Minibond Protesters: Are They Right?

Minibond Protesters: Are They Right?Article Comments (5) Exchange HOME PAGE »There are 5 Comment(s)
Go to most recent Add a Comment Sort by: Oldest Newest

http://blogs.wsj.com/exchange/2010/12/10/minibond-protesters-are-they-right/
10:18 am December 13, 2010
Standard Chartered - wrote:
1100 victims complained about the mis-selling of Standard Chartered Bank, and 702 cases were confirmed by HKMA with enough evidence proving such, but these victims got nothing, and the only reason being Standard Chartered Bank was the foreign bank in the terrritory and they do not care what HKMA or SFC. The other banks who compensated were mostly Chinese banks. There is a difference between the Chinese and British banks. In future don’t trust the British banks or American banks. Better trust the Chinese banks.


10:22 am December 13, 2010
Standard Chartered - Citi wrote:
The report was not accurate. Only seventeen banks agreed to compensate 60% to minibond holders. Standard Chartered Bank paid none, even 70% of the complaints showed evidence that there was mis-selling, and these were the so called equity linked deposits related to HK Stocks, which are worth more than 100% of the principal amount. Standard Chartered Bank sold these as fixed deposits and never mentioned the name of the issuer as Lehman. Now the bank is saying they were only acting as agents for Lehman, and they do not have the stocks which are now even worth more than the principal. Isn’t this a FRAUD?


11:34 am December 13, 2010
Alice wrote:
Dah Sing Bank sold principal protected Note to the depositors just before Lehman collapsed. The Notes was under two year ago ( Aug 2006 ) prospectus. Even though the rumour of financial crisis of Lehman throughout the market. Dah Sing Bank still pushed to sell the Lehman Note. Dah Sing Bank transfered their risk to the depositors. Shame of Dah Sing Bank.


12:21 am December 14, 2010
Jimmy wrote:
I think a lot of people, and the worse is the media, misled by the HK governement and banks saying they have helped the victims getting back 60-70% of their money. The banks only repurchased minibond issued by PFIL but there are other similiar minibonds issued by other entities are not repurchased or even discussed how to solve it. The poeple protected on street are those being ignored. The question is why SFC and bank agreed on the repurchase of some kind of minibonds but not other kind of minibonds which they have very similiar in nature. These people on street are claimed being cheated by bank staffs, but it seems that no one in government offices, SFC, HKMA and even media pay a little attention to them. Please look into the matter more deeply before you raise this subject.