To all who believe that DBS had mis-sold in HK but is too ethical to missell its products here, do you really think that its procedures are that different in these two countries?

My mum was offerred the High Notes when she wanted to create a FD for me on my 21st birthday. Her RM (who obviously knows how risk-adverse she is after handling her for over 10years) tried to push HN5 as a higher interest alternative to normal FDs.

And the whole time before I opened my mouth he was saying that there was a risk that the interest rate might be lower than 5% (or whatever that number is). Yes obviously I know that the number they gave is the highest. And so, he did not even say that we could lose our principal (even part of it).

Unfortunately (for him not my mother) I study Finance, and hence I know its not that simple. So he said its a product of 6 companies and hence at most we will lose 1/6 of our investment, and that the collapse of any of these 6 companies is highly unlikely (I would agree totally back then), but then its a structured product. So its not that simple, and it includes all the credit swap default things which i don’t want to describe here, but let me just say that instead of dividing the risk by 6, the RISK of default is MULTIPLIED by 6.

Obviously I told my mum to stay away. Unfortunately not everyone knows about investments or knows someone who knows.

For now, if there is misselling, the contract should be partially void and 50% returned to investors. And if there is some kind of wrong doing, why limit to the uneducated? Why should there be discrimination to educated ones?

Wrong is wrong, if it is found to be so.

To be fair, I believe investors also should take half the responsibility and be glad to accept 50% refund.

Good short posting, as Singaporeans we can use the Balot box to exercise our rights for changes in the coming General Election like our Malaysian brothers up north who voted in the Pakatan Rakyat with 83 seats in the Malaysian Parliament and 5 state goverments ie Kelantan, Kedah, Penang, Ipoh and Selangor. We Singaporeans are not stupid, blind or uneducated and bulk of us are Middle Class with education-70% and we only need a good,matured and constructive Oppositions who are equal and better than the PAP.

Regards
Andrew Chuah

If you had done some research, US banks already knew that some of their asset are sitting at aloss by early 2006 which marks the end of the US housing boom. However, these unethical suckers choose to artificially prolong these boom by transfering these asset from their balance sheets to an empty shell company, These is what Lehman had done by setting up “MInibond Ltd’. ( The fact that they name it with the word “bond” already aims to misrepresent). These subprime toxic assets are then split up according to “priorities” in uncovering their loss in an event if the asset really drops in value , which US banks already would eventually happen when they design this. These split out asset( CDO) are then packaged with other similar products given a rating and sell to other banks and their consumers, thereby diversifying their risk and loss.

With prolonged low interest rates and minimium regulation on the financial system in the US, the Sgp government, FIs, RMs and investors alike are all being fooled by the US investment banks. The investors here are not unreasonable ppl, they just wants the pain to be shared and the admirable Mr Tan is doing his utmost to help them. It is unfair for the investors to bear all the consequences as they are naturally the most vulnerable ones here.

I strongly feel the government has to do something right. We do not want olympic medals , F1 race or some “windmills” in the city if we cant even protect our fellow citizens. These are like terrorist acts but shipped directly from the US. If nothing has been done by the authorities , I think sgpreans should remembered this for a long time.

Welcome, Community Spirit :D

I am happy to see the present help being made by citizens to citizens – whatever the outcome. Now at least, the feeling is that you are not alone. When you are minoritility affected, you are expected to suffer in silence. Look at other issues like the UNSWAsia campus sudden closure- nobody would want to take responsibilty for the affected students. Look at the faulty cash cards. Look at the seat belt issue for student transport. Look at the occurence of dog attack human incident even when tipped off, and many more and as an old man, I am tired of bringing them up.
As an older generation citizen, I am used to be “stoic”. But the feeling is that the policy makers are quick to claim credit through the local papers but very slow to try to solve real problems when they surface. Perhaps it is the case of safeguarding their rice bowls – in present days, golden rice bowls indeed, and golden parachutes with jobs waiting even in retirement if one is well guarded through.
I wish the younger generation well and hope that you will build a better Singapore for to-morrow with TOC’s initiatives.

Regards
Andrew Chuah

I wish to quote the following:

25. Market discipline also requires an effective enforcement regime. To preserve investor confidence, penalties for transgressions must be swift and appropriate. MAS now has the power to investigate and bring a court action for market misconduct under the new civil penalty regime. This will complement the existing criminal penalty regime administered by CAD.”

In the first Petition signed by 983 investors, there was a call for MAS or CAD to investigate into any wrong doing by the financial institutions that created or marketed the product. So far, there is no news on this matter.

I hope that they will “investigate and bring a court action for market misconduct”. This is so obvious already.

I would think 80% of them would not understand the mechanism behind a minibond. Even more won’t not be able to explain the technicalities in mandarin to an old heartlander retiree.

As what they say, do not buy any products from RMs at month-end. Those are periods whereby anything that can be sold will be sold to meet their quota, or to achieve certain landmark for which the commission payout is much higher.

You see young RMs driving fancy sports car, I do not think they deserve all these. The compensation plan is skewed, very skewed. Every month there is an award ceremony celebrating the top salesmen. And really, clients under them are probably the worst off given the high ‘churn-rate’ to achieve these top sales.

