2009年4月28日星期二

The Consumer Council


The Consumer Council for the first time will use its Consumer Legal Fund to help a Lehman Brothers minibond investor sue a bank to recover losses amounting to HK$500,000.

Johannes Chan Man-mun, chair of the action fund, yesterday said the case has the potential to be used as a test case to clarify important legal principles and establishprecedents forbetterconsumer protection.

He said it was chosen as it involved four major factual and legal issues found in the buying of Lehman Brothers- to two years before being heard at the related products. High Court, and perhaps two years if it

‘‘It involves misrepresentation, the goes to the Court of Final Appeal. exemption clause in the bank, inadequate Asked if the case will end up like 11 disclosure of material facts, and the fidu- of the 82 applications for legal assistance ciary relationship between the bank and that were withdrawn after the bank deits consumers.’’ cided to settle, Chan said settlement

He declined to disclose any details would be a good thing for the consumer except that the case does not involve eld- to get at least part of the money back. erly people or the underprivileged. The 11 applications were withdrawn

Chan said they have to be very careful after settlement that involved about in bringing the case to court as public HK$4.8 million. money is involved, but he is optimistic He said litigation can begin as early about the outcome. as one or two months from now, as the

He said the litigation might take 1 1 /2 investor had signed and returned an agreement with the Consumer Legal Action Fund yesterday.

The council up to last Friday received 11,229 complaints related to Lehman Brothers, with 624 out of 943 cases processed reaching settlement with the banks involving HK$217.8 million.

According to the council, the remaining 319 cases are unresolved as the banks have declined to settle.

The council was criticized for taking so long to process the applications after the collapse of the US firm in September last year.

2009年4月27日星期一

War on Joseph Yam on frauds cover up





Victims of Lehman Products demand Yam Chi-kong stop being the public enemy!--victims of Lehman Brothers
Victims of Lehman Products demand Hong Kong Monetary Authority's Chief Executive, Joseph Yam Chi-kong stop being the public enemy!
Members of the Legco Sub-committee investigating the Lehman Brothers products saga yesterday (April 24) had unanimously decided to disclose the full report which was sent by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority to the Financial Secretary in January. According to legco sources, the blackout part of the report revealed five categories of suspected mis-selling by the banks.
Victims of Lehman Products welcome the sub-committee's decision as the revelation would help reveal the Lehman saga and increase pressure for the banks that had committed the mis-selling to settle the cases with the victims.
However the Victims are deeply angered on learning that Joseph Yam would consider to start judicial proceedings to block the disclosure of the full report.
Joseph Yam had more than once insisted that disclosure of the full report was against public interest and put the trust between the banks and its clients in jeopardy. The reasons for Joseph Yam's objection were totally groundless and disregarded by the Legco Sub-committee. Action is in hand for the Legco Sub-committee to put up a united front against Joseph Yam. This concerted effort by Legco can be seen as a slap in Yam's face.
Since the Lehman saga in last September, as head of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, Joseph Yam, instead of putting the banks in good order, has always protected their vested interests at the expense of the bank victims who have lost all their life-savings and suffer unspeakable agony and misery.
The Allied Victims of Lehman Products denounce the delaying tactics of Joseph Yam and demand him to listen to the voices of the community and stop raising objection to the decision of the Legco Sub-committee.
The Allied Victims stand behind the Legco members and declare war on Joseph Yam!
-Victims of Lehman Brothers-
26 Apr 2009

2009年4月23日星期四

葉劉淑儀女士


於研究雷曼兄弟相關迷你債券及結構性金融產品所引起的事宜小組委員會研訊發問
2009-03-20

研究雷曼兄弟相關迷你債券及結構性金融產品所引起的事宜小組委員會
2009年3月20日(星期五)上午10時於立法會會議廳向證人財經事務及庫務局局長陳家強教授取證的公開研訊

第一輪提問
葉劉淑儀議員 :多謝主席。局長,如果本會或社會整體要追究責任,其實你無須如此驚慌,因為你在2007年7月才上任,這些產品在你上任之前已經開始賣。為甚麼會批准這些產品在香港賣,不關你的事。但是,我們要知道的是,你在上工後怎樣扮演你的角色。當然,問題可以這樣說,既然銀行的證券業務多了這麼多,你有沒有提高警覺,預先去想銀行的銷售是否過分、產品是否適合市民購買?我們可以說你沒有"先知先覺" 這也許對你不太公平,因為這世上先知先覺的人不是很多。但是,我想問了一個較具體的問題,這就是雷曼在9月15日申請破產,16日你已經跟我們的監管最高層舉行會議,見過面了,你是否承認你只關心市場的穩定,你聽取那些巨頭的報告,以及有沒有銀行承擔過度風險,但完全沒有想到有多少產品已售予市民,他們蒙受多少損失,對社會有甚麼影響?你是否承認你完全忽略了“保民”這方面?

主席:局長。

陳家強教授:議員,多謝主席,多謝議員。我想你說的是某個會議的紀錄。關於該會議紀錄,我們是在討論當時金融市場的情況,當中並無就雷曼的事情作出討論,但這不等於我們沒有在其他機會作討論,因為在雷曼剛出事時,我們已立即知道有結構性產品在市場上銷售,我們已經知道有關數目的情況,我們當時已立即請監管機構盡快向我們分析情況和研究怎樣處理情況,這是同時進行的。

主席:葉劉淑儀議員。

葉劉淑儀議員 :如果你說那個會議是討論市場的整體穩定,所以你首先要考慮的不是有多少人買. . . . . .在邏輯上說不通,因為如果政府舉行會議研究藥業的監管,它沒理由不會想到某間藥廠可能賣了甚麼藥物 – 你也知道,西方銷售某種藥物出了事,對嗎? 我想問局長,你何時才知道有多少萬人買了這些產品,牽涉多少錢? 大概何時才知道?

主席:局長。

陳家強教授:主席、議員,我記得人數是後來過了一段時間才知道的,時間我已記不起,數目則很快知道,數目應該是雷曼出事. .. . . . 日子我記不起,應該是在星期一晚上,當日應該是公眾假期,星期一晚上,在第二天上班前,我們已經知道該數字。我們當然知道人數相當不少,但我們沒有正確數字,銀碼我們是知道的。

主席:葉劉淑儀議員。

葉劉淑儀議員 :局長,你既然知道金額很大,無論是站在愛民如子的立場,關心市民如何承擔損失之外,或在政府的立場,減低政治的傷害,你即時想過甚麼方案呢?

主席:局長。

陳家強教授:主席,我想澄清一下,這個問題牽涉雷曼事件發生後政府需要處理的工作,這跟我們今天討論的制度問題是不是有關? 我樂意回答這個問題,我只是想澄清這個問題是否有關我們今次的討論。

主席:葉劉淑儀議員,他想問你,你的問題怎樣和今天討論的範疇扯上關係?

