by the way hafiz, have you created a website/blog to detail your explanation. coz it's easier to spread awareness that way when the information is all in one play. whereas in the forums, the info is in a few pages. normal people wouldn't scroll through various pages to find your points to read them.

Just a Substack - with screenshots of some of the things I had posted in this forum.

To be frank, communications is not my area of expertise - I don't know how to write things simple enough for a mass audience.

No point writing something technical if the layperson who is actually impacted doesn't get the point and feels there is nothing much they can do about it.

I was hoping for others working in media to carry forward this issue. They are the ones with the platform to spread awareness, not me. But maybe it's too much of an ask.

Write in what you post to that MP going after the insurance company. No point you write here. No politician going to read this.

I am wondering why cant we roll back the initial agreement, let them sell the 25% of the shares, let EPF take those portion,

also i am sure this MySalam insurance hardly anyone know how to use or claim it like what they always claim it is to benefit the B40. I rather they pay the tax and use it to upgrade/build new/purchase new infra/hospital.

common guidance for critical illness (CI) coverage is 3-5x of your annual income.

If you have annual income of 100k, that's 300k of CI coverage which is probably not cheap for most folks.

What's your CI coverage currently? is it following this common guidance/guideline of 3-5x of your annual income?

Selamat Hari Raya, Maaf Zahir & Batin

One of BNM's senior management personnel gave me this reply in response to my concerns regarding the ethicality and legality/lawfulness of abusing the estate for shareholder purposes. I would ask all of you to steelman his/her/their arguments and not strawman it. For those who are keen, walk me through your thought process. Also, some things to highlight re language used, e.g. "orphan estate", "luxury of time and circumstance", "ideal situation", "assured of this", "independent parties", "legal and actuarial experts", "savings from not going through lengthy court process", "no worse off", "sustainable", "not-for-profit", "exercise to reduce the size", "precedents", "not compromised", "carefully studied", "distributed/reattributed", "improvement on the UK experience", "reduction proceeds", "neither illegal or unethical", "expensive lawyers", "have to paid from the estate funds"

Email is probably not a good way to have this discussion. But I must make it clear that there is no abuse of the Par fund estate. It is an exercise to reduce the size of the estate, and distribute the proceeds to policyholders as well as to the IDF and shareholders. Whilst there are some elements of the exercise which in an ideal situation could be done/sequenced better if we had the luxury of time and circumstance, the outcome of the proposed exercise is neither illegal nor unethical. To be assured of this, the exercise will be reviewed by independent parties, as well as legal and actuarial experts to ensure that policyholders interests are not compromised (i.e. that policyholders receive their fair share from the reduction proceeds) and the exercise remains in compliance with the relevant requirements. There are also precedents in the UK where orphan estates have been distributed/reattributed, which were carefully studied in coming up with the current exercise. If some of the savings from not going through a lengthy court process (which involves expensive lawyers which have to paid from the estate funds) can be channelled to the B40 group in a way that helps them meaningfully, I would consider it an improvement on the UK experience, while being no worse off for policyholders. We are focusing our energies now on ensuring the scheme delivers the intended results (B40 truly benefit and are able to "graduate" to commercial insurance in years to come) and designing a scheme that is both sustainable and not-for-profit.

Critical Illness is another poorly designed product. Why do you need CI coverage when you already have a medical card?

If the excuse given is that the critical illness means you can't or need help to do your activities of daily living or can't work anymore, wouldn't that mean that you are either permanently or temporarily disabled?

Why not buy disability insurance instead of CI coverage then?

What is it that the CI cover is actually helping you to solve?

these are the highest per disease rite? cos the average payout remains below 10K rm.

in some sense, 200K annual limit does serve its purpose for most people... definitely most people.

of course, higher limit is better but comes with higher cost rite?

