Sunday, November 30, 2008 1:57
“This thing will never die until it is settled”
In Main Stories, Out Of The Box, Top Story • 2,761 views • 56 Comments
Editor’s note: The title of this report has been changed for accuracy.
Davin Choo / Tng Wen Quan
Mr Tan Kin Lian spoke at Speaker’s Corner today for the sixth time on investments gone awry. While his speech mainly consisted of two portions – bringing up the issue to the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the legal advice he is currently undertaking – the main message he had for investors was for them to ask the relevant authorities to take proper action, and to continue to do so until a proper resolution has been achieved.
Mr Tan emphasized the need for investors to seek redress from their Members of Parliament (MPs) as well. “It is the duty of the MPs to ask these questions on your behalf. Your MPs can also raise them in Parliament,” he said. Mr. Tan also urged investors to continue to forward their complaints to the MAS, the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDREC) and banking institutions, stressing that they should not accept only verbal accounts from those in charge but to also ask for written statements – as explanations of events in verbatim change with every retelling. Furthermore, the person-in-charge also cannot be easily held accountable for what he or she has said.
When he questioned the audience of about 200 people on who have been interviewed by the banks so far, about twenty people raised their hands. His second question, whether they were given a reply at all from the banks (either compensation or rejection) however, had only two respondents. No one present raised their hands when Mr Tan asked if anyone had taken their cases up with FIDREC. “This thing cannot just die…” he said, referring to the investors’ pursuit for proper resolution.
Mr. Tan went on to say that MAS regulations state that banking institutions must give a formal reply to any enquires by the public within four weeks. So far, six weeks have passed and many still have yet to receive any form of replies. Investors, he said, should continue to press those who have the answers. If no satisfactory reply is received, then a complaint should be lodged with the respective authorities, i.e. MAS. He stressed that investors have a right to ask such questions, and should.
Mr. Tan disclosed that he has contacted two senior lawyers to go through the prospectus for misrepresentation or non-disclosure. By misrepresentation, it means that the fund manager has provided false or incorrect information regarding a fact. Non-disclosure, on the other hand, refers to a situation whereby the fund manager has failed to point out and reveal information regarding the fund, including potential dangers and risks. These will then misguide the consumer in his decision making.
At the same time, Mr. Tan is going to contact a Queen’s Counsel and obtain legal advice from British lawyers. According to him, this is due to two main reasons – one being that Singapore’s laws are based on British laws and the other is because the issue is one which is relatively complicated and perhaps the British counterparts can provide better legal advice.
Throughout his speech today, Mr. Tan emphasized the importance of investors going to see their MPs. He advised that they should question the MPs on what is the outcome of the first petition which asked MAS to investigate if there were any wrong doings by the Financial Institutions (FIs), how many investors have had their cases resolved by the FIs and how many complaints have been lodged with FIDREC.
“If you already saw your MP before, you can see the MP again,” he said. “This time, ask the MP to do the “right thing” as the leader that represents you.”
Ms Lee Wai Leng later translated Mr Tan’s speech to Chinese for the audience. Mr Goh Meng Seng spoke on the recent PAP town councils’ investment losses and on Mr Tan running for elections. (See the videos here.)
———–
Mr Tan Kin Lian’s speech, Part One:
Part Two:
—————–
Some pictures of today’s event:
———
Related posts:
56 Comments
Gilbert Goh Keow Wah
alphaville
It is obvious that PAP govt. chosen to tough it out despite the ugliness.
They have chosen to brick-wall investors who were first caught out by MAS allow these structured financial product to sold onto the hand of investor, despite the beguiling aspect of its nature, the way inordinate risk is conceal by its complexity. Second by abdication of its duties as the authority in arbitrating any misdeed by the banks.
As days gone by, week passes, fatigue will nevertheless sets in.
It is like the five stages of grief, 1) Denial and Isolation, 2)Anger, 3) Bargaining, 4) Depression, 5)Acceptance. They want you to accept what has happen and move on. I urge investors who had suffered the plight to realised this, don’t let the bastard grind you down.