葉劉淑儀議員 :甚麼? 對不起,主席,我. . . . .

主席:局長,你想. . . .

陳家強教授:我回答吧,不要緊。主席:我相信你應該回答這個問題。陳家強教授:不要緊,我. . . . . .主席:我以為你想問她. . . . . . 我認為你應該回答這個問題。

陳家強教授:不要緊,我盡量回答,因為我們今天討論的是制度或政策,但如果是說雷曼發生的事情,我想我需要很多時間準備,才可把所有事情向議員報告。但是,雷曼事件發生後,我們已即時向證監會索取資料,即時決定、瞭解那些資產的狀況、在哪里,以及當時雷曼的倒閉對投資者的影響,法律上的問題,我們已即時到證監會向他們瞭解,然後要求他們向我們報告。這應該是. . . ...如果我沒有記錯,應該是第一天上班已經跟證監會說。

主席:葉劉淑儀議員。

葉劉淑儀議員:那麼,局長,你何時才想出這個回購方案? 是否你想出來的呢? 以及. . . . . .根本現在已證實這是不可行的方案,你如何向這些市民交代? 你應該有責任提出多些方案,如果一個方案不可行的話。已經證明不可行了,對嗎?

陳家強教授:主席,回購是不是這個時候說呢? 我. . . . . .主

席:我不是要你說內容,我相信議員是想問你當時提出的意見,她問你有沒有提過任何意見,她是問你有沒有類似的意見或有沒有你個人提出的意見。其實,我剛才也問過你,有沒有做過任何特別關注的. . . . . . 是你認為應該立即要做的,響了號,紅燈已全部亮起,警號已經存在。我相信這方面的問題你需要回答。我不是問你回購的內容,那是不同的,那不是今日的範疇,但她問的是,類似是有沒有其他應該由你提出的建議,你有沒有提出呢? 我相信這是這個問題的方向。

葉劉淑儀議員:是的,作為問責官員. . .

主席:我認為你要回答,局長。

葉劉淑儀議員:. . . . . . 你知道牽涉龐大金額,便應該考慮怎樣解決問題,對嗎?

主席:局長,我認為你要回答。

陳家強教授:關於回購的情形,當然,我們應該. . . . . . 這樣說吧,我們向監管機構瞭解之後,我們花了一段時期才知道產品的情況,包括它們的抵押品等各方面的情況。我和我們的同事商量之後,覺得這個回購方案可以提出讓銀行考慮,所以在那個情況下(鐘聲響起)作出那個提議。

第二輪提問

葉劉淑儀議員:多謝主席。我也是跟劉慧卿一樣,先想跟局長說,我們看過你那兩個最高層的委員會的會議紀錄之後,都覺得根本沒有甚麼敏感,市場敏感,根本看不出有甚麼保密的需要,因為即使有甚麼敏感,也是6個月前的事,現在已經是明日黃花o 我的感覺是,你要求保密,只不過想保護官員,因為一看下去,只覺得你們甚麼都沒有做到,沒有關心投資者及小市民,真的很難看。這點我要記錄在案。局長,你剛才也承認,保障投資者是你的責任,對嗎? 那麼,我想問你,其實你的情形,當日的情形是否真的. . . . . . 因為收到很多投訴,立法會又要迫問了,又有這麼多人上街,你才去瞭解有多少人投資,以及想出回購方案出來。我不是要跟你討論回購方案的細節,而是我想說,既然你想出這個回購方案,其實你不是有誠意解決問題,你只不過想把問題推卸到銀行身上,以免大家追究官員。你是不想,政府不想承認責任,其實是否這樣? 其實你一直回答問題,你剛才的態度也是,制度沒有甚麼問題,政策沒有甚麼問題,要有少許修改,政府沒有甚麼做錯,所以你的回購方案,你推卸在銀行身上而它們不接受,其實你並非有誠意解決問題,你們只是想脫身,對嗎? 你是否同意?

主席:局長。

陳家強教授:主席、葉劉淑儀議員,我是很不同意這個看法的。我可以跟大家說,雷曼倒閉之後,我們是很關心這件事情,我們很關心投資者的損失,而我們基本上是用了很多方法想瞭解如何可以幫助投資者,所以我們所有的做法、所有的提議,都是基於這情形。這不是說甚麼脫不脫身,說真話,如何脫身呢? 說真話,如果要做這件事,我一定要為了投資者的利益做我的出發點。

主席:葉劉淑儀議員。

葉劉淑儀議員 :局長,我很高興聽到你說你這麼關心投資者。既然你的回購方案不可行,我跟銀行談過,它們很多也有情緒,覺得政府也要負上一些責任。然後,我跟好幾位議員找你. . . .主席:我想,我們不要問回購或者. . . . . .

葉劉淑儀議員 :他的責任嘛,保障投資者. . . . . .

主席:因為不是我們這個I、II、III 的範疇。

葉劉淑儀議員 :. . . . . . 主席,這是他的責任,他如何保障投資者。

主席:你轉變一下提問的方式,因為你現在是到了第V個範疇。

葉劉淑儀議員 :我現在也要間,局長,既然我跟幾位議員來向你介紹另一個可以解決問題的方案,為何你想也不想? 你很快便拒絕了我們。還有,你拒絕了我們之後,現在六個多月了,你作為問責官員,你再有甚麼方案幫助投資者解決問題? 你還有甚麼“橋”?你是否承認你根本沒有“橋”?

主席:葉劉淑儀議員,不好意思,這又是範圍第V。 你看一看,因為我們給局長的傳召中,寫明I、II、III範疇的,你現在問了第V,我相信. . . . . .

葉劉淑儀議員 :我問他如何保障投資者嘛,為何不可以問?

主席:我不想在這里討論這問題OK ? . . . . . .

葉劉淑儀議員,你不可以討論現. . . . . . 不可以這樣問,我主持會議OK ? 你不可以問,因為有範圍,現在超越了,我便提醒議員,就是這意思。

(有人插話)我不想在這里討論這問題,好嗎?

葉劉淑儀議員 :我們要在這里尋找真相. . . . . .(有人插話說: 局長是不會再回來的了! )

葉劉淑儀議員 :政府如何履行它的責任,要保障投資者嘛。如果他又不能預警,又不能善後,那麼他做甚麼? 收30萬人工1個月。

主席:OK,你可以就看I 、II 、III的範圍再問下去。

葉劉淑儀議員 :我覺得這是問題的一部分. .

