A wake-up call for banks


Tweet #Rightways


 KUALA LUMPUR: The police remain firm in their stance that people should ignore calls from unknown numbers.

Instead, they say, legitimate businesses have to find new ways to handle over-the-phone marketing and verification methods.

The need for new ways is due to scammers also using the same methods to make victims part with information about themselves, according to Federal Commercial Crime Investigation Department director Comm Datuk Seri Ramli Mohamed Yoosuf.

Comm Ramli acknowledged that both the banking and telemarketing industries have been facing problems with customers refusing to reveal information about themselves for verification purposes.

“I have been asked what would happen to industries that rely on telemarketing services to promote their services if the police continue to advise all to not answer calls from unknown numbers. I urge these industries to change their promotion tactics and not try to change consumer behaviour.“Among the more popular tactics in online scams are the use of phone calls to contact victims directly. This has created a fear among people that unknown calls are from scammers.“Our priority must be the protection of consumers,” he said.

In the eyes of the police, he said, the best way to avoid being scammed is to simply ignore unknown calls, as this completely removes the risk of being cheated over the phone.

He added that he had also personally received legitimate calls but would not give the required information as he preferred to err on the side of safety.

“Just last week, I received five calls from two banking institutions for over-the-phone verification. When I asked about the purpose of the call, I was told I would need to verify my identity first.

“So it’s a never-ending issue; I have to verify myself to them and the banks will need to verify themselves to me.

“In the end, no one verifies and both end the call,” he said, leading to laughter from reporters.

He also noted that business is still being conducted using mobile numbers, leading to even more suspicion.

Source link 

Related:

Putting off charge for DuitNow QR payments, call for waiver for DuitNow QR payments permanent


Tweet #Rightways

 

New rules: PayNet said debit and credit card payments were subjected to MDR, while there is currently a MDR waiver for QR payments. — SHAARI CHEMAT/The Star© Provided by The Star Online

PETALING JAYA: Several financial institutions, including Public Bank and CIMB, have announced a waiver of the merchant discount rate (MDR) for vendors accepting payments via the DuitNow QR code platform.

CIMB has decided to postpone the MDR until the end of the year, while Public Bank will maintain the waiver until further notice. 

 
Public Bank has communicated on its website that it would waive the following fees for QR payment acceptance, effective from Oct 1 until further notice.

It said merchants would enjoy fee waivers for categories such as payment acceptance via Current and Savings Accounts, ewallets, and Maintenance Fee and API Integration Fee under the bank’s Enterprise Plan.

Credit card transactions under the Enterprise Plan will incur a charge of 0.25%.

The DuitNow QR service enables money transfers between banks and non-bank entities by scanning QR codes.

Related video: DuitNow QR charges won’t burden low income groups, says PM  

It was established by Payments Network Malaysia Sdn Bhd (PayNet) under Bank Negara’s Interoperable Credit Transfer Framework.

Earlier yesterday, Paynet confirmed that vendors would be charged a transaction fee for payments received via the DuitNow QR code platform starting Nov 1.

It said there were charges for two different epayment types – the MDR and the 50sen fee for transactions exceeding RM5,000 for peer-to-peer fund transfers between personal QR codes, not payments to merchants.

ALSO READ: Charge on DuitNow QR payments will burden SME sector, says group

Merchants, it said, would receive the payment made by their customers after deducting the MDR, which is charged based on a percentage of the transaction value.

PayNet said debit and credit card payments were subjected to MDR, while there is currently a MDR waiver for QR payments.

Starting Nov 1, the MDR waiver for DuitNow QR payments would be lifted, it said in a statement, adding that the MDR was neither a new fee nor an additional charge.

“As an incentive to promote usage during the introduction of QR payments in 2019, the MDR was waived. This was extended due to the Covid-19 pandemic.”

 
 

 Source link

 

Banks to delay fund transfers in latest move to fight fraud


Tweet #Rightways

PUTTING THE HEAT ON SCAMMERS

 PETALING JAYA: In its latest move to fight scammers, the banking industry has introduced several safety measures including delaying the movement of “abnormal” funds by 12 hours.

Public Bank introduced the half-day cooling-off transfer period, which would allow people who have been scammed to stop their funds from being moved out. The new policy came into effect from yesterday.

In a statement to customers, it said it was introducing the transaction cooling-off period for abnormal transfers.

A cooling-off period is a precautionary measure that allows banks to review and assess transactions that display “characteristics of abnormal behaviour.”

This additional step was proposed by Bank Negara Malaysia and is designed to minimise the risk of unauthorised transactions and potential fraudulent activities, ensuring the safety of customers’ funds.

“As an added security feature to protect your financial interests, the bank will be introducing a transaction cooling-off period for abnormal transfers with effect from June 22, 2023,” Public Bank said in its statement.

It explained that when the bank detects a transaction deemed to be abnormal, the transaction will be put on hold.

“The bank will notify you of the status of your transaction via SMS, email and push notification.

“Alternatively, you may track your transactions by logging into PBe, clicking ‘Account’ and selecting ‘View Pending Verification’. Any transaction that is undergoing the transaction cooling-off period will be listed here.”

On June 11, in an email reply to The Star, Bank Negara said it would be up to banks to implement cooling-off periods of between 12 and 48 hours.

Meanwhile, Bank Islam Malaysia Bhd has also executed a cooling-off period – a 12-hour waiting interval for any new application or request made on its IB, GO and GO Biz banking apps this week.

It also introduced a new “kill switch” feature allowing customers to protect their funds from online scams and temporarily deactivate access to several Bank Islam Internet banking services.

Last year, Bank Negara announced several measures for banks to implement, including migrating from SMS OTP to more secure forms of authentication, implementing a cooling-off period for first-time enrolment of online banking services and limiting the number of registered devices for authenticating transactions.

It also wanted banks to establish dedicated scam hotlines for victims and to have a “kill switch” for victims to freeze their accounts temporarily to stop the loss of funds.

“In addition, public awareness remains important in preventing online banking fraud,” said Bank Negara.

On May 2, in The Star’s front-page report titled “Fighting chance to beat scammers”, cybersecurity law expert and lawyer Derek John Fernandez mooted the idea of adopting a 48-hour “cooling period” when funds above a certain threshold are transferred to new bank accounts.

This, he said, would give scam victims time to pull their money back from the brink.

Fernandez said that was one way to stop financial scams as victims usually realise they have been scammed after 24 hours.

He had proposed the 48-hour cooling-off period to the government, including Bank Negara and the Malaysia Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).

“During the cooling-off period, if the new bank account seems suspicious or if the bank receives complaints, the accounts can be tracked down by MCMC and action taken.

