2012年12月27日星期四

2008年統一證券違規賣雷曼結構性產品被證監會罰款200萬

2012年12月4日 – 星島日報 (星島日報)統一證券於2008年接受21名台灣客戶認購多項與雷曼兄弟有關的結構性產品時,沒有以符合其客戶最佳利益的方式行事,遭證監會公開譴責並罰款200萬元。 證監會的調查發現,那些台灣客戶是由統一證券於台灣的母公司,即統一綜合證券,轉介至統一證券。他們在購買該等產品前,於統一證券開立了帳戶,但開戶過程則由統一綜合證券處理。統一證券的職員以見證人身分簽署台灣客戶的開戶文件,但實際上他們從未與那些客戶會面。統一證券的職員沒有聯絡那些台灣客戶以核實他們的身分, 並沒有解釋開戶文件和確立他們的財政狀況、投資經驗及投資目標,亦沒有向他們披露風險。統一證券在接受那些台灣客戶認購該等產品前,沒有充分確保他們明白有關產品及接受與該等產品有關的風險,只倚賴台灣客戶所簽署的標準風險免責聲明,但卻沒有向客戶解釋免責聲明的內容。 若干產品已訂明最低認購規定,以致只有某些類別的投資者才符合資格購買該等產品。由於部分台灣客戶的認購額並未達到最低認購規定的金額,統一證券便匯集客戶的指示,以符合最低認購規定,但卻沒有通知那些客戶會將他們的指示匯集起來。基於以上關注事項,統一證券在為台灣客戶開戶一事上,沒有遵守監管標準。統一證券毫不猶豫便接納台灣客戶認購該等產品,並將未達到最低認購規定的客戶指示匯集起來,反映統一證券沒有以符合其客戶最佳利益的方式行事。 證監會認為統一證券的違規行為損害廣大投資者的利益。

2012年12月14日星期五

Singapore Law Watch - High court awards Taiwan investor US$49m in damages

Singapore Law Watch - High court awards Taiwan investor US$49m in damages
SourceBusiness TimesDate13 Dec 2012AuthorGrace LeongJustice Pillai finds Deutsche Bank failed in duty of care


[SINGAPORE] In what could be one of the biggest legal victories to date in Singapore for the financially inexperienced investor, the High Court awarded Taiwanese scientist Chang Tse Wen US$49 million (S$59 million) in damages plus interest and full legal costs for losses he suffered as a result of Deutsche Bank's negligent advice.

In a 71-page judgment released yesterday, High Court Justice Philip Pillai found that the bank and Dr Chang's former relationship manager, Johnny Wan Fan Ting, had assumed a duty of care to Dr Chang, but that both "failed to take reasonable care in advising Dr Chang on managing his new wealth".

Significantly, Justice Pillai found that the duty of care to Dr Chang arose pre-contractually before he signed the service agreement and derivative agreement with the bank, and that "all the losses that (he) suffered were caused in fact and in law by (Mr Wan) and (Deutsche Bank's) breach of duty of care".

"It is my finding that the derivative agreement does not affect (Deutsche Bank's) liability for any assumption of a duty of care which had arisen previously," Justice Pillai wrote.

The High Court awarded Dr Chang US$49 million in damages plus simple interest starting from Nov 21, 2008 until the date of full payment by the bank.

Furthermore, in light of the bank's liability for damages for breach of duty of care to Dr Chang, Justice Pillai also ruled that he need not pay US$1.8 million sought by the bank in a lawsuit against him. That amount represents the shortfall in his bank account after he suffered losses from so-called Discounted Share Purchase Programmes (DSPPs), or high-risk derivative investments known as accumulators.

Deutsche Bank said in a statement yesterday that it will appeal the court's decision and believes it "has strong grounds to do so".

Dr Chang, who lost nearly half of a US$118 million windfall from his lifetime's work on the asthma drug Xolair, accused the bank of breaching its duty of care to him when it failed to warn him of substantial risks involved in high-risk derivative products, such as DSPPs, and risks involved in margin financing in relation to these products.

Specifically, Mr Wan failed to tell Dr Chang "the potential loss or liability" that he might incur under a DSPP if the underlying share price fell below "strike price" over the life of the contract was "unlimited", or that "as a counterparty to a DSPP transaction, Deutsche Bank would stand to profit at (his) expense".