This is ALWAYS the same method, it is a conditioning of behaviour the PAP govt. constantly impressed upon Singaporean. Watching video interview of residents whose town council has admitted massive losses, this shows up as a sense of resignation, the helplessness. It is like the being taken hostage, bound and gagged, unable to resist the abuse and torture. As one of the interviewee puts tacitly “What to do?”. We all understand what that means.
Learned helplessness theory is the view that clinical depression and related mental illnesses result from a perceived absence of control over the outcome of a situation (Seligman, 1975)
Onlooker
For all the old folks and planning to retire work executives, this is a shining example of what a man can do when he has time and money. No need to worry about retirement and with a lot of money to not worry for a lifetime.
Curious what he did before retirement to give him so much wealth – how he made his money?
When you have time and money on your side, what you need is something to about: choose your topics, there are plenty within Singapore, no need to look else – charity starts at home.
Sgcynic
If this is indeed a govt for the people, why should it will irk the govt? Then again this govt does not care for the people. It’s priority is the economy, which is fine, if it were not the end in itself.
Burnt Investors are between the Devil & the Deep Blue Sea!
Nothing can be done if your are burnt……..simply if your house is burnt to the ground ….only claim home insurance but some investments don’t come with insurance cover so my future plans must have insurance cover too. Some LandBanking companies offer insurance cover for such investment products!
learn aout product being insurance to have peace of mind. never invest in minibonds and structured products that you don’t ever know! better go to Genting and try your luck……..than to lose all your money to such toxic products!
so Burnt Investors feel burnt out too at the end of the day…worries can burnt you out fast!
If Li Ka Shing can invest in landBanking in Canada, surely it is a recognised investment..
I’ve have seen failures in my Unit Trust now 50% down, lost money in ILP (Insurance Linked Products) Lost in FOREX Time Deposits too but have somehow made money in LandBanking (companies withproven track records only) So investing is like TIKAM TIKAM!…….Come to think about it Nothing is safe bust best is to have CA$H at all times and the best is to place in your home safe!
So 10,700 burnt investors and if some Ah Long investors must be saying O$P$……..and who is listening? Whose Fault?
If Bank tell you O$P$ they know what to do……they send Official Asignee or I really don’t know the exact word!
C J
You people think that all this chitter chatter will IRK the almighty ruling party??
The way they handled this entire year’s face-reddening fiascos, and you think that this little hulabalula at the little griping corner will bring upon them any irksome feelings??
I suggest talking about removing their self-protectionism mechanism (GRC) instead, and ALLOW Singaporeans to vote in the coming GE. I think this is more pertinent. NOTHING, will ever change with this Foreigners’ Action Party. After so many decades of their stagnated governance, where are we all now???
We are all getting ever deeper in KAKA…!!!
There’s no such thing as a zero-risk investment. Are you trying to say that the town council fundmanagers did not do their due diligence before investing in the omnibonds? It can’t be that the banks entirely missold to everyone, there must be something wrong with the product to begin with.
I hope the law will accord justice to those who have been truly missold vis a vis those who actually know what they are doing and the inherent risks. Bottomline is trust no big name regardless of reputation, market buzz or legacy. Times have changed. And give the Government some credit. MAS is now trying to protect the Masses if you notice, bans on naked short selling, stricter regulations on Corporate Governance, information disclosures etc are examples.
All of these designed to help the masses who have lost millions in their equities just because the big money boys like institutional funds and brokerages are chucking out everything they have now.
Respect pro-active Action rather than ReAction, if you please.
alky
Dear Elaina
So do you think the town councils went in to buy these products with their “eyes” open or closed? Were they mislead into buying these structured products or they knew the risks and were taking a gamble with the sinking funds?
Their silence on this issue and the side stepping is not helping to clear the air.
C J
Town Councils, being government bodies, SHOULD be well advised and globally knowledgable in invetsment risks and global economic climates.