“If consumers suspect they have been scammed, they can cancel immediately. MCMC can then publish these account numbers to its website to alert others,” Fernandez said in his proposal.

On May 12, MCMC chairman Tan Sri Mohamad Salim Fateh Din said that RM1.2bil was lost to scammers between 2021 and April 2023. 

Source link

Dangerous deepfakes 

CLICK TO ENLARGECLICK TO ENLARGE

 PPETALING JAYA: Deepfake technology, which uses artificial intelligence to manipulate videos, has become a tool for scammers.

The celebrity promoting a product may not really be that person. Instead, it could be scammers posing as the celebrity.

Celebrity impostor scams are fake posts using photographs and artificial intelligence (AI) videos of famous people on social media accounts to lure people into making financial investments or buy products.

ALSO READ : Enough warnings given

These days, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram are filled with such fake celebrity accounts set up to deceive devoted fans.

Scammers con the real star’s followers into making donations to charity, buying exclusive tickets or entering into investment deals which will definitely be profitable or a fee to win big prizes.

Cyberlaw expert Derek Fernandez said the scammers now were very clever, pointing out a recent case in China where the latest technology – the new AI face-changing app – was used to defraud the head of a company of 4.3 million yuan (RM2.8mil) in just 10 minutes.

Local scammers are not far behind, he said, as local celebrities and famous people like politicians seem to be popping up on social media accounts urging one to invest or buy currencies.

“Celebrity impostor scammers can be charged under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1988 (Act 588),” said Fernandez.

The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) could even haul up internet service providers (ISPs) and their directors for misuse of their network by scammers.

The MCMC, in a statement, said it was urging all over-the-top (OTT) platforms, like YouTube and Netflix, to cooperate in this regard.

“MCMC will be reminding internet service providers (ISPs) regarding their legal obligations under Section 263 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (Act 588).

“ISPs are required to use their best endeavour to prevent their network facilities from being used for any illegal activities in Malaysia.

“This includes improving their detection, identification and elimination of scam sites and contents, and cooperating with MCMC in combating such illegal activities.

“MCMC takes a firm stance against any form of scamming and fraud,” it said.

Fernandez said that Section 233 criminalises online content that is obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person.

If convicted, an offender could be fined not more than RM50,000 or imprisonment for up to one year or both.

He also said that, depending on the case details, celebrity impostor scammers can be charged under the Penal Code. 

Source link

 

Financial literacy and bankruptcy


Tweet #Rightways

 

Stretching your ringgit: The importance of knowledge in this space cannot be more timely, especially when Malaysians are doing their level best to stretch their ringgit in order to cope with the increasing cost of living from inflationary pressures, which are spiralling out of control.

 

It is not enough to be good at your job. Managing your money well is as important as having good hygiene.

Lack of financial discipline reasons for bankruptcy

Using a credit card or apps wisely to accumulate points for future spending, waiting for bargains such as free shipping options or vouchers on ecommerce platforms on special days of the months to purchase necessities are just a few examples of being financially aware. 

FINANCIAL literacy is an important agenda for a country’s economic well-being.

Most governments around the world would like for their citizens to be financially literate, be it entrepreneurs, working professionals, white collar or blue collar workers.

It is not enough to be good at your job. Managing your money well is as important as having good hygiene.

Recently, the Malaysia Department of Insolvency (MDI) reported that 287,411 people in the country have been declared bankrupt as of March 2022.

Between 2018 and May 2022, there was an increase of 46,132 new bankruptcy cases.

Of this number, 59% (amounting to 27,365) of the bankrupt were aged below 44.

This led to the Prime Minister highlighting his concern on youth bankruptcy and requesting for the relevant authorities to look into this matter including potentially revamping the laws on insolvency.

It is important to note that due to the pandemic, our government has in fact raised the threshold of bankruptcy from RM50,000 to RM100,000 in 2020.

Many legal actions against defaulters of loans were also postponed due to the effects of the pandemic.

Personal loan main reason for default

Diving into the MDI’S statistics, I realised that the main reason for bankruptcy was due to default of personal loans with an overwhelming percentage at 42%, followed by hire-purchase loans (15%) and business loans (13.5%).

Personal loans have often been touted to charge exorbitant interest rates, especially credit card schemes.

A simple illustration: when month end comes, there are often three options to settle your credit card bill, namely statement balance, outstanding sum or minimum sum.

The right thing to do would be to settle the statement balance. Settling the outstanding sum in full means that the credit card user is paying down the credit card debts which isn’t yet due, which defy the purpose of utilising credit card in the first place.

Paying only the minimum sum, which many people often do, would lead to one incurring high interest on the outstanding credit card debt.

This would snowball to levels which are highly exorbitant.

The statistics above is telling because it shows that excess consumption pattern is a key reason for bankruptcy.

In terms of youth bankruptcy, it makes sense especially with social media propagating binge spending, splurging on luxury goods and the shallow mindset of keeping up with the Joneses.

Living beyond one’s means owing to social pressure simply isn’t going to go out of fashion, more so in today’s digital age.

Proliferation of get-rich-quick schemes and scams

There is no doubt the lack of financial discipline and bad spending habits are reasons which contribute to this social issue.

However, I believe another major contributing factor is the increasing number of scams and get-rich-quick schemes. These schemes often tap on the most vulnerable segment of the society, namely those who are greedy, desperate or naive.

Greed is one of human nature’s biggest weaknesses. Despite the evolution of mankind, this primal instinct has continued to flow through the DNA of mankind. I do not doubt the importance of greed as a driver for progress, but too much and it becomes fatal.

Desperation, especially in the case of hardcore poverty or extreme emergency without anyone to rely on, there is hardly any choice to seek help.

We have seen this episode played out, especially in the times of economic recession, high unemployment not unlike the period of pandemic we have all been through recently.

Of the three, the most addressable would be the one who is naive, in short, one who lacks the necessary knowledge.

Stretching your ringgit

The importance of knowledge in this space cannot be more timely, especially when Malaysians are doing their level best to stretch their ringgit in order to cope with the increasing cost of living from inflationary pressures, which are spiralling out of control.

I would like to put it on record: Accumulating financial knowledge does not mean becoming an investment prodigy. It can be as simple as understanding the various options for people to stretch their money.

One of the most common savings hacks would be to channel your monthly salary to a “flexi” or “semi-flexi” home loan account. This simple gesture every month automatically lowers the interest on the loan to be incurred.

Your unused funds will be utilised to further reduce the principal and interest while you have the option to withdraw the excess amount if you require to use the funds.

Using a credit card or apps wisely to accumulate points for future spending, waiting for bargains such as free shipping options or vouchers on ecommerce platforms on special days of the months to purchase necessities are just a few examples of being financially aware.

