Citibank is unilaterally rasing the spread on its existing Sibor loan customers !

[amk]

...Mr Peng said all the terms and conditions have been carefully outlined and that interest-rate definitions are clearly stated.

if you look at what hopeful posted right above, Mr Peng's argument is weak, and is pushing the limits of interpretation. This is just despicable.
look at the posted doc here http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/ea...n-4984471.html , the "Thereafter" spread is clearly a fixed number.

If Citi insist he never meant to sell it as throughout spread, then Citi would have been doing a deliberate and intentional mis-selling in 2011. That sounds very illegal to me.

(It's a different matter if Citi said, "at the time we did intend to sell it as throughout, but today business change, and I INVOKE MY CATCHALL CLAUSE to rescind it". For that we are back to the real issue why banks are allowed to have such clauses.)

As hopeful pointed out, Citi clearly try not to say " under T&C I can change anyway", but instead say "the main contract already allows me to change, you never read your problem". never mind pushing the limit of word playing game.

hopeful, my friend is not as cynical as you think. he is not arguing with Citi anymore because he is afraid he would be blacklisted by the bank as he has other business with Citi. Since he can refinance out, he said just move on.

To me MAS is the party that should take on Citi. MAS has all the details, and MAS is not afraid of "offending" a bank on *consumer loans*. This is why I urge every one to write to MAS directly. No need to be a freerider as it is of no cost to you.

[teddybear]

Agreed that what hopeful posted is right.

Still, after pointing out all these, and since people already wrote to MAS and CASE (and even journalists have interviewed them), BUT yet MAS and CASE don't interfere, what can consumers do?????

if you look at what hopeful posted right above, Mr Peng's argument is weak, and is pushing the limits of interpretation. This is just despicable.
look at the posted doc here http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/ea...n-4984471.html , the "Thereafter" spread is clearly a fixed number.

If Citi insist he never meant to sell it as throughout spread, then Citi would have been doing a deliberate and intentional mis-selling in 2011. That sounds very illegal to me.

(It's a different matter if Citi said, "at the time we did intend to sell it as throughout, but today business change, and I INVOKE MY CATCHALL CLAUSE to rescind it". For that we are back to the real issue why banks are allowed to have such clauses.)

As hopeful pointed out, Citi clearly try not to say " under T&C I can change anyway", but instead say "the main contract already allows me to change, you never read your problem". never mind pushing the limit of word playing game.

hopeful, my friend is not as cynical as you think. he is not arguing with Citi anymore because he is afraid he would be blacklisted by the bank as he has other business with Citi. Since he can refinance out, he said just move on.

To me MAS is the party that should take on Citi. MAS has all the details, and MAS is not afraid of "offending" a bank on *consumer loans*. This is why I urge every one to write to MAS directly. No need to be a freerider as it is of no cost to you.

[teddybear]

Who else here affect by Citibank?
The rule of the game is to get an OFFICIAL reply from Citibank (in black and white) on which clause they specifically use to change the spread (don't take verbal reply)!
Then, bring this up with MAS and CASE with Citibank's official reply letter, cite "deliberate and intentional mis-selling in 2011"?

if you look at what hopeful posted right above, Mr Peng's argument is weak, and is pushing the limits of interpretation. This is just despicable.
look at the posted doc here http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/ea...n-4984471.html , the "Thereafter" spread is clearly a fixed number.

If Citi insist he never meant to sell it as throughout spread, then Citi would have been doing a deliberate and intentional mis-selling in 2011. That sounds very illegal to me.

(It's a different matter if Citi said, "at the time we did intend to sell it as throughout, but today business change, and I INVOKE MY CATCHALL CLAUSE to rescind it". For that we are back to the real issue why banks are allowed to have such clauses.)

As hopeful pointed out, Citi clearly try not to say " under T&C I can change anyway", but instead say "the main contract already allows me to change, you never read your problem". never mind pushing the limit of word playing game.

hopeful, my friend is not as cynical as you think. he is not arguing with Citi anymore because he is afraid he would be blacklisted by the bank as he has other business with Citi. Since he can refinance out, he said just move on.

To me MAS is the party that should take on Citi. MAS has all the details, and MAS is not afraid of "offending" a bank on *consumer loans*. This is why I urge every one to write to MAS directly. No need to be a freerider as it is of no cost to you.