Even then, where is the TRANSPARENCY our government claimed that they have?
If Lehman Brothers did not crash, would we come to know about Town Councils investments with Tax Payers monies?
They best clam up, because when they do speak, it will sound so bloody lame.
jennifer
Did YPAP invest in any of these structured low-risks instruments?
”
Town Councils, being government bodies, SHOULD be well advised and globally knowledgable in invetsment risks and global economic climates.
Even then, where is the TRANSPARENCY our government claimed that they have?
If Lehman Brothers did not crash, would we come to know about Town Councils investments with Tax Payers monies?
They best clam up, because when they do speak, it will sound so bloody lame.”
no? when they earn money, they can’t wait do tell you the good news. when they lose money, they remind you that they earned money for you before so be grateful.
“Did YPAP invest in any of these structured low-risks instruments?”
our brightest and the elites, i don’t think they are so stupid. sorry i meant i don’t think they are so stupid to tell you if they did.
george says:
If the affected people finally back down it would be a very clear signal to the govt that it has the people of Singapore in its pocket to do whatever its whims and fancies take it.
Singaporeans should develop a bit of the grit of the Thai people. Events unfolding there hold a great lesson for Singaporeans. One can only be pushed so far, before pushing back! Or, you will be taken for granted and always given the short end of the stick.
Sgcynic
So the Town Councils lost millions? Our leaders tell us:
1. Thank them for past deeds.
2. See things in perspective.
3. All is not lost.
4. Let’s move on!
Wonder about the surpluses in other quasi-government organizationsm, e.g. the People’s Association and their numerous committees?
We are certainly not not implying anything. Definitely not to say that the town council fundmanagers did not do their due diligence before investing in the -bonds. For we know little in the first place: amount in the sinking funds, who’s doing the investing – fund managers, estate mangers or MPs, who made profits – residents, town councils or fund managers. We are not insinuating that there is any cover-up, just that the way the whole episode is managed leaves plenty of room for second guesses and theories.
Vote wisely. I believe in any organization, the boss that is cocky and incompetent deserves a swift kick in the -.
Dear Alky
You must understand that investments are a way to generate future returns on existing funds. Whether eyes open or closed is not the debate here. I will say that it is whether the investor is willing to take on the pitfalls and risks or not.
Also, the investment community is not just the mass community but also spans across a sophisticated audience – town council, retail investors, fund managers regardless. There is no silence, its just what you need to know. So what do you want to know?
aiyoyo
aiyoyo
Mr Tan is really a GOOD man.
think all people would like to have Mr Tan as a representative for us
commoners.
believed he’s the kind of LEADER needed for us.
cheers..
MB
Yes aiyoyo I totally agree with you ! Mr. Tan K.L. is a true representative for us commoners unlike Elaina whose head is in the clouds and whose mind is in illusion !
sunny
TKL
We fight on and on and on with you – forever and ever and ever.
We are against a mountain.
The enemies are on the crest and shooting down on us.
If one die, others will take up arms.
I know what they are like – the big banks, the government bureaucrats and all that.
They hid behind the wall of bureaucracy.
As for the MPs, many are just cari makan. I know one, the joker in my constituency, he big cari makan. Gutless. Kick him and he still cannot move. So, he got his musclemen to write and sign the letters so that he is not responsible. What an as h. Get pay at end of month. Get him to act. Yes, with a bow and arrow.
Sunny
ArtBoon
Yes, TKL is retired and can afford to do what he wants to do.
Well, he is doing something for others.
I suppose we can recognise something good here?
RED-man
Guys, I strongly suggest avoid any further argue with the “ah mor” wanna be Elaina. I think she must be lonely over her blog, where no one even bother to comment at all.
I think she don’t even has a freak idea of hard earned money supposing to be in a long term safe investment ended up going into a high risk product. Don’t think she even follow the issue. One of those kind of F@$k up daddy little girl, that don’t go thru hard time.