主席:這傳召是寫明I 、II 、III範疇的,給他的傳召寫得很清楚的。

葉劉淑儀議員 :主席,我覺得你的裁決不公道。如果你不讓我間,我沒有法子,但我記錄在案,我不服。

主席:第V、VI個範疇是關於向投資者提供的協助及回購等,大家有文件在這里,文件是SC(1)-L3,有在這里的,請你看一看。

葉劉淑儀議員 :無須. . . . . .我看過這份文件。

主席:傳召寫明是I 、II 、III範疇的,我們要跟著這個的。

葉劉淑儀議員 :主席,我不服,我要記錄在案。

主席:沒有問題。O K 。

葉劉淑儀議員 :為甚麼呢? 這是真相的一部分,問責官坐在這里做甚麼? 又不能預警. . . . . .

主席:你提問題,好嗎? 葉劉淑儀議員。

葉劉淑儀議員 :. . . . . .那麼,他如何善後?

主席:請你提問題。

葉劉淑儀議員 :我的問題就是,局長在保障投資者方面還有甚麼良策? 只是這樣而已,為何不可以問?

主席:這樣說可以,你可以回答她這個問題。

葉劉淑儀議員 :怎會不可以問? 你有甚麼良策,有甚麼" 橋" ?

主席:要看你怎樣間,我也說要看你用甚麼方式間,我不是不讓你間,是以甚麼方式間,對嗎? OK ?

陳家強教授:葉劉. . . . . .

葉劉淑儀議員 :我已經問了,我剛才問他還有甚麼“橋”嘛. . . . . .

主席:局長,你是否有甚麼回應?

葉劉淑儀議員 :主席,是你總不讓我問. . . . . .

陳家強教授:葉劉淑儀議員,我可以跟你、跟大家講,政府在這方面仍然是不斷努力,還有......

葉劉淑儀議員 :六個多月了,局長. . . . . .

陳家強教授:還有的是. . . . . .

葉劉淑儀議員 :現在人們經常上街,影響政府的民望,你知不知道?

主席:或者你先讓他回答,或者你讓他回答啦,

葉劉淑儀。陳家強教授:還有的是,證監會和金管局是就著這些投訴個. . . . . . 這些可能是違規個案的情況作出調查。我們現在當然是等. . . . . . 希望調查的結果是能夠達到一個令問題有解決的方法。

主席:OK。葉議員。

葉劉淑儀議員 :這樣答便等於沒有答了。事實已擺在面前,政府是沒有能力解決問題。

主席:局長。

陳家強教授:我不同意,葉劉淑儀議員。我覺得我們在現時的制度里,我第一次也提過,在目前的制度里面,我們是有一套監管銀行。或者是一個券商銷售的時候,我們是有監管行為的,加上我們是有懲處和調查的權力。這是整套制度,所以我覺得現時的制度仍在運行,我希望大家要抱著一個. . . . . . 我也很明白大家很關注這件事情,但我們要相信執法機關是要根據它們的規. . . . . . 法律的基礎上去執法的。

主席:葉劉淑儀議員。

葉劉淑儀議員 :但事實擺在眼前,六個多月過去了,銀行一間也未查完,許多人得不到和解,這樣多人上街,對嗎? 你分明是沒有解決。局長如何講也沒用。我不會再問的了,主席,浪費我的時間。

AUDREY EU


MS AUDREY EU (in Cantonese): President, this morning when the Chief Executive attended a radio programme, he said to this effect, "It was a pity that the Lehman Brothers used the word 'bonds' because the product is not a kind of bond but a derivative. The term 'bonds' was used when the product was offered. Maybe some people might think that it is a kind of bonds. From the structure of the product, I do not think that it is a kind of bonds. It was a rather complicated kind of derivative really." This is the meaning of the verbatim record of the interview which I looked up. I wish to ask the Chief Executive especially about the remark that he made to the effect hat "some people might think that it is a kind of bonds …… I do not think that it is a kind of bonds."This is because I believe and the Chief Executive also knows it very well that there are laws regulating such matters in Hong Kong. Those who engage in the sale and marketing of these derivatives are subject to regulation. The relevant

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 16 October 2008105

regulatory bodies are the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC). These products cannot be sold without the approval given by the SFC of the relevant papers and this applies especially to the retail sale of these products to the banks which in turn sell them to the small investors.Hence may I ask the Chief Executive whether your remark to the effect that "some people might think that it is a kind of bonds …… I do not think that it is a kind of bonds" is sort of irresponsible and sarcastic? Or are you admitting directly or indirectly that the SFC has been irresponsible and has been in dereliction of duty of supervision when it gives approval to these papers to permit the retail sale of such complicated derivatives and high-risk products in the banks to the small investors?

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Ms EU, what I mean is that at that time my feeling was that this was not a kind of bonds. And what I said on the radio today was nothing more than my own feelings. I can see from its contents that it is obviously a derivative and not a bond. So if the form they adopt or the methods employed in selling these products in Hong Kong are permitted under the existing regulations, this is something we have to look into precisely. We know that the event has occurred and what they have used and the monitoring methods adopted are something that you perhaps know better. We use the disclosure method and all the related information is given to all the buyers and investors. On the other hand, we oversee the sale of these products so that they come under the regulatory scope of some rules and standard practice. In this regard, what we should look for after the occurrence of the Lehman Brothers event is whether or not these regulations are sufficient. This is something we need to explore and deal with. However, personally I do not think that this kind of so-called minibonds is a kind of bonds. It is not a kind of bonds.

MS AUDREY EU (in Cantonese):President, the Chief Executive has not answered my question. I asked the Chief Executive that since he knows we have got a regulatory mechanism and had the SFC which is tasked with supervision not given approval to these papers, it could not be sold to small investors in the name of bonds at the retail level by the banks. Since the Chief Executive says that this is not a kind of bonds, the question I wish to ask is whether or not it was a sarcastic or irresponsible remark and whether or not the SFC will be held accountable for this event.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 16 October 2008106

I got a letter of reply from the Chief Executive today because I had written to him and suggested that a series of measures should be taken. You have only done part of it. You said yesterday that funding would be made to the Consumer Council as a kind of litigation fund and you also said that the HKMA would be asked to handle the matter and appoint some mediators. However, the problem now is that many people have lost their confidence in the banks because of this.The suggestion I made to you is unlike what Mr CHIM Pui-chung has said, not that a special court should be set up or there should be an arbitration mechanism which does not allow appeals. There is actually a mechanism for arbitration.I made a suggestion to you in my letter, that apart from the part which you have accepted earlier on, another part is to appoint independent arbitrators. This is because arbitration entails expenses. The Government should at least take up the responsibility and provide some resources and appoint some independent professionals tasked with arbitration. Should mediation fail, at least a fair arbitration procedure should be provided for each case.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): Ms EU, first of all, no one should be sarcastic with respect to the Lehman Brothers saga and no one should say anything sarcastic. I was only telling the truth about these problems. I said that they were not bonds and they are remarks I made from the bottom of my heart. After looking at the structure of these products, I am convinced that they are obviously derivatives. As I have just said, under our existing system, we rely on the disclosure method and the name used is permitted under this existing system. Under these circumstances, is this right or proper? Should any review be undertaken after this event? This is something we should explore and it is also something we should study in-depth.On the suggestions you have made to me, they have been given careful consideration and you would know that we are now implementing some of them.As for the arbitration option you have mentioned, would arbitration be possible only when the two parties agree? As far as I know, arbitration cannot be carried out if any one party refuses to resort to arbitration. Right?