[amk]

The rule of the game is to get an OFFICIAL reply from Citibank (in black and white) on which clause they specifically use to change the spread (don't take verbal reply)!

my friend got a letter by post telling him it is that clause ("interest rate subjected to change"). it's very official.

[teddybear]

So that letter will be very useful to pursue further, but too bad he is not pursuing anymore...........

As hopeful said, and I agreed, that fixed figure say "0.60%" cannot be the "interest rate" that they referred to that they can change, since SIBOR is the actual interest rate that can change, so if they insist that that particular clause refers to "0.60%" which they can change rather than SIBOR (which almost all of us will interpret as such), then it is obviously a very weak argument. A fixed spread is a fixed margin, their profit margin, it is not an "interest rate"! Citibank want to bullshit who???????

my friend got a letter by post telling him it is that clause ("interest rate subjected to change"). it's very official.

[DC33_2008]

Banks are like legalised loan sharks. They are just looking at the bottom line. I am glad that I am not a client of the Bank that never sleeps. MAS has really got to review this incident. We should boycott it. It may not be a bad idea to rally at Hong Lim Park.

So that letter will be very useful to pursue further, but too bad he is not pursuing anymore...........

As hopeful said, and I agreed, that fixed figure say "0.60%" cannot be the "interest rate" that they referred to that they can change, since SIBOR is the actual interest rate that can change, so if they insist that that particular clause refers to "0.60%" which they can change rather than SIBOR (which almost all of us will interpret as such), then it is obviously a very weak argument. A fixed spread is a fixed margin, their profit margin, it is not an "interest rate"! Citibank want to bullshit who???????

[TABee]

My rant...

Yes! Banks/Finance Houses are legalised 'loan sharks'! But they and the finance houses are the more prudent folks to borrow from as they are watched by Big Brother MAS.

Due to the history and right hand take in cash (0.35%-0.50% savings a/c or current account interest rates), left hand lend to those in need (1.6%-5% p.a.), they make a good spread. That will cover infrastructure, operating costs, etc. See how much the CEOs of the local banks make?

What is your view of SIBOR now? It has just been falling past 2 days at least. I was just about to fix a rate but realised the Ts & Cs of my agreement require 3 mths notice and there is a processing fee. Still contemplating and watching SIBOR and world economics.

What is the fine print on the loan agreements? They are drafted by in house legals and even vetted by international law firms.

Who are the folks running the loan shops? Same as you and I, humans out to make a living and their success for the year is measured by the returns from the products that they represent/sell.

Generally, their KPI is 10%-15% above the previous year's performance.

Are they great minds? Not exactly but they do have the network and information to place bets in 3Q and start to crack their brains and discuss the approach for the following year. The strategy and business plans are planned in 3Q/4Q in the preceding year to be rolled out 1Q/2Q in the following year and tweaked as performance is monitored weekly/monthly/quarterly.

Can we beat them? Only if you are very active and savvy with CASH to grab the opportunity when it appears. Just like buying a house at a point before prices go up and selling before prices fall. Cash is KING. We need to be active to move X% of funds into liquid investments. Y% into less liquid investments and Z% into non-liquid investments. Perhaps V% is into luxuries like expensive meals, treats, car and holidays?

I am just an average Joe....

...Ranting

[amk]

Banks are like legalised loan sharks. They are just looking at the bottom line. I am glad that I am not a client of the Bank that never sleeps. MAS has really got to review this incident. We should boycott it. It may not be a bad idea to rally at Hong Lim Park.

well at least loan sharks are upfront about their terms.

... No need Hong Lim lah ... that's for CPF/MediShield stuff with "political interest".

please just help to write to [email protected]

[JohnTan]

Have been away from this forum for a few years.

Chanced upon teddybear referencing the citibank issue in another thread and was interested because it fitted the profile of my mortgage loan. Sibor plus 0.65 which they upped. At that time when takong up my home loan, my mortgage banker who is from another bank was very upfront with me. He said its a no brainer and also recommended citibank over his own bank stating that the spread is perpetual. Thats why i took it.

thats why i was surprised that they upped it, but the extra interest does not bother me much so i did not act.

however if there is some ethical issue then maybe i have to reconsider.

Therefore whats the latest on this. Anyone any uodates?

[wmelvin]

Hello
His companion probably offered a crude arrangement then in the event that this is valid. Sibor spread at that the reality of the situation will become obvious eventually to have same spread throughout the residency and not an expansion of spread after the third year/consequent addition in later years.
Thanks