You don't have to take my word for it. You can read this write up by one Dr Gunalan Palari Arumugam in CodeBlue

The Private Medical Insurance And Hospital Charges Conundrum: Part 2 — Dr Gunalan Palari Arumugam

The misconception is that our fees are bankrupting patients. Just an example of range of fees, about 60 per cent of hospital bill sizes fall below RM10,000 (mainly medical admissions), 30 per cent between RM10,000 and 50,000 (simple surgeries), and 5 per cent RM50,000 and RM100,000 (complex surgeries),

Only about 3 to 5 per cent of cases actually exceeded RM100,000, and this is when a patient presents with a complicated problem (cardiovascular or neurology) and multi-organ failure that needs end organ support via ventilation, dialysis, interventional radiology (coronary or neuro). These are the bills that generally depletes the savings of our patients, if the insurance is not able to cover the costs.

Using the above bill size distribution and assuming 8 per 100 policyholders make claims (8%) every year, the monthly premium comes up to RM 180 with a 5% loading and RM 280 with a 40% loading (loading for expenses/profit etc.).

It's still going to be somewhat pricy.

This has been explained before. It's not the big claims that are an issue, it's the more frequent small claims that are causing premium prices to increase. The difference in annual limits at the higher end don't make much of a difference. It all depends on the types of treatments, procedures available. It is not the case, to my mind, that there is a RM  500k treatment option under the 1 million annual limit and another RM 1.5mil treatment option under the 2 million annual limit for the same type of disease/disability burden - and even if that was the case, the frequency of such a disease/disability burden would be minimal enough to not make much of a difference for the purpose of pricing premiums. It would be more impactful from a premium pricing perspective if there were two treatment options, with one being RM 2k and another RM 5k, both covered under the 1 mil and 2 mil annual limit options for the same disease/disability burden, as the smaller claims tend to have a much higher claims frequency and variations in claims severity for the same type of disease/disability burden.

And I'm telling you those champions are probably denying or delaying claims. Just because Generali and others like Etiqa priced those products below or around RM 1.5k doesn't means that you're getting your money's worth. Assuming a 40% margin means a RM 1.6k product is only paying less than RM 1k in average medical pool claims cost. Probably most of their claims are below 30k. You're buying it at your own peril. So please be aware. Do ask on their average claims payout, average medical pool claims cost and other key statistics.

I do share the same believe with you partially but CI payout probably helps if you are unable to work short/long term due to dreaded disease but not permanently/temporarily disabled in the sense of TPD

CI is another expensive product which I might eventually cut during advance age to sustain my medical card longer

I do share the same believe with you partially but CI payout probably helps if you are unable to work short/long term due to dreaded disease but not permanently/temporarily disabled in the sense of TPD

CI is another expensive product which I might eventually cut during advance age to sustain my medical card longer

For that highlighted, .... if you want to do that, try after age 65.
As an article from SG, pointed out that "most critical illness claims happen from age 51 to 55. And the bulk of claims happen from age 41 to 65".

Regarding your mention of "CI is expensive", try PM "Ramjade", I think he got one from SG at "alot much lower price" compared to MY.

No need pm here and there. I got nothing to sell/hide.

Just a Substack - with screenshots of some of the things I had posted in this forum.

To be frank, communications is not my area of expertise - I don't know how to write things simple enough for a mass audience.

No point writing something technical if the layperson who is actually impacted doesn't get the point and feels there is nothing much they can do about it.

I was hoping for others working in media to carry forward this issue. They are the ones with the platform to spread awareness, not me. But maybe it's too much of an ask.

Then, mind to repeat/repost that info here again?

if bigger players like malaysiakini is too afraid in taking up the matter, may i suggest the smaller ones like cilisos. i've seen them touch on more complex topics before.
https://cilisos.my/contact/

The BNM senior management personnel who wrote this reply to me is still in BNM.

Maybe Tony Pua and Ong Kian Ming can tell us more about this plan.

But I must make it clear that there is no abuse of the Par fund estate. It is an exercise to reduce the size of the estate, and distribute the proceeds to policyholders as well as to the IDF and shareholders....

There are also precedents in the UK where orphan estates have been distributed/reattributed, which were carefully studied in coming up with the current exercise......