MS AUDREY EU (in Cantonese): President, I wish to make a clarification of this part. My request is that at least the Government should provide resources and appoint some independent arbitrators. It is, of course, another question whether or not the two parties are willing to come to arbitration. But at least the Government should provide such resources and at least it should be responsible for this part. This is one of the questions I asked.

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 16 October 2008107

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): In the statement I made yesterday, I said that the HKMA had set aside resources to undertake mediation work in this incident. I would think that this should be of help to the people concerned in tackling the problem of settlement of accounts and undertaking mediation, and also in identifying better arrangements should such incidents happen again. We have allocated such resources and the HKMA will pay for the expenses in appointing some people to tackle the incident by way of mediation.

公民黨

http://www.civicparty.hk/cp/pages/page-c/lhsch.php

09 JAN 2009 政府公布金管局和證監會調查雷曼事件報告部分內容翌日,任志剛聲言雷曼事件主因是金融海嘯而非監管制度有問題。余若薇反駁,指立法會尚未完成調查,任志剛妄下結論。她亦呼籲政府盡快落實上述兩份報告的建議,加強保障消費者。 新聞稿

22 JAN 2009 證監會宣布,與新鴻基投資服務有限公司和解,新鴻基願意向310名雷曼苦主購回迷債,退回全數本金,涉8,500萬元。證監會並譴責新鴻基自2002年銷售雷曼迷債涉及的「內部系統和監控措施」。翌日,公民黨發出新聞稿,指出新鴻基和解一事,突顯「一業兩管」可能產生的雙重標準,公民黨並呼籲各分銷銀行以新鴻基為鑑,盡快與雷曼苦主尋求和解,作出合理賠償。 新聞稿

20 FEB 2009 立法會雷曼小組首次公開聆訊,傳召財經事務及庫務局局長陳家強作供。余若薇向他指出,07年11月,國際貨幣基金組織提出了預警,敦促香港特區政府監察結構性產品的風險問題;翌年5月,陳家強在紐約演說中,亦詳細解釋次按產生的問題,顯示他熟悉次按危機及衍生工具的問題。余若薇質問陳家強,發表演說前,是否已察覺有關產品在香港市場廣泛銷售予普羅大眾?有否在9月迷債「爆煲」前向小投資者提出預警?有否有在任何階段提醒小投資者,雷曼迷債是信貸掛勾票據,並非一般人理解像「五隧一橋」的債券?陳家強說上述演辭只是論述次按危機的成因。另外,湯家驊質問陳家強,政府對金融市場應該有宏觀的監管責任,除了賦予金融監管機構議會及金融市場穩定委員會資源和權力外,官方有否監管渠道?陳家強說官方與該兩個機構有不少日常接觸。

23 FEB 2009 立法會財經事務委員會特別會議,討論金管局和證監會調查雷曼事件報告。余若薇問金管局總裁任志剛,為何雷曼迷債在香港廣泛銷售,但在美國卻沒有?任志剛、金管局副總裁蔡耀君及證監會行政總裁韋奕禮均表示,其他地區都有類似但可能名稱不同的投資產品。

24 FEB 2009立法會雷曼小組第2次公開聆訊,繼續傳召陳家強作供。余若薇問他,身為財經事務及庫務局局長,他的職責之一是監督轄下執行部門,若然金管局和證監會辦事不力,他是否要負上政治責任?陳家強說,例如公司註冊處,才是其轄下執行部門,金管局和證監會不是。另外,余若薇問他,他既然明知有些銀行本身也不明白結構性產品的投資風險,他豈能期望散戶明白呢?陳家強說,這正正是監管機構調查的問題。

27 FEB 2009 立法會雷曼小組第3次公開聆訊,繼續傳召陳家強作供。余若薇問他,為何迷債在香港的銷售層面比其他地區大很多,是否香港監管比較寬鬆?陳家強重申香港的「披露為本」和「合適性評估」政策與其他地區無異,分別在於投資習慣和行業結構。金管局和證監會的調查報告已表述可改善之處。余若薇追問他,他認為銀行需要花多少時間才能向客戶充分「披露」如此高風險的投資產品?陳說,不能以時間度量,視乎表達方式。湯家驊問陳家強,07年8月金融監管機構議會和金融市場穩定委員會兩個會議中,他可有提出關注雷曼兄弟正遇上經濟困難?他說,有討論次按的全球影響,無印象曾否討論個別金融機構。

05 MAR 2009 公民黨公布一項民意調查結果,逾千名受訪市民中,高達72%認為,監管機構至今未能交代銀行違犯銷售雷曼迷債個案的調查結果,實屬失職。 民調結果

20 MAR 2009 立法會雷曼小組第4次公開聆訊,陳家強第4次作供。湯家驊問陳家強08年9月前可有主動了解雷曼有沒有在港出售金融產品。陳家強說,這是監管機構的工作。余若薇問陳家強,雷曼迷債事件發生至今半年,只有屬證監會監管的新鴻基投資服務有限公司和解外,金管局監管的銀行卻一間都不見受處分,迷債持有人圈圈轉,一業兩管是否浪費資源?陳家強說,一業兩管有效地減少監管重疊,是恰當的做法。

CHIM PUI-CHUNG


http://www.legco.gov.hk/yr08-09/%20...%20016-translate-e.pdf

MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): Chief Executive, globally the financial tsunami has happened, and in Hong Kong, just as you said earlier, we have the minibonds issue. In the policy address, you mentioned that a task force chaired by you would be established, and yesterday in front of the media, you even urged the banks to expeditiously make a decision. Chief Executive, you should know that the problem cannot be immediately resolved even if those two things were accomplished. Meanwhile, I strongly support your administrative initiative of establishing the Accountability System for Principal Officials. My question therefore contains three sub-questions. Firstly, what action will you take if it is proved in the future that one of the Principal Officials has to be held responsible for the minibonds issue? I have actually put this question to a secretary of Department before, but I would like you to give a fairer response to all Hong Kong people and the victims.If it is proved that the case involves criminality, will you instruct other departments to employ tougher means so that the perpetrators would no longer take Hong Kong a teller machine?

