From what I read Prudential was prepared to hire despite the persistency rate (probably they knew it was suspect) and AXA refusing to explain the calculation. They actually applied to MAS for a licence for the chap. MAS on the other hand took the letter form CEO AXA at face value and did not bother to check the substance. If it had not been MAS incompetence the guy would have been employed. Also note that they did not even ask the guy to defend himself. Imagine they operating in a vacuum.
The trouble with civil suits are that judgements are buried and the press is just so hopeless and their report was so poor and misleading. They even gave the impression that the guy was working in a restaurant when he owns the bloody thing. They did not even bother to mention the role that Teo Chee Hean played.
The trouble with civil suits are that judgements are buried and the press is just so hopeless and their report was so poor and misleading. They even gave the impression that the guy was working in a restaurant when he owns the bloody thing. They did not even bother to mention the role that Teo Chee Hean played.
When the late Wong Pakshong was in charge of MAS....they were on the ball, don't think this kind of 'monekying' around with MAS was tolerated. MAS was an entire totally ' animal' back then. Now...it is more of 'pussy cat'.
Wong Pakshong recently passed away, was rather surprised he had a rather subdued a very low key quarter page obituary & nothing much was mentioned...despite that fact that, he built a rock solid MAS....HALIMAH had pages written about her & still counting...& she is not even elected!.
You get the a feeling that, their 'guard dog'...must be sniffing somewhere...where he shouldn't have.