If some of the savings from not going through a lengthy court process (which involves expensive lawyers which have to paid from the estate funds) can be channelled to the B40 group in a way that helps them meaningfully, I would consider it an improvement on the UK experience, while being no worse off for policyholders.

This is really tragic and comical at the same time.

KJ, Kian Ming & Tony Pua Are Your New Lecturers (Sort Of) At Taylor’s PPE Bachelor’s Programme

Ong Kian Ming and Tony Pua are now lecturing for Taylor's Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) Program.

TP (Part 3: Tony Pua responds to Tun M): I would listen and bring the proposals back to the minister for consideration. Many excellent proposals were sourced via these meetings. These would include the setting up of a RM2 billion MySalam critical illness and hospitalisation fund for the B40, contributed by the insurance industry. This fund has benefited more than 120,000 Malaysians to date…..I would however avoid parties who are only interested in securing contracts via direct negotiation with the government. The minister would always tell me to inform them that in the event the government is interested in the project, an open tender would be called, and they would be invited to participate.

There was no open tender for the mySalam scheme, even after two years of being in operation. This was the finding and opinion of the Auditor General in the LAPORAN KETUA AUDIT NEGARA 2019 SIRI 2.

Tony Pua And Dr Ong Kian Ming Are Helping Out The Finance Ministry For Free

Maybe these two champions can provide their PPE students a detailed international relations, geo-economic/strategic/political and local political/strategic analysis of allowing Great Eastern Malaysia to:

- Swindle RM 2.37 billion from their participating policyholders to fund the mySalam scheme;

- Providing Great Eastern Malaysia RM 569 million in income tax exemption for the amount transferred from the participating fund to fund mySalam; and

- Awarding Great Eastern Takaful the contract to run mySalam without going through an open tender (direct negotiation) and which benefited Great Eastern Takaful through probably over RM 150 million in wakalah (management) fees.

Perhaps also delve into whether mySalam helped PH gain Malay heartland support.

Also, they should do an analysis on why BNM has failed in getting the other foreign insurers to either divest or contribute to the mySalam trust fund.

Our national brain trust. Best believe them.

All jokes aside, this is a very serious matter.

Our Central Bank (BNM) truly did conspire with MOF, Great Eastern Malaysia and Great Eastern Singapore to misappropriate RM 2.37 billion @3 March 2020 from participating policyholders within Great Eastern Malaysia's closed participating funds.

I hope anyone coming to this forum and chancing on this post takes the time to truly understand what happened.

It's not something to be scoffed at or ridiculed.

By all means, please be sceptical of all claims, including mine.

Question everything, but please keep an open mind to what is being presented.

Follow the evidence.

There are plenty of official accounts, including disclosures within Great Eastern Malaysia's financial statements and annual reports that would corroborate, at the very least, the transfer of RM 2.37 billion from their participating funds on 3 March 2020 and subsequent payment of the same amount by Great Eastern Singapore to the mySalam Trust Fund on 5 March 2020.

Please read the following articles within Murray Hunter's Substack to understand what happened.

Billions up in the air? Why haven't other foreign insurers operating in Malaysia complied with the divestment condition?

Guest Editorial: Will Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) be putting pressure on AIA, Prudential, Tokio Marine, Zurich, Chubb and AIG to contribute to the mySalam Trust Fund?

Can a Malaysian be covered for a CI plan from SG based insurer?

common guidance for critical illness (CI) coverage is 3-5x of your annual income.

If you have annual income of 100k, that's 300k of CI coverage which is probably not cheap for most folks.

What's your CI coverage currently? is it following this common guidance/guideline of 3-5x of your annual income?

I do share the same believe with you partially but CI payout probably helps if you are unable to work short/long term due to dreaded disease but not permanently/temporarily disabled in the sense of TPD

CI is another expensive product which I might eventually cut during advance age to sustain my medical card longer

wah, now my prudential medical card premium increase is like every year, year 2023 my premium is RM280, last year apr increase to RM324, then last month another increase to RM351. This round no info, no email, just direct increase, auto reduct from my credit card. Call the agent, no reply, What can i do?