Investors’ questions to Profitable Plots directors go unanswered

SIAS has taken up the fight on behalf of investors, but so far the directors of this failed investment scheme are refusing to talk to them.

SIAS announced on 25th April 2011 that it would take up the plight of investors in the Profitable Plots saga. The investors claim that they have not been kept informed of their investments and that their requests to meet the directors through the lawyers of the Profitable Plots directors have not been acceded to.

Since the announcement, SIAS has conducted a dialogue session with the investors and a sub-committee set up under SIAS. SIAS is conducting a Press Conference on the outcome of the dialogue session and the possible steps for investors to recover their investments. SIAS will make public certain calls it would make on relevant parties.

Since the middle of last year (2010), investors have been making enquiries on the guaranteed annual payments for their investments, but were being shunted aside with all kinds of excuses by the company’s Directors and senior staff. Early this year, investors also tried to contact PP’s Directors at least twice, through PP’s lawyers. But the Directors have not answered investors’ queries at all, even though the latter have clearly spelt out that they are deeply worried about their investments.

The second of these attempts was a letter sent on 26th February, signed by 231 investors, mainly from Singapore. This failure to communicate properly was also commonly seen during the pre-raid period. For example, investors complained the company never even bothered to inform them that the company had defaulted on payments. The standard reply the investors are given by the Directors’ lawyers is that investigations are currently ongoing and as such they cannot communicate.

The onus of discovery was thrown on the investors. This conduct compelled investors to believe that the company’s standards of corporate governance were abysmal and even frightened a few that their investments are being mismanaged.

This callous attitude has caused frustration among investors.

A second critical example of poor communication was the fact that the Directors had NEVER issued a statement or called for a public meeting with investors to explain reasons for failure to meet contractual coupon payments.

It was this failure by the Directors to communicate effectively that triggered outbursts of investors’ protests and including some making police reports, which eventually led the Commercial Affairs Department to step in.

PP investors are asking for the Directors to communicate with them immediately. They ask: “What do they have to hide? If they haven’t done anything wrong, they should meet with us and assure us that everything is alright.”

They shouldn’t take the excuse that because investigations are pending, they cannot speak to their clients. That shouldn’t stop them from communicating with investors from whom they have taken monies. It is estimated about 1500 Singapore investors and about 4000 foreign investors have invested in this scheme. These figures can only be verified when investors come forward or from the book seized by the police. These investors said that they cannot accept the position taken by the Directors that because their books are taken away they cannot speak to the investors.

The foreign investors, mainly from Malaysia and Thailand, tell us that they have invested in Singapore because they recognised Singapore’s reputation as the financial centre, as a no-nonsense city where laws are enforced strictly without fear or favour.

It must be noted that bulk of investors have not made a police report because they were still hoping for the company to continue with this business and honour its promises. But the refusal to communicate by the Directors to-date has made them lose hope in recovering their investments.

If the Directors are willing to speak to the investors, SIAS will be more than happy to facilitate the dialogue. They could have their lawyers present. This will allay the extreme anxiety on the part of investors. The recent press case of a Director seeking to get her passport back from the police has increased the anxiety of investors.