Of course, the best thing to do is to be prudent in spending, in essence practicing delayed gratification at all times.

The best investment is knowledge

It is a good sign that there is an increasing number of licensed financial professionals such as Chartered Financial Analysts and Certified Financial Planners out there today.

We also do see many more collaborative efforts between industry professionals working hand in hand with regulators in adopting social media to reach out to the masses.

With the advent of social media, it is also crucial to sift out genuine financial literacy advocates. After all, there are many free resources online today.

It is not to say the smartest people from the top of their professions cannot be hoodwinked. We have seen how 34-year-old Ng Yu Zhi of Envy Asset Management and Envy Global Trading swindled prominent people like the general counsel for Temasek Holdings Pek Siok Lan, criminal lawyer Sunil Sudheesan, ex-president of the Law Society Thio Shen Yi, chairman of Vickers Capital Group Finian Tan and CEO of Chuan Hup Holdings Terence Peh, among others.

This purported nickel trading scheme amounting to S$1bil (Rm3.2bil) was the largest fraud or Ponzi scheme in Singapore’s history. The best part, red flags were obvious where both of the perpetrator’s entities above were not licensed by Monetary Authority Singapore and he was promising 15% returns in three months to his clients.

Ultimately, it comes down to the individual and a good sense of financial awareness when managing one’s own hard-earned money.

The best investment is in yourself. Whether it is learning a new skill or advancing your education, self enrichment gives the best return on investment.

As Benjamin Franklin once said, “An investment in knowledge pays the best interest”. He can’t be wrong considering his face is literally on the US dollar bill even till today.
– StarBiz,

Ng Zhu Hann, the CEO of Tradeview Capital. He is also a lawyer and the author of “Once Upon A Time In Bursa”. The views expressed here are the writer’s own.

 

Switching banks for better deals 

 

 

Related posts:

 

Financial literacy and technology are key factors, will attract young investors

 

Promoting women entrepreneurs; mind your finances 

 

Be wary of these four types of financial predators

 



      CLICK TO ENLARGE   PETALING JAYA: The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of Bank Negara has increased the overnight policy rate (OPR) by…

 



  Consumers can download them to look for low prices and comparisons Cooking oil prices are up as of today, so are those of chicken and …
 


  Janet Chia, 48, watering the lettuce plants at her house compound in Seri Kembangan, Selangor. Chia and her husband have planted several v…
 


CLICK TO ENLARGE DEPRESSED wages, and a rising cost of living – these are the biggest tribulations facing the man on the street these days….
 

 

 

BANK NEGARA RAISES OPR TO 2,5% , Still a good hedge against inflation


Tweet #Rightways

 

 

 

 CLICK TO ENLARGE

 

 

PETALING JAYA: The Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of Bank Negara has increased the overnight policy rate (OPR) by 25 basis points to 2.25% amid positive growth prospects for the local economy.

“For the Malaysian economy, economic activity continued to strengthen in recent months.

“Exports and retail spending indicators affirm the positive growth momentum, supported by the transition to endemicity, “ the central bank said in a statement yesterday.

The ceiling and floor rates of the corridor of the OPR are correspondingly increased to 2.5% and 2%, respectively.

The OPR, which is a benchmark rate that allows banks to determine their lending and deposit rates, had been reduced by a cumulative 125 basis points during the course of the Covid-19 pandemic, bringing it to a historic low of 1.75%.

Yesterday’s increase was a second consecutive one after a 25-basis-point hike in May, which was also the first time the OPR was raised since the onset of the pandemic.

OCBC Bank economist Wellian Wiranto said the fact that the central bank had not gone more “ballistic” with a 50-basis-point hike yesterday speaks of a “heavy preference for a gingerly approach in tightening.”

 

OCBC Bank economist Wellian Wiranto said the fact that the central bank had not gone more “ballistic” with a 50-basis-point hike yesterday speaks of a “heavy preference for a gingerly approach in tightening.”

“That is a prudent thing, given how global recession fears are on the rise,” he said.

Going forward, he said he expects at least one more 25-basis-point hike this year that will be seen as a further normalisation of policy rate rather than outright tightening.

“It might then pause in the last meeting of the year in November to assess the balance between inflation and recession risks before undertaking any action thereafter,“ he added.

In its statement, the central bank said the extent of upward pressures on inflation will remain partly contained by existing price controls, fuel subsidies and the continued spare capacity in the economy.

“The inflation outlook continues to be subject to global commodity price developments, arising mainly from the ongoing military conflict in Ukraine and prolonged supply- related disruptions, as well as domestic policy measures,“ it said.

Year-to-date, headline inflation averaged 2.4%.

In its statement, the central bank said the extent of upward pressures on inflation will remain partly contained by existing price controls, fuel subsidies and the continued spare capacity in the economy. 
.In its statement, the central bank said the extent of upward pressures on inflation will remain partly contained by existing price controls, fuel subsidies and the continued spare capacity in the economy.

 

“While it is projected to remain within the 2.2%-3.2% forecast range for the year, headline inflation may be higher in some months due mainly to the base effect from electricity prices.

“Underlying inflation, as measured by core inflation, is expected to average between 2% and 3% in 2022, as demand continues to improve amid the high-cost environment,” it said.

Bank Negara said that in recent months, the unemployment rate had declined further, with higher labour participation and improving income prospects.

“Looking ahead, while external demand is expected to moderate, weighed by headwinds to global growth, economic growth will be supported by firm domestic demand.

“Additionally, the reopening of international borders since April 1 would facilitate the recovery in tourism-related sectors.”

Nevertheless, the central bank warned of downside risks to growth that continue to stem from a weaker-than-expected global expansion, further escalation of geopolitical conflicts and worsening supply chain disruptions.

“Even as it continues to project a strengthening economic recovery, things are likely to turn less rosy from here,” OCBC’s Wiranto said.

Bank Negara said that at the current OPR level, the stance of monetary policy remained accommodative and supportive of economic growth.

“The MPC will continue to assess evolving conditions and their implications on the overall outlook to domestic inflation and growth.

Rakuten Trade head of equity sales Vincent Lau told StarBiz yesterday’s hike was a reflection of confidence in the continued growth of the Malaysia economy. 
Rakuten Trade head of equity sales Vincent Lau told StarBiz yesterday’s hike was a reflection of confidence in the continued growth of the Malaysia economy.

 

“Any adjustments to the monetary policy settings, going forward, would be done in a measured and gradual manner, ensuring that monetary policy remains accommodative to support a sustainable economic growth in an environment of price stability.”

