weapons location to the enemy. In any tussle with your opponent you must keep the opponent guessing as to what action you wish to take.

If cost was the concern the WP there is still no need to urge people to give up on one weapon. Instead it could focus by urging the legal fraternity to waive charges and help out in times of needs. Here would be a smart political move. Since WP can’t do anything substantial, it could at least help shine the spot light/shame on other group that can act to act!

Well spoken Tan Ah Kow.

And sumething to think abt — PAP has secretly taken control of WP mgt? Taz why WP so quiet on so many issues? Hard to think of any gd, reasonable reason why WP so quiet on soo many things that matter to Singaporeans.

Feel ashamed I voted for them in 2006.

Whatever reason WP can give, here is the bottomline according to me:

1. Its whether you are ABLE or UNABLE. Not the constraints you face. As Politicians , its their job to fight and overcome Constraints. How much effort have they put in to overcome constraints given that HL park is there for them to utilize. What social issues have they commented at HLP over the last many months where hikes come one after another and the Investment FIASCO ? Name me not many, just half an example will do. Can anyone name me 0.5 of an example?

2. For so long, there has not been many opposition parties. The 33.3% had only so few choices to choose from. WP is fortunate to be given 33.3% support by their supports who stood in the muddy fields and in rain to support , clap , chanted ‘WP! WP!’ for them in all rallies. After the Election, what rallies have they held? What speech have they done to engage the Youths and working adults and old folks?

3. don’t ask the People what the People can do for you but what you can do for the People. Its your job. Your fundamental existence is precisely this. Constrainst or no Constraints. Look at the new kid on the block TOC. In just a few months they manage to engage so many and including the Youths. Youth Quake you say? I tell you most people are not aware of Youth Quake. What is the REALity WP? No more excuses. The voters expect more. I hope WP do not take things for granted. Things Change. just a concern for WP.

You have no idea how disappointed I am. sigh….

regards
Kang wong

Everybody learns from their mistakes…. hopefully =)

Instead of urging people not to use class action, they should have been more strewed to have left that as an option. For example, they could have easily have urged people to use the non-legal route first and, if all else fail, then use the legal route. – Tan Ah Kow ((#29)

I agree WP should not have made the above statement, especially since WP is an opposition party, they should be ambiguous about their agreement with PAP´s position. To me, this actually discredits WP as an opposition political party. WP claims in its 2006 Manifesto that it gives people choice, but adopting the same position as PAP in parliament means people don´t have a choice. I think WP should be more pro-active and see if WP could work with the Singapore Law Society to get more pro-bono legal aid for the retail investors who are made poor and vulnerable by this entire incident.

1st it was a WP member who said he voted for pap.
then, LTK when asked if he wants wong to resign.
now, this.
sigh…

“I agree WP should not have made the above statement, especially since WP is an opposition party, they should be ambiguous about their agreement with PAP´s position. To me, this actually discredits WP as an opposition political party. WP claims in its 2006 Manifesto that it gives people choice, but adopting the same position as PAP in parliament means people don´t have a choice. I think WP should be more pro-active and see if WP could work with the Singapore Law Society to get more pro-bono legal aid for the retail investors who are made poor and vulnerable by this entire incident.”

Giving a choice is about giving it over several policies, not just one. Not taking legal action at this moment is a nobrainer. Things have not come to that stage yet. WP has given a choice other areas – lower minister pay, lower GST.

Opposing every single thing is not what people expect of the opposition. I expect responsible parties like WP and SPP to agree with PAP at times. If an opposition party says, “scrap public transport, everyone walk to work”. Is that giving people a choice?

“What social issues have they commented at HLP over the last many months where hikes come one after another and the Investment FIASCO ? Name me not many, just half an example will do. Can anyone name me 0.5 of an example?”

Why should any opposition or WP use HLP (Hong Lim Park) before they meet your expectation? Remember HLP is a place given by the PAP. Even SDP steers clear of it.

“After the Election, what rallies have they held? What speech have they done to engage the Youths and working adults and old folks?”

Who has held rallies, my dear? Not SPP, not SDP, not TOC, not even PAP. You’ve given WP a fail grade for an exam that only WP is forced to take. I don’t know, for a middle aged man like me, WP appealed to me when it took up GST, minister pay hike, foreign workers, healthcare and the ridiculous GRCs. I can’t even finish listing what WP fought for and it’s ironic people see them as “quiet”.

“Look at the new kid on the block TOC. In just a few months they manage to engage so many and including the Youths. Youth Quake you say? I tell you most people are not aware of Youth Quake. What is the REALity WP? No more excuses. The voters expect more. I hope WP do not take things for granted.”.

You need to prove more than that. No disrespect to TOC but the WP and not TOC is the one to have a youth wing. Without activities, you’d think the youths would not join on their own accord. You don’t need to see everything to believe it.

Despite recent incompetent performances by PM (JBJ condolences), Min of Fin (read prospecus), and Home Affairs continued clowning, PAP still got brains with MM Lee still around.

Maybe PAP taken control of brains of Low, Sylvia etc and tell them what to do, without Low, Sylvia etc realising that they have become PAP-controlled zombies.

Reasonable explanation for WP becoming more complacent than govmin, no?

More likely explanation for WP silence. They think that S’poreans have NO CHOICE but to support WP if they don’t like PAP. After all SDP run by bunch of clowns.