(HKMA chief Yam is the Principal Official that knowingly allows banks to pretend Minibonds, a high risk derivative products as a low risk bonds to sell to their customers for profits and to help Lehman, Morgan Stanley and DBS to steal money from HK people and Yam has to be held responsible.)

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 16 October 200887

Thirdly, which is the most important point, will you consider setting up a special court? We all know that legal poceedings may take as long as three to five years, after which the problem may remain unresolved. This will deal a serious blow to Hong Kong as a financial centre. Three questions have been raised, but they can actually be summarized into one. Now, the floor is yours.

(Observers on the public gallery applauded after Mr CHIM Pui-chung had finished with his question)

PRESIDENT (in Cantonese): Will people on the public gallery remain silent please.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): We are now busy combating the financial tsunami, Mr CHIM, and I am confident that our Government is a responsible one. And yet, this is not the right moment to punish any official. Nor is this the appropriate time to hold anyone responsible. For the time being, we should all stick to our positions and overcome the difficulties. I think that justice is in the hearts of the people. When the issue dies down, Members will naturally see who has done wrong or what mistakes we have made in this financial quagmire in comparison with other regions. In the face of the crisis, I believe it is more important to pool all our manpower and resources and this is what is expected of us by Hong Kong people.If criminal acts are disclosed after the investigation, Mr CHIM, I can assure you that I will follow it up seriously. I will definitely do so.

(Varies banks such as Shanghai Commercial Banks, DBS etc. that act criminally in Minibonds selling should be charged)

Yesterday, I also mentioned that should a victim found that the case involved civil rather than criminal acts and considered it unfair, whereas the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) also noticed some unfair acts of the institutions concerned, he might turn to the Consumer Council for assistance under a special litigation mechanism. Money will be injected by the SAR Government when this litigation mechanism lacks funds, hence enabling the victims to initiate proceedings. This is the way to tackle it through the civil avenue. As for criminality, follow-up actions would surely be taken.Regarding the special court proposed by you, the Courts are always full and many Judges are occupied with cases. If the Judges are made to take up this case, how long will the hearing last? I believe the hearing will be excessively long and may even affect other cases. I hope that the case will not

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL ─ 16 October 200888

be brought before the Court as reputation and goodwill is very important to the intermediaries concerned (including the banks). Should we find anything wrong or flaws are discovered after the HKMA investigation, I am confident that those responsible banking institutions would immediately resort to reconciliation and consider making compensation without bringing the case before the Court, which is considered to be too humiliating and troublesome.

(Shanghai Commercial Bank, Bank of China, DBS and others have already court cases involved, and these banks are already with bad reputations)

MR CHIM PUI-CHUNG (in Cantonese): President, members of the public should have heard the three answers given by the Chief Executive. The point is we all know that legal proceedings in Hong Kong may probably take as long as three to five years. It is therefore my opinion and wish that the Government could set up a special court to make an ultimate arbitration where no appeal is allowed and is final. The decision certainly rests with the Secretary for Justice.With the availability of arbitration in Hong Kong, a lot of time can be saved.We are allowed to resort to this course in case of emergency. It is all up to you.

CHIEF EXECUTIVE (in Cantonese): I dare not say if it works in the absence of an appeal channel. What is more, "Uncle CHIM" ― I used to call him in this way ― according to legal advice, arbitration requires the consent of the two parties concerned. In case either party does not agree, the case will be brought before the Court and no one can be forced into arbitration. Should either party refuse to give consent, nothing can be done. Legal proceedings are therefore necessary for some cases. But I do agree with you that if a large number of cases (civil cases in particular) are involved, hence the Court may probably take a very long time to handle them, but if the bank concerned still refuses to reconcile or do something about it when the elderly victims seek help, we will then resort to other courses of action. I will consider all your proposals and discuss with the Chief Justice how these special cases could be dealt with.

2009年4月9日星期四

政務司司長唐英年

協助雷曼苦主 並非輸打贏要財經事務及庫務局局長陳家強昨與多間雷曼迷你債券銷售銀行代表會晤後表示,已要求銀行主動接觸有關的投資者,並增撥資源處理問題。銀行公會亦宣布成立專責小組,跟進迷你債券的投訴。雷曼迷你債券受美國金融海嘯波及,發酵至今,已經有一段時間,涉及數以千計市民的利益,而損失的金額可能高達數十億港元。蒙受損失的市民怨氣沖天,批評政府對事件存在監管失誤,而金融機構及其職員則被指以失實推銷手法誤導投資者。政府有責任施加壓力,促使業界承擔相應的責任,以及檢討日後加強對金融衍生產品的監管;同時也要避免傳遞投資失誤可向政府索償、輸打贏要的訊息,破壞了金融市場風險自擔的遊戲規則。雷曼兄弟迷你債券事件擾攘多日,近日有傳媒報道,指有銀行與苦主達成妥協,願意作出賠償,消息旋即被相關銀行否認,受影響的苦主向銀行的賠償追討陷入膠着狀態。事件發展至今,苦主的損失究竟是因為自己的投資失誤,還是被銀行職員誤導所致,社會上存在一定爭議。正如美國的7,000億救市方案在眾議院被否決一樣,反映有民意認為次按危機完全是瘋狂的投機行為造成的,按照自由經濟原則,金融海嘯的後果沒有理由讓政府包底,讓納稅人來「埋單」。我們認為,香港迷你債券事件不可與美國相提並論,相當部分的案例並非投資失誤那麼簡單。銀行的推銷手法、政府對高風險金融產品的監管有不可推卸的責任。迷你債券把高風險的結構性金融產品包裝成類似定期存款的保本產品,再推銷給投資者,從中賺取豐厚的佣金。而購買迷你債券的小投資者,很多是長者或退休人士,與銀行已有多年存款關係。如今雷曼兄弟已告倒閉,這些投資很可能化為烏有。投資風險固然應該自負,但分銷迷你債券的中介人,包括銀行、投資公司及其職員有否遵守專業守則?例如,銀行是否對推銷的職員有足夠的培訓和指引?銀行職員向顧戶進行產品解釋時,有否清晰說明風險,提醒客戶作出判斷?這是今日釐清各方責任的關鍵。迷你債券、股票掛鈎票據等信貸相聯的結構性金融產品,是近年華爾街新興的金融創新產品,具有投資大、高風險、結構複雜的特點,部分海外國家是不容許向散戶銷售此類產品的。
政務司司長唐英年在接受傳媒訪問時表示,香港要維持國際金融中心的地位,允許市場存在金融衍生工具是理所當然的事,只要分銷商在推銷時能提供風險透明度,至於銷售甚麼產品,政府是不會過問的。
提高香港金融市場的多元化,保持自由度,並不等於放任自流,放棄必要的管制,更不能姑息有違專業操守、損害香港金融信譽的營商行為。造成今日的局面,顯然與政府監管存有漏洞,對高風險的金融衍生產品的約束不夠有關。到目前為止,受迷你債券影響的苦主已有3,500多人,估計平均每人的損失將以數十萬計,這些人已經倍感受騙、氣憤,倘若再得不到政府有效的協助,便很可能演變成對政府管治威信的衝擊。但是,事件爆發以來,從金管局、證監會等監管部門的反應來看,又犯了政府一貫的被動、遲鈍毛病。金管局、證監會當然不能視事件是普通的投資失誤,以置身事外的態度發表一些不痛不癢的安慰說話就此了事,一定要作出實質性的介入,施加壓力,要求銀行與苦主協商,爭取一套雙方可接受的解決方法,盡可能將雙方的損失降至最低。
楊星