Meanwhile, Rakuten Trade head of equity sales Vincent Lau told StarBiz yesterday’s hike was a reflection of confidence in the continued growth of the Malaysian economy.

“With the increase in our benchmark rate, this may also stem the outflow of foreign money, which will technically see higher returns alongside the higher rate,” he said.

That said, the stock market fell over 20 points at the close yesterday after the hike was announced.

“It was probably a knee-jerk reaction as the hike had more or less been priced in already,” Lau said.

Bursa Malaysia’s fall was also in line with most regional markets as the fear of a global recession continued to rear its ugly head.

Nevertheless, at the close of the market yesterday, lenders like Malayan Banking Bhd and CIMB Group Holdings Bhdfinished higher as investors bought the stocks, banking on a higher OPR that could likely boost the lenders’ earnings. 

 Source link

 

 

Still a good hedge against inflation 

 

 

 https://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2022/07/07/still-a-good-hedge-against-inflation

 

 

Higher rates may hurt real estate sector – The Star

 

 

Insight – The need to raise interest rates explained | The Star

 

 

 

 

 

Related:

 

 

Banks the big winners | The Star

 

 

 

 

Public Bank to raise base rates by 25 pct effective from Friday

 

 

Public Bank, Public Islamic Bank to increase its base rate by

 

 

 

Public Bank is16.1pct more profitable at RM5.66bil in 2021

 

 

 

 

CIMB to raise base rate by 0.25% following OPR revision

 

 

 

 

 

The Top 5 Ways to Hedge Against Inflation – Investopedia

 

 

Five reasons why you should buy a house – StarProperty

 

 Wooden table between armchair and couch in cozy living room interior with pouf and ficus

 

 

 

 

 

 

Goldman Sachs must follow up on its apology with US$7.5bil compensation in 1MDB scandal


 

Goldman Sachs Group Inc should follow up on its apology to Malaysia with a payment of US$7.5bil (RM30.86bil), says Lim Guan Eng.

The Finance Minister said a mere apology from the investment bank over the scandal-ridden 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) is not enough, unless they pay reparations and compensation.

Lim said Goldman Sachs should understand the agony and trauma suffered by Malaysians as a result of the scandal.

“An apology is not enough.

“An apology with US$7.5bil is what matters.

“At least he (Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon) accepted that they have to bear and shoulder some responsibility but that is insufficient.

“They have made provisions of around US$561mil (RM2.3bil) but that is not adequate.

“We are seeking US$7.5bil,” he told a press conference here yesterday after announcing the names of the joint lead arrangers for the Samurai bond.

On Thursday, Solomon apologised to Malaysians for former banker Tim Leissner’s role in 1MDB.

Solomon also said it was very clear that Malaysians were defrau­ded by many individuals, including the highest members of the previous administration.

Asked if Malaysia would drop charges against Goldman Sachs with the US$7.5bil payment, Lim quipped: “US$7.5bil … then we can discuss lah”.

Lim added that it was very clear who the top government official Solomon was referring to as there could only be one person.

“You worked hand in hand, and there has to be accountability. It also involved a breach in fiduciary duty, and I think the banking industry has this obligation to make good the losses that we suffered.

“I think this is at least an admission.

“If not for the change of government, do you think Goldman will apologise? We’re dealing with the largest investment bank in the world,” he said.

Lim added that he found it distressing that Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak still refused to admit there was something wrong with 1MDB and the entire exercise.

He also lambasted the former premier for passing the buck to Goldman Sachs, and for being in a state of denial for refusing to admit that Malaysians suffered huge losses due to the scandal.

By Royce Tan The Star

Goldman Sachs CEO apologises for ex-banker’s role in 1MDB scandal

NEW YORK: Goldman Sachs Group Inc chief executive officer David Solomon (pic) has apologised to the Malaysian people for former ban­ker Tim Leissner’s role in 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal, but said the bank had conducted due diligence before every transaction.

Goldman is being investigated by Malaysian authorities and the US Department of Justice (DOJ) for its role as underwriter and arranger of three bond sales that raised US$6.5bil (RM26.7bil) for the sovereign wealth fund.

US prosecutors last year charged two former Goldman bankers for the theft of billions of dollars from 1MDB. Leissner, a former partner for Goldman Sachs in Asia, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to launder money and violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

“It’s very clear that the people of Malaysia were defrauded by many individuals, including the highest members of the prior government,” Solomon said on conference call discussing the bank’s fourth-quarter results in a report by Reuters.

Solomon said Leissner denied the involvement of any of Goldman’s intermediaries in transactions with 1MDB.

An attorney representing Leissner did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Roger Ng, the other charged former Goldman banker, was arrested in Malaysia at the request of US authorities and is expected to be extradited, according to John Marzulli, a spokesman for the prosecution.

The DOJ has said that US$4.5bil (RM18.5bil) was allegedly misappropriated by high-level officials of the fund and their associates between 2009 and 2014.

As part of Goldman’s due diligence efforts, Solomon said the bank sought and received written assurances from 1MDB and International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC) that no third parties were involved in the first two bond sales.

Abu Dhabi’s IPIC had co-guaranteed the 1MDB bonds when they were issued in 2012.

In the final offering, the Malaysian government itself, along with 1MDB, represented that no intermediaries were involved, he said.

“All these representations to Goldman Sachs have proven to be false,” Solomon said.

Goldman Sachs did not disclose any other information about its involvement with 1MDB, but said the impact on its client franchise had been de minimis. Shares of the bank, which reported strong fourth-quarter results earlier in the day, have fallen over 25% in the last three months, after headlines about its involvement with the sovereign wealth fund emerged.

The Malaysian government said in December it was seeking up to US$7.5bil (RM30.8bil) in reparations from Goldman over its dealings with 1MDB. – Reuters

In an immediate reaction yesterday, former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said Goldman Sachs had to take responsibility because they were appointed and paid by 1MDB to take care of Malaysian’s interests.

“We put up a system, the system was there to take care of our interests, you see.

“So if they fail, then they have to take responsibility, because they were appointed and paid by 1MDB to take care of our interests,” Najib said.- The Star

Related:

 Goldman Sachs  CEO David Solomon apologises for ex-banker’s role in 1MDB scandal

Swiber to wind up, biggest Singapore casulty of oil slump; banks hit with crushing debts


Swiber Holdings

SINGAPORE – Singapore oil field services firm Swiber Holdings Ltd filed an application to wind up the company and said a Singapore court had appointed provisional liquidators, making it the biggest local name to fall victim to the slump in oil prices.

In a statement to the Singapore Exchange, Swiber said the hearing to wind-up the company has been set for August 19. Swiber, which operates a fleet of 51 vessels, did give any specific reason for the move but said it was facing letters of demand for US$25.9 million (S$34.9 million) and had warned earlier this month of delays in raising US$200 million in preference shares.