As for MB, please aiyoyo comment proper and read between the lines, it is not a compliment. Either cases, both are the POSITIVE by product of PAP regime brain wash programme. I strongly recommend minimum contact with these people and make your day happier.
chorus
I don’t support Elaina but I feel that at least she has the guts to come over to a anti-establishment leaning community such as TOC and state her views. Isn’t that what TOC claims it wants to offer? An opportunity for exchange of ideas and open discussion?
I don’t see the need for personal attacks and snide remarks against her. Unless some of you want TOC to degenerate into a place for us to wallow in our own unhappiness/anger/angst/self-pity/whatever and gain joy from wallowing with other wallow-ers.
Oscar Choy
I think the best and “final solution” to this fiasco is to seek redress in the court of law. The people who suffer from all these ding-dongs and merry-go-around must know this bloody well. It only needs a “hero” or groups of like-minded “heroes” to mount a legal tussle with the Big Boy. Who and wherefrom is/are these “hero”/”heroes”? Everyone is waiting for these “wannabes” to emerge and to lead. If TKL is one of those who buy into those stupid “Notes” then, I am sure the problem will be solved. Who is going to PAY for legal advice? It can a bottomless PIT. An estimate of legal costs is only an ESTIMATE, remember this. Fighting a legal battle half way is better not to start one. Think carefully. BUT to seek the TRUTH and fight for the RIGHTS, people of TOC, the “bongo” and “wanaba” people we always dearly called should help to chip in – by again mounting another petition for HELP.
alky
Dear Elaina,
If you still fail to see what we want to know after the numerous posts, then I am afraid it is because you have chosen only what is considered important to you. Your stand that “There is no silence, its just what you need to know.” smacks of the typical PAP speak that has been espoused to us time and again.
We do not need the PAP to decide for us what we need to know, it is for them to answer to us and not the other way round.
We are not disputing the fact that investing the sinking funds to generate returns is wrong. What we want to know is why these particular structured products were chosen and on what basis?
No rational investor would risk losing 100% of his capital for a mere 5% return. I believe even if one had bought into the worst performing tech related unit trusts, he would still have had at least 10 to 20% of his capital intact even after the bubble burst.
And so now we come to the same question again. Did they buy into these structured products with their eyes open and if so why? Also no one knows if they have filed a complaint with FIDREC on this matter. It seems that they are not even concerned about the money they have lost. Maybe they fall under the category of “those who actually know what they are doing and the inherent risks” and are inadvertently admitting that they have no case?
aiyoyo
aiyoyo
MB thx for your input/concur..
hopefully someone can help commoners address the hardships & come up with
effective new measures/actions to ensure commoners life become easier,
not so many pressure, daily necessity more affordable etc..
TKL, we’ll support you always
aiyoyo
loop
I do not see the media (both TV & newspapers) reporting about these minibonds issues & the plight of investors anymore. Everything seems to be limited at the speaker’s corner. I recommend the investors to keep on writing about their situation they are facing now to the forum pages of newspapers.
ArtBoon
If the investors are not doing anything, maybe it means they accept that there is no mis selling?
I plead with the government to settle this issue once and for all, then there will be no more pretenders. Of course it’ll never end until it’s settled. Unless it’s solved, some people will still get access to free publicity.
For goodness sake, hurry up!
Come on SM Goh and Minister Tharman, surely you know what you can do to fix this potential problem? You still have the edge as the incumbent. Take over what’s he’s doing and leave it there.
I guarantee that all the credit will go to the government for settling this problem and no one else.
It’s so simple to silence people.
What are you waiting for?
Please…
Tan Kin Lian
Hi Friends,
Here are some information about my approach towards getting legal advice from the UK.
http://tankinlian.blogspot.com/2008/12/legal-action-against-issuers-and.html
And the legal angles to approach this matter.