2009年4月5日星期日

HK voodoo economics



Dear Legco members,

G20 and China in fact are now adapting the Macroeconomic policy while our HK government is still using their Voodoo economic policy in the new budget. During your question period about HK gov. involvement in Lehman Minibonds, please be reminded that the economic policy of Hong Kong is completely wrong and outdated. Mr. Chu is the best brain behind Lehman Victim group and his letter to Premier Wen in facts show (but not speak out)the anger of China government over HK government economic policy:

迷 債 苦 主 心 聲 - 請 中 央 政 府 插 手 處 理 溫家寶總理、習近平國家副主席:發生香港迷債事件,至今快半年,債主們在痛苦之中等待。一日不解決,如何能保持香港國際金融中心的地位?令香港整體社會經濟受損。再不能寄望曾特首為首的政府庸官,其等祗不過是前港英政府,在溫室"培養"出的產品,缺乏獨立判斷處理事件的經驗,不會主動採取處理問題 (去年東亞銀行擠提,雷曼兄弟破產前,股市U價事件)。無經濟、政治的危機感,高薪厚祿,無責任感 (其等薪金中,包括了職位上的政治責任的風險津貼,不知到了北京才知官位的大與小,在港也文也武擺款)。盼望中央政府插手公正公平的解決迷債事件,追查有關官員錯誤的失責(香港是問責政府,當然要查)。挽回政府管治威信,銀行的信譽,市民的信心,保持香港國際金融平台美譽。同時要求中央政府責令,以香港中銀集團為首的中資銀行,帶頭配合中央政策 - 安定繁榮香港社會,保持香港成為國際金融中心平台,向迷債苦主100%回購投資迷債的本金。如果此事發生於國內,中央政府會如何解決呢?是否任其一路惡化下去,危害整體社會經濟利益?為國為民,切勿拖延,造福市民,亦國家之福。請登入http://www.lbv.org.hk/查閱。

香港特區 - 迷債苦主朱先生2009-3-10

Prof. Sung, Ph.D from Univ. of Minnesota. , advisor of Regina Yip, dept. head of economic of Chinese University and represent Premier Wen macroeconomic advisors approach of Chinese economy-

Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors during the Kennedy-Johnson years, Walter Heller (1915-1987) became the chief spokesman and exemplar of the "New Economics" which attempted to maximize economic growth through "fine tuning." Heller advocated deficit spending to spur economic growth. Professor of Univ. of Minnesota. during 70s. Heller followers worked for President Clinton and President Obama.

HK government Prof. Chan , Ph.D from Univ. of Chicago and statistician Yam, HK Univ. bachelor degree HKMA chief following Univ. of Chicago voodoo economics and both involved in cover up of Minibonds bank frauds

-Milton Friedman (July 31, 1912 – November 16, 2006) was an American economist, statistician and public intellectual, and a recipient of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. He is best known among scholars for his theoretical and empirical research, especially consumption analysis, monetary history and theory, and for his demonstration of the complexity of stabilization policy.[A global public followed his restatement of a political philosophy that insisted on minimizing the role of government in favor of the private sector (eg. HK pirate bankers and US investment banks robbers). As a leader of the Chicago School of economics, based at the University of Chicago.

HK government in fact is now covering up their responsibility in the Lehman Minibonds frauds with all these delaying actions and also the new budget also shows that HK government is still insisting in small government approach with so small deficit spending to speed up HK economy that need your vetos to their wrong economic policy that will further sink HK economy to bottom.


Mr. Tsang Voodoo economics


Tsang keeps options open on new stimulus measures
(04-06 11:14)
Hong Kong may adopt a further economic stimulus package this year to counter the impact of the global financial downturn, Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen said.

He said the territory is facing its most serious economic test since World War II but is in a position to weather the storm.

Tsang told the Financial Times the city had HK$400 billion in the bank ''so I'm in a good position to spend more if I want to ... If necessary we will do something in the middle of the year.''

While Hong Kong has generally capped government spending at 18 percent of gross domestic product, Tsang said it is difficult to make a major impact on the wider economy.

''Fortunately I've still got a lot of ammunition in my pocket,'' he said.

On Friday, Tsang said he will take more measures if needed to help people cope with the crisis.

The government will not be stingy when more measures are needed, Tsang said after a meeting of the so-called Task Force on Economic Challenges.

AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE

Task Force on Economic Challenges sets priorities

The Task Force on Economic Challenges, established by Hong Kong’s Chief Executive, Mr Donald Tsang, and composed of top government officials, finance experts, economists and representatives of major industries, held a detailed discussion on the global situation and how it may affect Hong Kong's economy at its first meeting on 3 November.

After the meeting, Mr Tsang said that the Task Force had agreed to focus on boosting the competitiveness of Hong Kong's four major economic sectors and tapping new opportunities in them, while exploring more measures to support small and medium enterprises and promote employment.

"While Hong Kong's financial system has demonstrated a high degree of robustness and resilience during the financial tsunami, we will not be immune from the wave of global credit tightening and economic downturn. And being a small and open economy, the risk of Hong Kong going into a recession in 2009 has increased," he said.

"It is expected those sectors relating to financial services, trade and logistics, tourism and consumption-related services, real estate and construction services will be hit rather harder in the next year or so."

Mr Tsang said first and foremost is the urgent need to mitigate the extent and impact of the expected tightening of the credit market in the city, both for the corporate and the retail sectors, adding the Financial Secretary will continue to spearhead the Government's efforts on this front.

Noting SMEs in particular are facing increasing difficulties in their daily operations due to the tightened credit market and possible fall in consumption, Mr Tsang said members believe further measures to support SMEs should be considered.