Local oilfield services companies have been burdened by weak oil prices, which have strained their liquidity, with charter rates tumbling and clients either delaying or cancelling projects. “If highly leveraged offshore and marine companies are unable to raise capital from equity markets, then they will be left with very little other options other than to file for liquidation or for judicial management,” said Joel Ng, an analyst at KGI Fraser Securities.

Over the next year-and-a-half, bonds totalling nearly S$1.2 billion from energy and offshore marine issuers in Singapore will mature, with S$615 million due over the next five months, according to IFR, a Thomson Reuters publication.

Another firm, Technics Oil & Gas Ltd, and its unit were placed under judicial management this month.

Investors had turned more positive on Swiber after it redeemed two bonds in June and July totalling S$205 million.

Swiber said this month a preference share sale agreement for US$200 million had been delayed and that it was seeking legal advice. But a flood of letters of demand, including statutory demands, had flowed in since Monday, claiming a total US$25.9 million, as of July 26, adding more pressure on the company.

Swiber said some of its executive directors, including its chief financial officer, had resigned.

From just 10 vessels in 2006, Swiber has expanded to own and operate a fleet comprising 38 offshore vessels and 13 construction vessels. It has more than 2,700 employees across Southeast Asia and other countries, according to its website.

Swiber’s longest dated bond due 2018 started falling sharply in mid-March. The provisional liquidators of the company, which has a market value of S$50 million, have asked for trading in Swiber’s shares to be suspended.

The High Court of Singapore appointed KordaMentha Pte Ltd’s Cameron Lindsay Duncan and Muk Siew Peng as the joint and several provisional liquidators of the company.

Sources: Reuters

Related:

Swiber to wind up, biggest Singapore casualty of oil slump | Reuters

 

Private bank clients may lose big amid Singapore’s oil and gas credit woes

 

Slump in oil prices affects S’pore lenders

 

Feeling the heat: OCBC’s total oil and gas exposure was US9.32bil, nearly half of which to the offshore oil services segment. – Reuters

 

Banks hit by poor demand for loans from oil and gas sector

SINGAPORE: Two of Singapore’s top banks flagged mounting concerns about loans to the oil and gas sector, on the same day that a prominent local oilfield services firm announced it was winding up, under the weight of crushing debt.

The dour outlook from Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp and United Overseas Bank, Singapore’s second- and third-largest lenders by assets, respectively, came as Swiber Holdings said it had filed for liquidation, making it the biggest local name to fall victim to the slump in oil prices.

OCBC and UOB, along with Singapore’s No.1 lender DBS Group Holdings, have long maintained prudent lending standards and adequate capital levels to become some of the safest banks in the world.

But oil’s 60% slump over the past two years is beginning to impact them, as the lenders’ main activity is centred on South-East Asia, a region for which oil and gas is a key industry. Banks are being hit by both poor demand for loans from the sector and by more loans turning sour.

“The loan demand is very weak,” OCBC CEO Samuel Tsien told a quarterly earnings briefing, adding that the oil and gas services sector continues to be under pressure.

“Our distressed indicators for this portfolio continue to deepen, but have not broadened,” Tsien said.

Over the next year-and-a-half, bonds totalling nearly S$1.2bil (US$881mil) from energy and offshore marine issuers in Singapore will mature, with S$615mil due just over the next five months, according to IFR, a Thomson Reuters publication.

OCBC’s total oil and gas exposure was S$12.6bil (US$9.32bil), nearly half of which to the offshore oil services segment.

UOB expected that over the next one to two years the key concern for the bank would be companies in the oil and gas sector, its CEO Wee Ee Cheong told a briefing,

OCBC posted a 15% drop in quarterly profit, hit by lower insurance income, though UOB surprised with a 5.1% jump in earnings on higher trading income.

However, net interest income was weak at both banks, which also saw bad-debt provisions climb.

OCBC said its customer loans contracted 2% from a year ago due to lower trade loans and reduced offshore borrowings of Chinese companies due to more favourable onshore borrowing rates in China.

Shares of UOB were down 1.6% in late afternoon trade, while OCBC fell 0.6 percent. Shares of DBS, which will report results on Aug 8, were down 2.6%. – Reuters

Related posts:

Rightways: Oil Prices: What’s Behind the Drop? Simple Economics

Apr 6, 2016 Some think it will be years before oil returns to $90 or $100 a barrel, a price that was pretty much the norm over the last decade. Credit Michael …
Rightways: Job cuts: rightsizing the oil and gas industry
Sep 30, 2015 Many oil majors have announced job cuts to manage costs that had spiralled upwards during the boom days in the industry. Oil majors now …
Nov 23, 2014 Malaysia’s economy is very much dependent on the oil and gas sector. … One notable impact of falling crude oil prices is on the government’s … rightways-tan1.blogspot.com


Rightways: Oil & Gas lead to wealth crunch, Malaysian Ringgit …Dec 2, 2014 PETALING JAYA: With the oil and gas (O&G) sector being the hardest hit in thecurrent market rout,  tycoons who own significant stakes in these …rightways-tan1.blogspot.com

Rightways: Oil enters a new era of low prices: Opec vs US shale Nov 29, 2014 Beginning July this year, the oil and gas dynamics changed with the United States becoming a large producer, thanks to the shale oil and gas.right-waystan.blogspot.com
Rightways: Will shale oil survive the price fall?

Jan 14, 2015 This could be the beginning of a shakeout of shale oil enterprises. … PETALING JAYA: With the oil and gas (O&G) sector being the hardest hit …right-waystan.blogspot.com
Rightways: Modern finance and money being managed like a Ponzi

Mar 5, 2016 Rail cars and oil tankers sit on railway tracks as water vapour and …… in far better shape than many smaller independent oil and gas producers.

Fintech – disruptive technology


https://players.brightcove.net/4405352761001/default_default/index.html?videoId=4903561099001

http://www.thestar.com.my/business/business-news/2016/05/21/fintech-disruptive-technology/

Businesses are embracing it by coming up with their innovations and startups

A BUZZWORD growing in popularity in the financial world today is “fintech”, short for financial technology, which in a nutshell refers to the use of technology to deliver faster and cheaper financial services.

Going by some predications, fintech could take a big chunk of business away from traditional banks as it is being run by smaller more nimble start-ups. But the debate is still out there as to how much that chunk will be. In Malaysia in particular, fintech’s presence is still nascent and small. Fintech transactions totalled a mere US$6.37mil this year compared with a global figure of US$769.3bil, according to Statista, an online statistics provider.