It is complicated,but I hope that we can find a way through this mess.
xtrocious
To Experienced Investor (#6)
Actually, investing is not a science, it is an art…
But having said that, it obviously favours the rich and town councils…
Heard of the 80/20 rule (Pareto Principle)?
For rich investors with the ability to diversify, they only need 20% of their portfolio to perform and they can make 80% of their returns.
That’s why Dr Teo can so blatantly state that the Lehman fiasco has affected just a tiny portion of its portfolio…
But for us poor folks, this is not something we can afford – and putting everything into minibombs and other risky instruments is clearly not an investment strategy…
limpo
Panter92,
This PAP government, as usual, will headline their good deeds and achievement in ST front page, but when it comes to mismanagement and complaints, they just keep silent and make the people feel frustated, helpless, disappointed and eventually realized that as invividual citizen, they can do nothing to fight against this systemic failure in our world class government …
Now, maybe or may not TKL can succeed in helping these individual to fight for their rights, TKL has showed that as an individual he’d do whatever he can to create awareness among singaporean that we should speak up to voice out our concerns, instead of suffering in silences.
panter92, long time no hear from you.
28) panter92 on December 1st, 2008 3.11 pm
“I guarantee that all the credit will go to the government for settling this problem and no one else.”
What guarantee ? You should rephrase it as “all the credit will go to the government for BEING PRESURRED IN settling this problem and no one else.” If it really happens.
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t. This is the consequence for acting like a snail and losing the opportunity of first-mover advantage.
“What are you waiting for?”
Waiting for durains to fall off from the banana tree lah. Time will wear off the stamina of those who do not have the will, time and resources to press further lah. Are you pretending not to know this lah.
minibombed
the joke by panter92 at #28 is so funny.
Thanks
Oscar Choy
As the “Notes’ are already deemed worthless. I do not know whether this suggestion is workable. It is – some Magi or wisemen who held those bloody stupid “Notes” should volunteer to legally transfered to TKL so that he can now armed as an ‘interested” party to FIGHT till “DIE” for the RIGHTS and to WIN.
Fever Guy
Panther
I dont think TKL is in for the credit, there is nothing to gain. Even if he is interested in politics does it become a benefit to him? Why not you go help the mini bond investors and get some lime light and credits?
If the case ever resolved by government, some form of recognition will be given to TKL. Seriously. do you think woody and botak will do anything? They will just sit down like a tua bei gong in temples and do nothing.
FG
minibombed
Dear Oscar Choy #34
A creative suggestion, but a little ahead of its time.
Some “little men”( 小人 ) are already calling Mr. Tan’s kind help a hidden agenda. By tranfering these worthless notes to him will indirectly worsen the smear.
Be Brave, Keep Fighting
angmohguy
Mr Tan Kin Lian,
I guess you might have missed this question in TWO earlier threads. Hence I am posting the questions here.
I am keen to sign the petition but would appreciate your response to three questions:
1) Which PAP constituency were you serving in for the past 30 years? Just marine parade?
2) Did you hold any appointments such as CCC chairman?
3) Were you ever invited to the party’s ‘tea-session’?
Thanks.
smallvice585
panter92 (#28),
Why do you think PAP should be the only legitimate channel to address grievances? This is a dangerous thought that will only impede the growth in the electorate’s political sophistication.
smallvice585
panter (#28),
Why do you think PAP should be the only legitimate channel to address grievances? This is a dangerous thought that will only impede the growth in the electorate’s political sophistication
The Singapore Daily » Blog Archive » Weekly Roundup: Week 49
[...] at Speaker’s Corner, 29 Nov 2008 – Singapore Enquirer: Goh Meng Seng’s speech – TOC: “This thing will never die until it is settled” – Wayang Party: Mr Goh Meng Seng lambasted PAP at Hong Lim Park, urges investors to sign petition [...]
cjc
I’m just curious how feasible is it to:
1) show that the prospectus is flawed (and all investors of the failed structured products are misled by default)
and
2) the same flaw does not show up in other investments products or any other sort of products with prospectus (so that consumers can’t just demand compensation for ANY transaction they want to revoke)
cjc
and
3) Prevent consumers who took risk willingly from a free ride (we have to be just)
alphaville
Anyway, if you had followed Tan Kin Lian’s blog, one of the points of contention is that the prospectus is too complex for the lay-person to understand, even so, for one who is financially savvy, it is impossible to digest the entire contract after a brief discussion with the RM regarding the product being sold.