He added that preserving the confidence of Hong Kong people in our economy and promoting employment are top priorities, noting that the unemployment rate is likely to rise.

In the coming months the task force will monitor global and local developments to assess their impact on Hong Kong, with its secretariat co-operating with government bureaux and departments in developing remedial and preventive measures.

Task force on economic challenges formed

Think tank: Chief Executive Donald Tsang briefs the media on the appointments to the task force on economic challenges.

Chief Executive Donald Tsang has appointed 10 people from different fields to the task force on economic challenges formed in response to the global financial turmoil.

They are:

* Mervyn Davies, Standard Chartered chairman; like to sell Lehman ELNs to old people.

* Dr Victor Fung, chairman of Li & Fung group of companies, Greater Pearl River Delta Business Council and International Chamber of Commerce; sold cheap toys and garments to help international name brands to make high profits .

* Prof Lawrence Lau, Chinese University of Hong Kong Vice-Chancellor and President; Ph.D. degrees in Economics from the University of California at Berkeley. May be replacement for Prof. Chan to please China.

* KC Leong, Roctec Futures Trading Company chairman and former Hong Kong Futures Exchange chairman; like to sell high risk derivatives.

* Margaret Leung, HSBC Global Co-Head Commercial Banking Group General Manager; appointed PIFL directors to steal our money.

* Ayesha Macpherson, KPMG Partner; HK low tax lawyer for the rich and accounting firm related to Lehman bank frauds.

* Dr Stephen Roach, Morgan Stanley Asia chairman; International shark. Sellers of Victory Peak notes, another type of Minibonds that some of the notes lost 100% of the values. Now non-Lehman related series 15 died in 2010 after Lehman bankrupt to show that these notes are very high risk which linked to Chinese government, an insult to China.

* Shih Wing-ching, Centaline (Holdings) Company chairman and member of the Estate Agents Authority and the Housing Authority; loved to sell very small house to Chinese very rich investors at very high price up to 30,000 /sq. ft.

* Dr? Patrick Wang, (Master degree at Physics) Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Johnson Electric Holdings and Hong Kong Applied Science & Technology Research Institute chairman; and like to make cheap and unreliable motors for VW, Ford, GM that I quit as his engineer and only like to buy Japanese cars with Japanese motors that never burnt. He hired Joseph Yam as director in year 2010.

* Mathias Woo, Zuni Icosahedron Executive Director. HK Univ. culture sector with no international standing.

New perspectives

"The challenges ahead of us are daunting. The damage the financial tsunami has inflicted on the global economy has yet to be fully revealed. We need to evaluate the situation, consider ways to respond, identify new opportunities, and ultimately enhance our international competitiveness," Mr Tsang said.



"While the task force has a small membership and does not include representatives of every sector of the economy, I hope it can bring to us new perspectives. With experience and collective wisdom, members will come up with specific proposals for the Government and the relevant industry to consider and take forward. This will help us weather the storm and turn the crisis into an opportunity."

When asked about the appointment of Mr Woo from the cultural sector, Mr Tsang said he hoped every economic sector can join and help, adding the creative and cultural industry is a sector being affected, too. However, he said members have been named not only to tackle the long-term economic issues, but also to tap new opportunities.

2009年4月12日上午8:20
hanhoco 提到...

Donald Tsang is involved in protecting the banks and cover up of the HK Minibonds banks frauds by not investigating these criminal acts thru HK police with more than 500 cases involved since Janaury 2009 because they cannot received go ahead order by him. For cases involved in Shanghai Commercial Bank than knew about these 100 or more CDO's involved in Minibonds and related products, I know from the bank employee that all their bank managers were treatening to sell these Minibonds to old people, and these orders were given by top managers there and HK police with names of these bank managers never search the bank records.

Donald Tsang is involved in setting up free market economy in HK supported by foreign investors, financial sharks to steal money from HK coorparation and H-shares companies and even in business magazines these international sharks are praising him to be the last place on earth that they can steal money thru HK stock markets. Even Premier Wen is angry with him for not disclosing his free fall market policy to chinese financial experts to protect chinese H-share companies in HK stock markets in U-shape market price.

Donald Tsang when he got power from China government two year ago, hiring Prof. Chan, a University of Chicago Ph.D, who advocate Voodoo economics that allows political philosophy that insisted on minimizing the role of government in favor of the private sector (eg. HK pirate bankers and US investment banks robbers) to steal HK middle class lifetime saving thru Minibonds. And that forced China to set up new international financial center in Shanghai for chinese cooparations.

US govenment officials are admitting their private sector are causing these financial crisis, HKMA chief Yam is now cover up his role in allowing HK Banks frauds. There are many papers published by HK University, Baptish University, City Poly University, Chinese Univesity, ex-professors from China, Chinese government study groups based in HK, business accociations about Minibonds Saga and private sectors integrity and Donald Tsang continues to disregards these frauds and protecting Yam by not investigating his role thru OMD in allowing banks frauds

Donald Tsang is not adapting G20 and China Macroeconomics approach by deficit spending to spur economic growth, delaying all developement projects for the past five years, dispersing technical staffs to other countries including China for jobs. He is protecting Minibonds banks frauds, and his cover up is exposed in Financial Times, Yahoo.com, Googles, CNBC and tens of other major international media include many China financial media . And he is now covering up his wrong economic policy by lying to Financial Times that he mistakely disregards the level of financial crisis involved this time. All he cares is his indulging of slang wordings in Legco.

Donald Tsang and HK government judges are still protecting rich and powerful in the HK courts. PCCW case is only one small example. HK laws still use the old colony laws adapted from English to protect the new rulers of HK and disregards the charter on human right of UN with many violations by HK police which lag Univ. qualification police officers thru his uneducated police chief Tang . Donald Tsang disregards the calls of Lehman Minibonds Victims group to put bank frauds as criminal cases and negligence and wants to force victims to courts for justice that makes legal costs unaffordable for all victims in order to cover up banks frauds.

2009年4月23日上午4:41 (revised Sept 2010)

張貼意見

Ma Si-hang


SCMP: Former finance chief willing to testify about Lehman fiasco
9 Mar 2009Former secretary for financial services and the treasury Frederick Ma Si-hang yesterday said he was willing to testify in the Legislative Council about the Lehman Brothers minibonds fiasco, but refused to comment on the proceedings so far. "You all know that I have always been very co-operative with Legco," said Mr Ma, who also served as secretary for commerce and economic development before he resigned for health reasons. "But since I am no longer an official, I do not have access to all the records {hellip} If I go, it will just be me and my brain." His successor, Chan Ka-keung, has told Legco that he did not know what a minibond was until the fiasco. Mr Ma refused to reveal how much he knew about minibonds, saying: "You will have to wait for the Legco hearing."