It however predicts that fintech transaction values to grow to US$14.4bil by 2020. A significant number of fintech companies, especially those in the digital payments space, actually work alongside local banks.

Still, fintech is not to be taken lightly. Top bankers themselves are speaking of its imminent threat to their business. Former Barclays CEO Anthony Jenkins referred to it as banking’s “Uber moment” to describe technological advances that could see bank branches close down and people laid off.

Last April, Jamie Dimon the CEO of the US’ largest bank JP Morgan in his letter to shareholders warned that “Silicon Valley is coming.” “There are hundreds of start-ups with a lot of brains and money working on various alternatives to traditional banking,” Dimon wrote.

On the home front, just last month prominent banker Datuk Seri Nazir Razak echoed such views. Speaking at the Star Media Group’s PowerTalk: Business Series held at Menara Star, Nazir opined that fintech companies are disrupting banking.

“Bankers must respond to this Uber moment. People actually dislike banks today, since the global financial crisis. Recent data suggests that in the US, the cost of banking intermediation has not changed for 100 years in real terms. This simply means banks have not gotten more efficient over the years, so its right that banks get attacked by ‘Silicon Valley’, which has identified banking as an industry that is very ‘ripe’ or juicy to disrupt.”

Even the central bank is echoing these views.

In his maiden keynote address at an Islamic finance conference in Kuala Lumpur last week, Malaysia’s newly-appointed Bank Negara governor Datuk Muhammad Ibrahim gave a grim reminder to banks of the threats posed by fintech. In particular, Muhammad quoted from a report by McKinsey that 10% to 40% of banking revenue is possibly at risk by 2025 due to innovations outside banking institutions that are able to offer a significant pricing advantage and that technologically-driven applications had spread to nearly every segment of the financial sector, with the number of fintech start-ups having doubled in the last year. “Fintech is challenging the status quo of the financial industry,” he said.

To be fair, Malaysian banks are quick to point out that while fintech does represent a disruption to business, they are embracing the movement, by coming up with their own fintech innovations or by working with fintech startups.

So what is fintech?

In a nutshell, fintech is an economy of companies using technology to improve efficiencies and effectiveness in the financial services industry. To illustrate the offerings of fintech companies, consider the business model of homegrown start-up MoneyMatch, which is modelled after UK-based TransferWise which began in 2011 and today moves US$10bil a year through its platform.

MoneyMatch has created a platform to match individual buyers and sellers of currencies, with the attraction of both sides enjoying better exchange rates than what banks and even money changers offer. The rate used by the MoneyMatch site is the middle rate of the currency exchange spread. So an individual for example, willing to buy US$100 for his travels will be matched with someone wanting to change his US$100 into ringgit. The parties will be matched on this application and then proceed to make their exchange in an agreed location. MoneyMatch is also entering the area of cross border fund transfers.

“For example, someone in Singapore wishing to transfer money to Malaysia can be matched with someone here wishing to send an equal amount of money across the Causeway. Hence the parties can make the respective transfers to local accounts of their choice after an exchange of information. This means the transfer is done minus any cross-border transfer fees,” explains MoneyMatch co-founder Naysan Munusamy, who had spent many years as a forex trader with a number of banks before venturing out to start MoneyMatch.

Peer lending

One key growth area in fintech is peer to peer or P2P lending, online platforms that match borrowers with lenders, bypassing the traditional financial institutions. The business had even attracted big names such as Goldman Sachs. The most notable name in this space is Lending Club, which had launched its service as far back as 2007 and became the US’ largest technology IPO in 2014, raising around US$1bil.

Lending Club claims that its platform – which enables borrowers to get unsecured loans of US$1,000 to US$35,000 – has now helped originate close to US$16bil in loans.

Locally, last month the Securities Commission (SC) launched a regulatory framework for P2P lending, paving the way for small and medium-sized companies to access this new avenue of debt funding. Under SC’s rules though, individuals are not allowed to raise money on the local P2P platforms. Rather it is meant to only fund projects and businesses and a number of safeguards are in place. For example, those behind the operator of the P2P platform need to pass the “fit and proper” test; the rate of financing cannot be more than 18% (as that would be deemed predatory lending) and that the P2P operator has to disclose information related to the issuer and the risk assessment and credit scoring parameters adopted by the operator. There is no authorized P2P platform in Malaysia yet as parties wishing to run such platforms have to submit their application to the SC soon.

In China, P2P lending has virtually exploded. As a recent report by Citibank highlights, “China is past the tipping point”, with fintech companies having similar number of clients as the major banks. The report notes that China is the largest P2P lender in the world, with transactions topping US$66bil, compared with the US with only US$16.6bil.

Regulating fintech

But there are problems. Some unregulated P2P platforms in China had run scams. Others helped fuel an equity roller-coaster by offering funding for stock investments. This led to the Chinese benchmark index rallying more than 150% in the 12 months to last June before abruptly crashing. The Chinese authorities are now cleaning up the P2P sector.

So what are the risks of fintech regulation in Malaysia? And do companies like MoneyMatch need be regulated and licensed?

In an emailed reply to StarBizWeek, Bank Negara says: “Fintech start-ups that engage in activities under the purview of the central bank must comply with existing laws”. Bank Negara explains that regulated businesses include banking, insurance or takaful, money changing, remittance, operating a payment system or issuing payment instruments.

“A fintech company that engages in any activity that falls within the definition of a regulated business must be properly authorised to do so under the relevant laws.

“As an example, collecting deposits via a fintech platform would require approval from Bank Negara.

“A fintech company that is authorised to conduct a regulated business under the laws that Bank Negara administers will be subject to the oversight of Bank Negara pursuant to those laws.”

What this indicates is that Bank Negara is going to regulate fintechs the same way it does banks. But exactly how, it still isn’t clear.

But the good news is this: Bank Negara says it is engaging with firms in this space (and presumably that includes the likes of MoneyMatch), “to understand and where appropriate facilitate their business and provide guidance on aspects on regulation that would be applicable to them.”

Bank Negara adds that it is in the process of formulating a framework that “encourages innovation without undermining financial stability, the integrity of the financial system or the adequate protection for financial consumers.”

The SC has also been pushing for fintech innovation to develop in Malaysia. Last year, Malaysia became the first country in the region to introduce the regulatory framework for equity crowd funding. (While P2P is about companies raising debt, crowd funding is for entrepreneurs to sell equity to investors.)

The SC has also launched aFINity@SC, a fintech community aimed at industry engagement and more recently launched the P2P financing framework, which is aimed at addressing the funding needs of small businesses.

Chin Wei Min, the SC’s new head of innovation and digital strategy, says: “We think fintech can provide solutions to some of the unserved and underserved needs in the capital market.”

