Get Rich Quick Malaysia Style

A Datuk Seri and his wife, dogged by allegations of running a dubious foreign exchange company, continue to be pursued by victims who have made a fresh batch of police reports.

In the latest allegation, former MIC treasurer-general Datuk R. Rama­nan claimed the husband-and-wife team had even converted to Islam in 2013 in order to convince a Muslim investor to put RM55mil in their company. Ramanan spoke to the press after he and dozens of victims lodged new police reports against the couple at the Dang Wangi police headquarters yesterday. Ramanan has been pushing for the couple to face the law after allegations emerged last year of them being involved in a foreign exchange scam.

The forex investment company was busted by the Bukit Aman Commercial Crimes Department on March 28. A statement the next day by CCID director Comm Datuk Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani said six suspects, aged between 28 and 38, had been remanded for 21 days under Section 3(1) of the Prevention of Crime Act (Poca).

Some 20,000 investors have claimed that they were cheated. In his statement, Comm Acryl Sani said the investors put in a mi­­ni­mum of RM2,000 and the investment company promised daily returns, which were not paid.

“Police have done a fantastic job so far. But the problem here is that while you managed to get the ‘tail of the snake’, the head is still out there,” said Ramanan.

Amy Salmiah Dahlan, 43, was one of the victims present at the press conference. “I represent a group of about 700 investors. We lost about RM6mil since last year in the foreign ex­­change company founded by this husband and wife,” she said.

Amy added that she was introduced to the company by a mutual friend. “He told me that the company was a registered company in New Zealand and that he had made around RM2.4mil from it,” said Amy, explaining how she became one of the investors.

Another victim, Sri Kumar, 42, had a similar story. “I joined in February last year. At first, I had decent returns from my investment.

“So I told other people about the investment company. But from August last year, I have not seen any returns. I invested about RM100,000,” said Sri Kumar, who did not reveal how much he received in the beginning.

Dang Wangi OCPD Asst Comm Mohd Sukri Kaman, when contacted, confirmed that the police had received the reports and that investigations were ongoing.

China Life Insurers - Serious Violations

China has opened an investigation into the head of its top insurance regulatory body, the anti-corruption watchdog said Sunday in an announcement that could signal problems for some of the country’s most powerful companies.

Xiang Junbo is being probed for “suspected serious violation of the Party’s code of conduct,” the Central Commission for Discipline Inspection said in a brief statement on its website. The phrase is often a euphemism for corruption.

Xiang took the top spot at the China Insurance Regulatory Commission in 2011 after heading the Agricultural Bank of China, one of the biggest state banks.Various Chinese regulatory agencies have trained their sights on the insurance industry, complaining about companies’ use of their financial holdings to fund risky acquisitions in real estate and unlisted equities.

In February Beijing announced investigations into several major insurance companies, including Evergrande Life and Foresea Life, for alleged market manipulation.

The announcement came after the chairman of the China Securities Regulatory Commission singled out the industry as a home for “barbarians” and “thieves” who engaged in debt-fuelled stock market acquisitions.

The president of PICC, the country’s first non-life insurance company, is also currently being probed for corruption.

Rumours about a possible investigation into Xiang have been swirling for months. He has previously been tied to scandal. In 2014, the New York Times reported he approached JPMorgan executives for a job for the child of a well-connected friend.

Last November the company agreed to pay a $264 million fine to the US government to settle claims it had violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by handing out jobs to the friends and family of top Chinese officials under similar circumstances in exchange for preferential treatment.

What Is A Life Insurance Agent

Over the course of my career, I learned that if I didn't define myself, then I was defined by what others said about me. Life insurance advisers distinguish themselves as advisers by first defining their role and responsibilities on the planning team.

For instance, in a real-life case last month, a client was considering the purchase of $1 million of life insurance for the dual purpose of family protection and wealth accumulation. As is too often the case, this conversation started with illustrations of hypothetical policy values for different products with different but undisclosed assumptions from each of his investment adviser and his insurance broker.