Justice Pillai also found Mr Wan to be an "evasive and unreliable witness" who had "materially fabricated" the bank's Client Acceptance and Profile Report (CAPR) on Aug 3, 2007 to obtain its internal approval to open an account for Dr Chang.

He found that Dr Chang was "not asked nor was he advised of the multiplication risks of margin financing, even though both (Mr Wan) and Dr Chang knew that he had recently received US$118 million and that he was financially inexperienced".

"The margin facility was triggered automatically without his concurrent knowledge when he made his first purchase of a Citigroup DSPP on 19 November 2007. The evidence reveals that this was made prior to his signing and prior to (Deutsche Bank's) execution and despatch of the derivative agreement and necessarily prior to the bank sending him the margin trading facility letter which informed him of its availability," Justice Pillai wrote.

At one point, Dr Chang's potential exposure was as high as US$99 million because he first entered into 32 DSPP contracts between Nov 19 and Dec 12, 2007, just as major US banks including Citigroup and Washington Mutual were getting roiled by the turmoil in the mortgage and credit markets.

"The sudden recorded changes in Dr Chang's risk profile between the CAPR 3 August 2007 and margin trading checklist dated 19 November 2007 appears not to have been noticed or, if noticed, did not result in any enquiry," Justice Pillai noted.

"As Dr Chang proceeded to purchase 32 international bank share DSPPs in quick succession within a short period of about three weeks, (Mr Wan) and (Deutsche) failed to alert him to his accumulating, concentrated and multiplying risks. They did not inform him of his total accumulating exposure and they failed to provide him with any risk management advice," he wrote.

Ultimately, 16 of the 34 DSPPs were unwound in March, July and October 2008 at substantial losses and by November 2008, his entire US$49 million investment was wiped out by the unwinding, and the continued purchase of shares through DSPP contracts that were not knocked out.

Dr Chang was represented by K Muralidharan Pillai and Sim Wei Na of Rajah & Tann LLP, while Deutsche Bank and Mr Wan were represented by Senior Counsel Ang Cheng Hock and Tan Xeauwei of Allen & Gledhill LLP.

'Financially inexperienced': Justice Pillai also ruled that Dr Chang (above) need not pay US$1.8 million sought by the bank in a lawsuit against him.

Bank of China misselling of Morgan Stanley note

高院入稟狀編號:HCA2295 原告:Chan Ip Kiu Connie 被告:中國銀行(香港) 要點:賠償損失

2012年12月7日星期五

法官對銀行界發出一個錯誤訊息,以為冒簽只是輕微罪行,以後監管銀行,形同虛設。

致香港特區律政司司長 袁國強先生: 12月3日一則法庭新聞《銀行經理涉偽造文件被判社會服務令》,本會深感憤慨不平。2009年該被告用偽造客戶簽名的「個人投資風險承受分析」,申請購買「結構性投資產品」,所涉罪行非常嚴重,況且事發在2008年「雷曼事件」之後,有45000名雷曼苦主當時仍在水深火熱中,但法官竟只輕判被告120小時社會服務令,如斯完全沒有警戒性的判刑,不但漠視社會公義,更對銀行界發出一個錯誤訊息,以為冒簽只是輕微罪行,以後監管銀行,形同虛設。 「雷曼事件」是涉及數以百億元的銀行違規銷售結構性金融產品的重大社會事件,但竟然沒有一間銀行被刑事檢控,而前律政司只檢控三宗銀行前線職員,兩宗被判無罪,第三宗不提出檢控,再加上最近12月3日一宗銀行經理偽造文件罪成而被輕判的案例,對香港成為國際金融中心地位及法治精神,有嚴重負面影響,對45000名雷曼苦主更是在他們的傷口灑鹽!至今還有不少當時被銀行欺騙的無辜苦主,經常在中環銀行區示威抗議,追討賠償! 我們懇請閣下對以上判刑提出覆核,以正視聽。 雷曼苦主大聯盟主席 陳浩偉 2012年12月6日 副本抄送: 香港金融管理局行政總裁陳德霖先生 證監會行政總裁歐達禮先生 香港特別行政區行政首長梁振英先生