Chin adds: “We are also mindful of the risk, fraud and all the pitfalls. We continue to enhance our engagement model. We want to remain very close to the industry.”


Fintech’s hiccups

Some recent developments in the fintech space, however, point to weaknesses in fintech companies. LendingClub, the poster boy company for P2P lending has seen its shares tumble, wiping out about a third of its market value.

This came as it faces scrutiny after its founder and CEO resigned following an investigation into improper loan sales.

The US Treasury has released a report criticising the P2P lending business, recommending it to be more tightly regulated. Some commentators are liking P2P lending to the early days of the subprime mortgage bubble of 2006-07.

It is more likely though that the experiences of fintech in mature markets like China and the US will serve as good guides as to how this business will grow in this part of the world, with the requisite regulations put in place.

And the jury is still out as to whether traditional banks here will lose significant parts of their businesses to fintech start-ups.

Or as one industry observer puts it, fintech is more likely to usurp the business of the shadow banking market here, as some unserved borrowers now have the option to move away from loan sharks or “Ah Longs” and into the crowd funding or P2P platforms. But after that, banks could be next.

By Risen Jayaseelan, Wong Wei-Shen, a Zunaira Saieed The Star


Related story:

Zafrul: ‘We want to anticipate and capitalise on opportunities.’Banking on fintech

 

Related post:

 

Apr 16, 2016 WHO dominates the phone dominates the Internet. The whole world of information is now available in your hand, replacing your own mind as a …

 

Where does the money go?


RECENTLY I was offered an easy loan with just 5.8% interest rate after activation of my credit card.

There was no pre-qualified questions asked when the sales personnel approached me through the phone. As I had no intention to get funding, I did not take up the offer.

It is understood that the “attractive” rate was offered to attract potential customers. If there is a delay in repayment eventually, the rate would jump up according to the interest incurred on the credit card outstanding balance, which ranges from 15% to 18% per annum.

When I asked around, I found most of my family members had on at least one if not more occasions being offered an easy loan, credit card balance transfer, personal loan, or other credit facilities via phone calls every month.

This contrasts with what I had heard from friends and peers from the property industry regarding housing loan. There have been complaints about stringent requirements for housing loan application and low approval rate. They have this question in mind – where does the money go?

Their concerns are understandable when I see the home loan approval rates was only hovering around 50% for the past few years. In 2013, the approval rate was at 49.2%, it improved slightly to 52.9% in 2014 but went down to 50.2% in 2015.

According to the group president of the Real Estate and Housing Developers Association (Rehda), Datuk Seri FD Iskandar, rejection rate for affordable housing loan applications was more than 50%, and the strict housing/mortgage lending conditions were denying aspiring owners their first homes.

Based on Rehda’s survey in the second half of 2015, loan rejection was the number one reason for unsold units, and affordable homes top the list.

For example, an individual or family with a combined household income of between RM2,500 and RM10,000 are eligible to apply for PR1MA homes that cost between RM100,000 and RM400,000. However, with loan eligibility based on net income, many with their existing commitments such as car loan or credit card outstanding payment, are not able to secure a loan for an affordable home. This dampens the effort of helping qualified households in owning their first homes.

Looking at the situation, I am puzzled with different treatments given to loan application. At one end, there is an easy access for personal loan and credit card financing. On the other, stringent requirements are imposed on housing loan. It seems like the priority has been given to spending on liability instead of asset.

If we look at it from the business perspective, credit card, personal loan and easy loan offer higher profit margin to the banks with interest rates ranging from 12% to 18%, compared to housing loan interest which is about 4.5% to 5%. This may explain the shift of focus among the banks.

Central bank concerned

Reports show that our household debt stood at an alarming 87.9% of GDP as at end of 2014 – one of the highest in the region. It is comprehensible that Bank Negara is concerned with the situation, and would like to impose responsible lending with housing loan.

However, when we look at the details, residential housing loans accounted for 45.7% of total debt, hire purchase at 16.6%, personal financing stood at 15.7%, non-residential loan was 7.7%, securities at 6.5%, followed by credit cards and other items at 3.9% respectively.

A recent McKinsey Global Institute Report highlighted that in advanced countries, housing loans comprise 74% of total household debt on average. As a country that aspires to be a developed nation by 2020, our 45.7% housing loan component is considered low.

Looking at the above, it is ironic that our authorities and banks are strict on funding a house which is a basic necessity and asset for people, but lenient on car loan, personal loan, credit card and other easy financing with higher interest rate, that tend to encourage the rakyat to overspend on depreciating items.

It is common nowadays to see young adults paying half of their salary for car loan, and people go on extravagant holidays or purchase luxury items which rack up their credit card balance. As such it is not surprising that the number of counselling cases took on by Credit Counselling and Debt Management Agency has also shown a worrying upward trend, with the number of cases leaping by 20,000 from 2013 to 2014. There was an average of about 35,000 counselling cases annually from 2008 to 2014, but that figure rose to approximately 60,000 in 2014.

It is important for the authorities and banks to encourage prudent lending and spending, re-look into high housing loan rejection rate, and consider to tighten lending conditions of other loans, such as personal loan and credit card. These will encourage the rakyat to channel their money into assets instead of liabilities, and improve the financial position of the people and the nation in the future.

By Alan Tong

Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He is the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback, please email feedback@fiabci-asiapacific.com.

Related posts:

 Jan 11, 2016 Datuk Alan Tong was the world president of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 and Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI Malaysia

Apr 12, 2016 Datuk Alan Tong was the world president of FIABCI International for 2005/2006
and awarded the Property Man of the Year 2010 at FIABCI…

Mar 12, 2016 Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He is
the group chairman of Bukit Kiara Properties. For feedback …

Feb 16, 2016 Datuk Alan Tong has over 50 years of experience in property development. He
was the World President of FIABCI International for 2005/2006 .

 

 

 

House buyers’ traps: purchasers lose their homes because of defaulting developers


WHY does this keep happening to house buyers in Malaysia?

This incident happened two years ago in Taiping where a laid-back community of mainly retirees found the roof over their heads nearly, and in some cases, actually, blown away. The purchasers had paid the developer and had moved into their houses and lived there for 10 years. Problem was that the purchasers paid the developers in cash remittance without taking out end-financing loans.

Unknown to the purchasers, the developer did not pay the developer’s bank to settle the developer’s loan vide bridging loans. The developer’s charge remained and grew into bigger indebtedness to the bank.

Apparently, the developer’s bank had not been collecting payment of the loan from the developer, even as the developer was collecting the instalments of the purchase price from the purchasers, as provided in the sale & purchase agreement (S&P) schedule.