Alas that said, I feel like a partner-in-crime. But I only advise, not into the sales. That is my consolation and of course, I do not have a big paycheck hence. At least i am at peace.

What is worse is that such narrow thought and words are perpetuated by the leaders who hog the limelight as headline in ShittyTimes. Surely we remember what Pinkish Clown and Woody Pecker thoughtlessly implying CAVEAT EMPTOR as the issue when the case first blown up. The real issue is about mis-selling and mis-representation, not Caveat Emptor. Our leaders are happily leading the way towards “mis-selling and mis-represent” the main issue themselves. Anyway, I am not surprised as these leaders give a conspicuous impression of wiggling the out of way of responsibility and accountability since both are “indirectly” responsible for the saga (PM (prior to Woody) and Woody manages MAS)
Contrast those message from Hong Kong government.

Look at how things are conveniently pushed.

Read the message
“http://www.mas.gov.sg/news_room/statements/2002/Address_by_DPM_at_MAS_Staff_Seminar_2002__29_Oct_2002.html”
Address by Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong,
Chairman, MAS
At MAS Staff Seminar
29 October 2002
“Market Discipline and Caveat Emptor

22. Our efforts to promote market discipline and a caveat emptor regime have focussed on enhancing the amount, quality and timeliness of information disclosed by institutions. We have shifted from a merit-based supervisory approach to a disclosure-based approach that emphasises market discipline to incentivise financial institutions to conduct their business in a sound, efficient, and professional manner. The local banks in particular have significantly improved their disclosure practices.

23. We must continue to update our disclosure standards in line with industry developments and international best practice. Furthermore, the mindset change is not yet complete. The public still expects to be protected from downside risks, for example when playing the stock market, but more so when depositing their money in banks. Hence one major motivation for introducing deposit insurance is to change this mindset, and get people to understand that only a limited first tranche of their deposits with a bank is protected should the bank run into trouble.

24. But disclosure by itself is not enough. It must be accompanied by investor education. Investors have to understand and use the information provided to them. They must learn to make sense of this information and use it to look after their own interests. We also need a pool of knowledgeable analysts and journalists who will shine the spotlight on any obscure fine print that the lay investor fails to notice. A more informed and sophisticated investor base will reinforce market discipline and form the basis for a more vibrant and mature financial sector. In all these respects, we have a long way to go.

25. Market discipline also requires an effective enforcement regime. To preserve investor confidence, penalties for transgressions must be swift and appropriate. MAS now has the power to investigate and bring a court action for market misconduct under the new civil penalty regime. This will complement the existing criminal penalty regime administered by CAD.”

I would like to offer a favourite phrase used by our Ministers:
DO NOT POLITICIZE THE ISSUE!

(…when they don’t want to answer certain things or give a direct reply.)

And I wish for our government and banks to have a good heart and start re-connecting to the ordinary man on the street.

Jim.

“These Banks and their officesrs who had sold the Lehman bonds to the 100,000 investors, had done their job professionally and explained thoroughly………”

Daear Mr Andrew Chuah

Have you ever talked to those sales representative or RM with desperate for quota before? They will not tell you the risk you have to take and jsut keep on mentioning abt the ~5% of the intereste…
If these banks were really very “Professionally” and explained thoroughly than porbably the retiree should not have involed in this incident as they are very conservative type of investors like my parent do. They wouldn’t have to take this ~5% interest and gamble for their entire saving with FI.

Some other people would try to fool or distract the viewers by ignoring this possibility and use sweeping statements like oh, you signed the contract that is it lor!

This is the tricks many are using in many publications (cannot be too blunt). They will use words and statements to say something that is not entirely wrong and will not fairly say that negative things like bad news. The sweeping statement gives half truth, ignoring the other truths. Students nowadays should be smart enough to read between the lines and understand this trap when reading publications.

Another example , half truth : demonstrations occured in xyz country. blood all over. violence and destructions. BUT!! what about this missing truth : blood was caused by an accident not related to the demonstration which was peaceful and violence was for short while due to unrelated incident of 2 drunk men fighting with each other? they also caused some destructions as they throw stones at the shops.

>>> in the above hypothetical scenario, the initial report was not a lie. It was a half truth. The other half truth is missing. I urge all students to demand the full picture in whatever you read , for examper, in your text books. cannot say too bluntly. ;) but you students smarter than me right? should get my point. ;)
When all demand the same, CHANGE will come.

1. You ordered Ba Cho Mee mai dee gua, then stall uncle gave you no dee gua and extra meat ball. That is a correct expectation and you get a bonus. If you expect uncle to give you extra mee on top of that then it is greed.

2. Same Ba Cho Mee mai dee gua ordered with the stall menu board reading “Ba Cho Mee stall”, but you get mee siam mai hum in return………

THIS IS DEFINITELY MIS-SELLING!!!

I will say is again: getting a 5% return p.a. can hardly be a justification exposure to a 100% loss risk. How on earth could someone categorize a 5% p.a. return as greedy is beyond my comprehension.

You still insisted these officers who conned the oldies, the cancer patients, the handicapped etc for sales commission are professional & thorough?

I dare to said you invested & lost millions not for the sake of a pittance 2-3% more than fixed deposts. So who is more greedy?