So it seems entirely possible to sue the banks and distributors for mis-selling.
cjc
Anyway, if you had followed Tan Kin Lian’s blog, one of the points of contention is that the prospectus is too complex for the lay-person to understand, even so, for one who is financially savvy, it is impossible to digest the entire contract after a brief discussion with the RM regarding the product being sold.
Pardon me, but i think this is the weakest part of the argument because many other non-structured, honest, and performing products also have complicated prospectus or product manuals. It is just that people are satisfied with them.
Unless the complexity ONLY lies in these structured products, otherwise it is hard to justify why the structured products are unfit to be sold but not others. And pushing in this direction further only makes complainants look sour.
RED-man
#44
Dear CJC, I am afraid you only get part of the facts right. It is agreeable that most prospectus are complex and hard to understand. Questions are:
1. Vital information such as this is a high risk investment was being highlighted by the sale representative?
2. Are these sale representative even awards that this is a highrisk product in the first place. Since even the expert find it hard to understand the prospectus?
3. At which level did this important piece of information over looked?
4. Did the bank intentionally omitted the “high risk” factor when promoting the product, thinking that it will never given the backing of this investment, it will never collapse!
All the prospectus or even contract term and conditions are complex! However, it is the consumer power to be given all the importances fact when being promoted with the product. If what you say is truth, must as well skip the sale person and throw the prospectus at people and let people go and read it themselves. Why need overhead for sale person?! Problem with sale people are, they only care about how many they are selling and leave the answering to the customer service in the end! To be frank, how many sale people actually care about the quality of their product that they are selling.
For that, I say your argument is naive. Of course, unless you are one of the PAP elites that don’t give a damn of people hard earn money. When one person suffer from failed product, we can say that it is his careless that lead to his undoing. However, if you have so many people suffers from the same consequences. Then I think it is reasonable doubt on the seller!
RED-man
Typo
Awards – awared
RED-man
Now, this issue has to be resolve now or sooner. I urge all banks that did not sell this toxic products to push DBS to quickly resolve this issue. This is because, when time are good, all investment plan by the banks will be given a cold shoulder. Simply because PEOPLE remember what had happened TODAY!
cjc
#46 RED-man: For that, I say your argument is naive. Of course, unless you are one of the PAP elites that don’t give a damn of people hard earn money. When one person suffer from failed product, we can say that it is his careless that lead to his undoing. However, if you have so many people suffers from the same consequences. Then I think it is reasonable doubt on the seller!
You are prejudice.
If I don’t agree with you, what justifies you to cast me as “one of the PAP elites”? I demand an apology.
It’s heart-breaking to lose all the hard-earned money. Noone expected it. But it is neither right and practical to put the blame on “a complicated prospectus”. Think about it. How easy is it say that a product is unfit to be sold because the prospectus or manual is “complicated”. There are thousands of other products, whether investments or not, that have “complicated” manuals.
The most practical way is to show that:
(1) such complications ONLY exist these structured products, or better still this product. (Even then this may ultimately hold only the Lehman Brothers accountably which is not fruitful.)
(2) the sales person deliberately mis-represented information
cjc, how are you my friend
“44) cjc on December 10th, 2008 10.09 am
Pardon me, but i think this is the weakest part of the argument because many other non-structured, honest, and performing products also have complicated prospectus or product manuals. It is just that people are satisfied with them.”
So do you pass a fully loaded rifle to a six year old kid.
Complicated prospectus or product manuals / contract is only one part of the whole selling process where the selling institution and representative play a lot of the active (or inactive role) in engaging the buyer. Do not zero in on the more easily visible part of the complicated prospectus or product manuals / contract.