Having waited for 10 years for the developer to settle his loan, the bank realised that the developer was not going to pay; that foreclosure was unavoidable.

The bank had a problem. Apart from the developer’s loan having ballooned over the years because of the bank’s laxity in not insisting on the developer paying promptly, there was also political repercussion. There are a few issues here, namely, the destruction of a settled community in a pleasant location, the injustice of the S&P; the solicitousness for developers in preference to purchasers on the part of the powers that be; and the embarrassment resulting from the bank’s philanthropic ramifications.

Has the bank breached the fiduciary duty of care to the purchasers as the bridging loan financier to the defaulting developer?

The crux of the problem is that the Housing Ministry-prescribed S&P allows the developer to build the purchaser’s house with the instalments of the purchase price paid by the purchaser from the day the S&P is signed. On top of this, and even more seriously, the developer is allowed to borrow from the developer’s banks on the security of the purchaser’s property.

Where a purchaser has paid the purchase price in full to the developer, and the developer does not pay the developer’s loan secured by the purchaser’s property, the developer’s bank may foreclose, auction off the purchaser’s property to recover the developer’s loan.

The developer suffers nothing. It has received the purchase price and pocketed it. The developer borrowed from its bank and gave the purchaser’s property as security, and with foreclosure the developer’s bank recovers its loan, and so the developer owes no money to the bank. It takes no risk, suffers no loss.

Purchasers the victims

It is the purchaser who loses. He loses his house and he has to settle the loan he took to buy the house with increasing interest on it. He is blacklisted, which means he can never borrow again. He may never buy a house again! Is this fair to the buyer who never did anything wrong to the developer or to the developer’s bank? In the Taiping housing fiasco, some of the purchasers had to buy their houses again at prices bloated by 10 years’ arrears of interest (i.e. pay the developer’s debt) to stave off foreclosure.

Who is to blame for this sad state of affairs? We will consider each one in turn. The most obvious candidate is, of course, the developer. Not so. It is the Housing Ministry for providing a standard form S&P that allows this to happen. Firstly, the S&P allows the developer to borrow money from a bank with a charge on the whole housing development land before it is sub-divided and sold. This pre-sale loan is referred to in the recitals to the S&P. This is understandable as the developer needs money before sale. The result of this is that the purchaser buys an encumbered property but the purchaser is not told how much of the developer’s loan, if apportioned equally, is borne by each purchaser’s sub-divided land (the redemption sum). After sale, the developer collects money from the purchaser from the day the S&P is signed, and should be able to make use of it to meet all the expenses of the development. However, after the sub-divided land is sold, the developer keeps borrowing, and no effort is made to keep the purchaser informed about the increasing amount of the developer’s loan/ the redemption sum.

The purchaser’s consent to the additional, post-sale loans is taken for granted. In fact, the purchaser cannot withhold his consent as long as the purchaser receives some fig-leaf protection from the developer’s bank in the form of an undertaking not to foreclose.

What is the use to the purchaser of the developer’s bank’s undertaking not to foreclose? What the purchaser needs is the absolute undertaking by the developer and the developer’s bank that a purchaser who has paid the purchase price will not face foreclosure vis-à-vis the disclaimer(s). This would have helped the Taiping purchasers. It is, therefore, a matter between the developer’s bank and the developer, with the Housing Ministry playing the proper protective role required of it by law, to ensure that such an undertaking/ disclaimer is given by the developer’s bank to the purchaser. This and other issues arising from the S&P have been raised by HBA with the Housing Ministry which continues to procrastinate.

To the developer’s bank, the loans to the developer on the security of the purchaser’s land is regarded as if it is the developer’s property entirely; it is of no concern to the developer’s bank that some of the purchasers have paid the developer and the developer may or may not have forwarded some of these payments to the developer’s bank.

The developer’s bank’s concern is whether the whole loan has been settled by the developer-borrower. If not, the developer’s bank feels secure in the knowledge that the entire housing development land is available to the developer’s bank to recover its loan/s. In so far as the developer’s bank is concerned, payments made by each purchaser to the developer is of no consequence. The transaction between the bank and the developer is the one that matters.

Under the then S&P, there is also no control over how much the developer should be allowed to borrow, for what purpose and by when it should be settled. Each loan to the developer increases the risks to the purchaser.

In the recent past, developer’s borrowed only for the purpose of meeting the expenses of the housing development. The developer was allowed to borrow twice only – once before sale and once after sale. Although the developer was not required to disclose the redemption sum, there was a very important safeguard. And that is, the developer had to settle the redemption sum to the developer’s bank before completion of construction so that at the end of the 24- or 36-month construction period, as the case may be, the property was free from the developer’s encumbrances and safe from foreclosure, even if the property was not transferred to the purchaser just as promptly. It was at least safe from foreclosure.

Bank initiatives

Banks/financial institutions should take the initiative to recover progressively the loan it had given the developer. Banks should stipulate as a condition for giving loans to their customers (developers) that the latter open its Housing Development Account (HDA), a statutory requirement, with the same bank and require the instalments of the purchase price be paid into it, and authorise the bank to deduct the developer’s loan by instalments from the HDA so that when the purchaser completes payment, the developer’s loan is also settled.

There is no such statutory requirement in the S&P so that if it happens at all, it’s serendipity!

HBA had meetings with the Housing Ministry to propose changes to the law and S&P with the view of giving greater protection to purchasers within the framework of the sell-and-build (which Rehda defend so fervently) but some pertinent ones had been objected by Rehda.

As if that is not enough, the ministry too have rejected those proposals vis-a-vis pre-determination of redemption sums in the S&P transaction. And that notwithstanding the Housing Development Act 1966 stating that it is inter alia for “the protection of the interests of purchaser.”

The next continuing article will dwell on the new “protection” or whatever in lieu thereof approved by the Attorney-General’s Chambers vis-à-vis “redemptions and disclaimers”.

Buyers beware by Chang Kim Loong

Chang Kim Loong is secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association: http://www.hba.org.my, a non-profit, non-governmental organisation.

Related posts:

 Nov 15, 2014 By CHANG KIM LOONG – Buyers Beware The Star Nov 15 2014. Chang Kim Loong is the honorary secretary-general of the National House …

 Feb 1, 2015 By Chang Kim Loong AMN who is the secretary-general of the National House Buyers Association. Related posts: Who is responsible: …

 

 Home, sweet home for young couples will lead to …

 Oct 12, 2014 HBA secretary-general Chang Kim Loong also said the housing scheme for young married couples was commendable. However Chang said …

 

 Oct 14, 2014 Its secretary-general, Chang Kim Loong, said speculators have taken advantage of the low entry cost of buying a property at the expense of …