The product recommended by his investment adviser was a fee-only product that was most consistent with his assets under management compensation structure. On the other hand, the product recommended by his insurance broker was commission-based, but with commissions discounted by 50%. 

The initial comparison of hypothetical illustrations seemed to support the claim that the fee-only product offered lower costs due to the lack of commissions, but the all-too-often inevitable and unpleasant illustration "beauty contest" ensued. In the back-and-forth battle of the illustrations, it was discovered that hypothetical policy values were being calculated differently due to undisclosed hypothetical assumptions, through no fault of either the investment adviser or the insurance broker. No wonder such illustration comparisons are now considered misleading, fundamentally inappropriate and unreliable by financial, insurance and banking industry authorities. By this time, the client didn't know who to trust and threw up his hands in despair.

In walked the life insurance adviser with reports that measured actual internal costs for both the fee-only and commission-based products against the universe of peer-group alternatives. The life insurance adviser revealed that cost of insurance charges, fixed administration expenses and premium loads were in fact 44% lower in the fee-only product. On the other hand, the life insurance adviser also revealed that cash-value-based "wrap fees" were more than 160 basis points lower in the commission-based product.

In other words, the product offering the lowest costs was not a function of fees versus commissions, but instead a function of the client's goals and objectives. If the client funds the policy at or near IRS limits for wealth accumulation, then the commission-based product offers the lowest costs. However, if the client funds the policy more like a traditional family-protection policy, then the fee-only product offers the lowest costs. Such advice is simply not possible by comparing hypothetical illustrations that do not disclose the composition or competitiveness of underlying costs.

In addition, with the measurement of how internal costs relate to best-available rates and terms versus worst-available rates and terms, the life insurance adviser was able to advise the client that other products with lower costs were available. In the end, the life insurance adviser earned the client's trust by defining their role as an adviser, by behaving like an adviser supporting their advice with independent research instead of compensation bias and misleading illustration comparisons, and by talking about life insurance in familiar terms the client could understand.

If you don't define yourself, then others will define you. Starting conversations about life insurance by defining roles and responsibilities in the planning process distinguishes the life insurance adviser from life insurance sales people, leads to better working relationships between the banker, CPA, attorney, trust officer and other members of the planning team, and ensures your clients' best interests are served.

Hike Up Medical Cost For Foreigner

Foreigner residents now have to fork out a heftier deposit when seeking treatment at government hospitals in a move to reduce medical subsidy for non-citizens. The Health Ministry, in a directive, announced the new rates for wards and surgery with a hike of 130% to 230%.

Its deputy secretary-general Datuk Mohd Shafiq Abdullah said the new rates took effect imme­diately. For third-class wards, foreigners will now need to pay a deposit of RM1,400 compared with RM600 previously. If they are in for a surgery, they will have to pay a deposit of RM2,800 instead of RM1,200.

Foreigners who need inpatient treatment in the second-class wards will have to provide a deposit of RM3,000, and RM5,000 for surgery. The old rates were RM900 and RM1,500 respectively. Those warded in the executive and first-class wards will have to pay RM7,000 up front and RM11,000 for surgery, instead of RM2,100 and RM3,300.

The new rates apply to both children and adults, except for fo­reigners holding permanent resident (PR) status. Also exempted are foreigners legally married to locals and children below the age of 12, provided that one parent is a Malaysian or PR holder.

The Government first introduced separate rates for foreigners in January 2015 after it was revealed that they took up between 30% and 40% of the subsidy in medical treatment for Malaysians. The Government then also deci­ded that subsidy for foreigners would be gradually cut.

The ministry wants medical officers to get in touch with the next of kin of any foreigner who is unconscious when wheeled into the hospital’s emergency department. This is to ensure that the deposit has been paid before the patient is warded.

Hospitals must also keep records of the patient’s address, contact number and details of the next of kin before he is discharged. Also, these patients are allowed to collect their medications only after settling their dues.

Hospitals have also been told to forward details of patients who fail to settle their bills to their respective missions here. Demand letters would be sent to those who fail to pay up.