RED-man
Dear CJC
Apolgies from me cost nothing which I am willing to give it to you. However, it really serve no purpose when in actual fact you are demoralizing those people who had already lost their money in the stupid toxic investment!
I think main focus of this discussion should be suggesting on ways and means of getting “some” compensation for the PEOPLE. I believe if the bank is not DBS, our MAS would had react faster to this issue and impartial! This I say it is a national conflict of interest!
Which also the root cause of all problems that Singapore is facing
Now! There is too much state holdings.
RED-man
For people who criticized TKL way of handling the issue or even comment what he do go thru the motion! And think you are in the better position to handle the issue, by all means, stand out and help!
However, if there is nothin constructive. Maybe you ought to give some time and see if TKL proposal works before judging. Of course, to give those that already lost their hard earned saving some hope. You could help by advising TKL on issue that he might over looked. So as to differentiate yourself from the heartless Elites in Singapore. I think it is alright that you don’t agree with some of the TKL solutions, but then again, it won’t hurt to suggest a better one to his if you have any.
Observer (SG-HK)
Kin Lian,
This may interest you.
http://www.singtao.com/yesterday/loc/1210ao14.html
The first known case of civil suit file against DBS-HK on the MiniBond saga.
RED-man
I think the same sale tactic was also apply in Singapore DBS as mentioned in the article provided by observer (SG-HK). At the sametime, I do believe that most people went into this investment is because of the bank that provide this product and therefore trusted all words from the sale person without thinking there is a slightest risk in this product.
I mean, who would expect DBS bank with a Country Government backing to sell this kind of stupid products?! Maybe if they look at the fact that the so call one of the 10 world most powerful woman running the GIC, they will think otherwise!
RED-man
When can those elites start to realize that they are not cut out to be a business man and STOP throwing our country hard earned money to be lost in some foreign investment?
Didn’t they learnt anything from the bloody ShouZhuo industrial park?!
Tan Kin Lian
Hi Oscar Choy (#23)
I did nto invest in any of the credit linked notes. I have been advising me against these products for the past year in my blog.
I hope to find a way to get a class action started that does not result in a “bottomless pit”. The first step is to get a Queens Counsel’s opinion on misrepresenations and/or non-disclusres in the prospects. This will apply to all the investors who bought the same product.
I will get someone to fund the QC opinion. If the opinion is strong, we can start a class action based on it. The investors can reimburse the cost of the QC opinion at that time. If the case is not strong, we have to re-think the strategy.
My strategy team has spent a lot of time to meet many lawyers in Singapore. It is a difficult task. Give us some encouragement, rather than make it more difficult for us with your statements.
Observer (SG-HK)
Hi Kin Lian,
Here’s another case where the investors are collectively seeking redress of the case in court. Litigation hearing will commence in February 2009.
http://hk.news.yahoo.com/article/081217/3/9s5r.html
I am sure these cases will shed lights once the process is completed.
Added pressure for the authorities to act once again.
Such sustained pressure, I wonder, will irk the govt? TKL is relenetless and definitely tougher than most consumer activist that I have seen so far. By winning the crowd, he has added ammunition to fire definitely.
It is like going head on with them. By asking investors to speak with their MPs, does this help? It will only crowd out those welfare cases on the queue who need some assistance from their MPs.
Maybe it is time to think of a collective court case so that there is some end to it.
If each only pays about 1k and there is some chance of an outcome it may be worth considering.
My take is that there are other issues more urgent to consider now – growing unemployment, one-party govt, FTs and global terrorism.
Nevertheless, hats off to TKL again for not giving up – a dogged determination to press on. Such are the hallmarks of a good decisive leader not unlike that of LKY, Mendela and Martin Luther King.
I am not so much concerned with the issues faced by the investors but more importantly the emergence of an impressive character in TKL.
We may indeed see a new dawn rising here!