2009年4月4日星期六

Shanghai Commercial Bank other frauds

http://hk.myblog.yahoo.com/hanhoco/photo?pid=75&fid=-1&action=next


迷債老婦自救向銀行索償
【 本 報 訊 】 七 十 七 歲 兼 多 病 的 退 休 女 商 人 , 四 年 前 在 上 海 商 業 銀 行 職 員 介 紹 下 , 用 九 百 萬 港 元 積 蓄 購 入 雷 曼 迷 債 , 其 投 資 因 雷 曼 倒 閉 而 付 諸 流 水 。 她 曾 向 金 管 局 、 證 監 會 、 消 委 會 、 政 黨 及 警 方 求 助 , 都 無 法 取 回 投 資 款 項 , 遂 決 定 「 自 救 」 , 委 託 律 師 昨 日 入 稟 高 院 , 向 涉 案 銀 行 索 償 有 關 金 額 。 900 萬 積 蓄 付 諸 流 水 入 稟 狀 指 出 , 原 告 人 是 蔡 秀 霞 ( 譯 音 ) , 是 被 告 上 海 商 業 銀 行 有 限 公 司 的 長 期 客 戶 , 自 一 九 六 六 年 起 已 光 顧 該 銀 行 。 於 ○ 五 年 期 間 , 被 告 的 職 員 向 她 介 紹 一 項 迷 你 債 券 , 她 當 時 快 到 七 十 三 歲 , 又 體 弱 多 病 , 相 信 對 方 的 說 話 , 以 為 該 款 迷 債 風 險 低 及 適 合 退 休 人 士 , 用 了 約 七 百 八 十 萬 港 元 投 資 。 她 在 ○ 五 年 及 ○ 七 年 再 於 對 方 介 紹 下 , 另 外 再 投 資 共 約 一 百 二 十 萬 元 , 購 入 另 外 兩 項 投 資 產 品 。 惟 她 在 去 年 雷 曼 兄 弟 倒 閉 後 才 知 實 情 , 並 認 為 被 告 在 事 件 上 曾 疏 忽 和 違 規 , 興 訟 要 求 被 告 賠 償 。 案 件 編 號 : HCA 938/2009

This is another case of Shanghai Commercial Bank that was involved in bank frauds cases. And why should HK police not to take action to search the bank for their bank frauds with all these top bank managements clearly involved.

Bank other frauds in Accumulators

寡婦慘被銀行輸光六百萬
一 名 將 丈 夫 六 百 萬 元 遺 產 存 入 銀 行 收 息 過 活 的 婦 人 , 金 融 海 嘯 後 驚 見 存 款 消 失 , 追 問 下 才 知 戶 口 被 人 用 「 孖 展 」 狂 炒 股 匯 及 「 累 計 期 權 」 (Accumulator) , 她 稱 被 銀 行 職 員 誤 導 , 「 矇 查 查 」 簽 署 文 件 , 現 時 血 本 無 歸 , 即 使 在 去 年 十 二 月 要 求 終 止 戶 口 , 亦 要 到 最 近 才 成 功 , 但 六 百 萬 元 已 經 全 部 輸 清 光 。 六 十 多 歲 的 苦 主 唐 太 , 丈 夫 逝 世 時 留 下 三 百 萬 元 積 蓄 , 加 上 保 險 公 司 賠 償 的 三 百 萬 元 , 有 六 百 萬 元 現 金 , 她 在 ○ 一 年 將 錢 存 入 銀 行 定 期 戶 口 , 並 交 由 一 名 她 一 向 信 任 的 銀 行 經 理 跟 進 。 唐 太 自 言 是 保 守 投 資 者 , 只 會 將 存 款 用 作 定 期 及 投 資 小 量 股 票 , 至 ○ 六 年 , 銀 行 經 理 告 訴 她 因 要 「 改 制 」 , 她 簽 文 件 方 便 提 款 。 到 去 年 十 月 , 唐 查 看 九 月 份 的 銀 行 月 結 單 , 發 現 帳 戶 驟 減 至 二 百 萬 元 。 向 銀 行 幾 經 追 問 才 發 現 所 開 的 不 是 一 般 定 期 帳 戶 , 而 是 為 專 業 投 資 者 而 設 的 綜 合 投 資 戶 口 , 存 錢 被 用 作 股 票 、 外 匯 和 「 累 計 期 權 」 等 高 風 險 投 資 , 而 且 以 孖 展 方 式 運 作 。 拒收 銀 行 96 萬 掩 口 費 唐 太 表 示 , 出 事 後 銀 行 職 員 向 她 訴 苦 , 說 擔 心 事 件 影 響 前 途 , 為 表 示 歉 意 , 每 月 以 私 人 名 義 存 入 五 千 元 給 唐 太 作 生 活 費 。 至 去 年 十 一 月 中 , 銀 行 告 訴 唐 太 , 因 為 銀 行 錯 誤 計 算 邊 際 息 率 , 歸 還 她 九 十 六 萬 元 , 但 要 求 她 不 作 追 究 , 唐 太 恐 答 應 後 無 法 追 回 所 有 存 款 , 故 拒 絕 接 受 。 後 來 , 她 在 子 女 陪 同 下 與 銀 行 開 會 反 映 不 滿 , 並 且 向 金 管 局 投 訴 , 以 及 向 警 方 備 案 。 有 關 銀 行 發 言 人 表 示 不 評 論 個 別 事 件 。 警 方 發 言 人 證 實 , 今 年 一 月 曾 接 獲 事 主 要 求 銀 行 終 止 其 授 權 投 資 服 務 , 但 戶 口 仍 有 投 資 活 動 , 未 有 證 據 顯 示 事 件 涉 及 刑 事 成 分 。
http://orientaldaily.on.cc/new/i%20...%20new/new_a00cnt.html

咁離譜都有

For Accumulator, the minimun amounts would be USD1,000,000 . The bank must lied to their customers in order to combine their clients money into 8 M HK dollars. This case is very similar to Minibonds frauds when many old people find their saving are lost, and later find out that the banks had bought Minibonds for them telling them what they signed were term deposits as told by the police but now HK government is now covering up the bank frauds by not arresting these bank managers that were involved in bank frauds case with so many evidences.I heard Shanghai Commercial Bank manager was telling me that he also traded foreign currency and stocks for his customers. I never trust bankers to trade stocks for me not knowing what they were buying, but probably they were trading Accumulators for their customers,and no wonder so many HK movies stars lost so much money by listening to those banks such as Shanghai Commercial Bank that was involved in bank frauds cases.