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facts, and the fidu- of the 82 applications for legal assistance ciary relationship between the bank and that were withdrawn after the bank deits consumers.’’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 The 11 applications were withdrawn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.
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.
2 則留言:
雷曼大聯盟︰訴訟只屬姿態
雷曼苦主大聯盟主席陳光譽（見圖）坦言，消費者委會雖首次動用訴訟基金協助雷曼投資者，但認為提出訴訟只是姿態性動作，實際達到的成果有限，因法律程序太冗長，對雷曼投資者的心理及資源均造成壓力，很可能出現最後階段要與銀行和解的情況，無法建立案例以協助其他投資者。他希望政府向銀行施壓，向全體投資者直接陪償本金，而今日會發動500人到立法會聲討金融管理局總裁任志剛。
盼藉先例令銀行受壓
陳光譽接受本報訪問時表示，消委會是次的行動姿態多於實際，認為消委會希望藉「測試個案」建立先例，乃一廂情願的主觀願望，因為很多案件一旦進入法律程序，銀行因怕麻煩，很多時他會主動提出和解，導致整個建立案例的過程，因為喪失控方而流產，而消委會公布有11宗到訴訟的前夕選擇撤銷，已反映有關問題。
他又表示，由於訴訟的法律程序拖得太長，消委會又不能承諾一定會勝訴，難以要求投資者拒絕與銀行和解的建議，選擇堅持訴訟到底。他又不滿消委會將90%投訴轉介金管局，是卸責表現。雷曼苦主大聯盟希望立法會和政府向銀行施壓，要求銀行悉數陪償本金，而大聯盟會在今日趁立法會調查雷曼迷債小組委會員召開會議，號召500人到場聲討任志剛，並向其遞交請願信。記者周肇堂
28 Apr 2009
We should make request to HKMA.
Request to HKMA:
Request to HKMA:
About the true features and associated risks of Minibond,
(a) what kind of explanations that clients should be given ?
(b) What kind of relevant material information that clients should be given?
This is not about the approval of documentations.
It is about the responsibilities, the duty of fair disclosure that Banks owe to their clients.
Banks, as minibond-distributors, bear the responsibility of explaining the true nature and risk of the minibond to clients, and bear the responsibility of disclosing material information to clients. We trust that Banks were not dummy product-sellers who would sell any products based on the commission rate. We trust that Banks, and all their capable financial professionals, do understand the true nature and risk of the products that they had been selling over 3-4 years.
A brief description on the main features and risks of minibond by HKMA is what public needs for the Minibond Investigation. Unfortunately, the Report released by HKMA did not provide such summary. We believe that such a brief description is not a top-national-secrecy that could danger the safety of the country including Kong Hong. Banks probably would welcome such a brief description (by HKMA) because banks insisted that they've done their duty properly.
OR:
(c) Does HKMA consider that "credit-linked to 7 well-known companies" summarized and reflected the main feature and risks of minibond?
發佈留言
訂閱 發佈留言 [Atom]
<< 首頁