Consumer financial disputes fall for S’pore banks, rise for life insurers and financial advisers

Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre chief executive Eunice Chua noted that among the 432 claims handled in the latest financial year, 147 involved life insurers.

Published Sep 11, 2026, 09:30 AM

Updated Sep 11, 2026, 10:36 AM

Market conduct claims against banks in Singapore have decreased by 9.5% due to improved sales supervision and complaint-handling processes.

Claims against life insurers and financial advisers increased, with many disputes against financial advisers linked to investment-linked policies (ILPs).

Regulatory changes will make financial advice optional for complex products, including ILPs, emphasising stronger investor safeguards and clearer product risk disclosures.

SINGAPORE – Market conduct claims against banks and finance companies have trended lower over the past three financial years, according to the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre (FIDReC).

By contrast, claims against life insurers and licensed financial advisers have been on an upward trend.

FIDReC chief executive Eunice Chua highlighted this trend at the Association of Financial Advisers (Singapore) (AFAS) annual conference in late July.

Market conduct disputes at FIDReC typically involve giving inappropriate financial advice, making false and misleading statements about financial products, or inadequately disclosing information needed for customers to make decisions.

FIDReC helps individuals, small businesses and charities resolve such disputes with licensed financial institutions – including banks, life insurers and advisers – through mediation or adjudication.

Speaking to The Straits Times after the event, Chua shared data ahead of FIDReC’s annual report, which is due to be released in November.

For the financial year ended June 2026, FIDReC handled a total of 432 market conduct claims. Of these, 191 were against banks and finance companies, a decrease of 9.5 per cent from the previous financial year .

While banks and finance companies continue to make up the biggest share – 44.2 per cent – of all market conduct claims, that proportion has been falling.

The decline could signal that banks are making headway in handling market conduct issues.

Chua said that anecdotally, FIDReC has observed banks continuing to strengthen their sales supervision and complaint-handling processes over the years.

“We do see a lot more steps – checklists, verification, callbacks – being put in place to ensure that the sale is done properly,” she added.

Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) director Ong-Ang Ai Boon said banks have established greater oversight of the sales and advisory process, and that sales professionals have to undergo regular training to maintain their professional and ethical standards.

“Trust is built over time,” she noted, adding that banks earn this trust by being transparent about fees and product features, taking accountability for mistakes and treating customers fairly.

Banks have also used customers’ feedback and complaints to improve on their product and servicing standards.

Dispute resolution outcomes at FIDReC provide one such source of customer insights, which Chua has observed banks applying to serve customers better.

She cited an example from two years ago, when FIDReC highlighted case studies on premium financing – the practice of taking out a loan to buy a life insurance policy.

Those cases prompted banks to recognise that their clients might not understand how overall returns could be affected when they use premium financing to service financial products.

In response to FIDReC’s findings, many banks now present expected loan interest rates alongside a product’s projected returns.

This gives customers a clearer idea of their projected returns net of interest, Chua said.

At the industry level, banks come together through ABS to share best practices, discuss emerging risks and explore ways to raise standards for treating customers honestly and fairly.

ABS also conducts mystery shopping exercises, which are typically carried out over an 18-month period.

Ong-Ang said that these exercises provide an independent assessment of how front-line staff are interacting with customers.

“The findings help banks identify areas for improvement, reinforce good practices, and strengthen training, supervision and controls,” she added.

Life insurers and financial advisers

While banks are successfully reducing consumer disputes, life insurers and financial advisers are seeing a jump in market conduct claims.

Chua noted that among the 432 claims handled in the latest financial year, 147 involved life insurers – an increase of 36.1 per cent from the previous financial year.

Separately, financial advisers and insurance brokers were the subject of 85 market conduct claims, up 30.8 per cent year on year.

Chan Wai Kit, executive director of the Life Insurance Association Singapore (LIA Singapore), pointed out that it is important to distinguish between a claim and a subsequent finding of misconduct by FIDReC.

“A lodged claim may ultimately be substantiated or unsubstantiated,” he noted, adding that while claim volumes warrant close attention, they should not, on their own, be taken as evidence of the prevalence of misconduct.

He said the life insurance industry actively works to minimise potential disputes.

Where there is evidence of wrongdoing, he emphasised, the industry takes responsibility for treating customers fairly, and will penalise those responsible for any misconduct or misleading sales tactics.

Furthermore, the industry tracks consumer experiences through annual mystery shopping exercises, dispute outcomes at FIDReC and the Insurance Trust Indicator Studies , which is commissioned by the Insurance Culture and Conduct Steering Committee (ICCSC).

The ICCSC is a joint industry committee comprising the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), trade associations like LIA, distribution and intermediary associations like AFAS, and senior insurance executives.

Chan noted that the insights from these exercises and studies allow insurers to identify emerging concerns early and take proactive steps to improve on their training, operational processes and product disclosures to build public trust.

Like life insurers, financial advisers saw a rise in market conduct claims.

However, Chua noted that a growing number of claims against financial advisers specifically relate to investment-linked policies (ILPs), driven largely by the product’s complexity .

AFAS’ honorary secretary Graham Choo explained that ILPs may look like simple life insurance products, but, unlike traditional insurance, they can lose money if their underlying investments perform poorly.

He added that ILP fees “may not be quite straightforward” because they are structured differently from those of regular unit trusts. While ILP clients pay for both insurance coverage and investments, unit trust customers pay only investment-related fees.

Choo emphasised that advisers who market ILPs must make a greater effort to explain investment risks and fees so that clients fully understand what drives their policy’s value.

On a wider note, financial advisory firms seek to forge long-term partnerships with clients.

AFAS vice-president Salim M. Amin said these firms start by building credibility through ensuring that their client-facing advisers are equipped with relevant product-related knowledge and strong ethical principles.

Advisers then have to maintain the client relationship by providing good after-sales support and by supporting customers during critical life events.

Financial advisory is a lifelong journey between financial advisers and their clients, rather than a one-time sale, Salim said.

Optional advice for complex investment products

This long-term guidance will become even more crucial as upcoming regulatory changes shift more responsibility to retail investors, making professional advice optional for complex investment products.

Under the forthcoming changes, most retail investors will no longer be required to seek guidance before purchasing complex products, such as structured notes, derivatives and, following the regulatory changes, ILPs.

Investors already do not need to seek financial advice when they purchase non-complex products such as stocks, exchange-traded funds, real estate investment trusts and fixed income instruments.

Investors may, however, still choose to seek advice.

FIDReC’s Chua noted that investors can choose to stay with a financial representative they trust.

She cautioned that self-directed investors who decide to buy complex products on their own may find it more difficult to make a claim on the grounds of misrepresentation, mis-selling or inadequate disclosure of material information in the event of a dispute.

To strike a balance between giving investors more autonomy and providing an adequate level of consumer protection, investor safeguards will be strengthened at the same time through enhanced “Product Highlights Sheets” and pre-transaction alerts.

Complex products will feature a red label on their Product Highlights Sheet – as opposed to the standard yellow heading band for non-complex products – which will clearly present key product features, risks and expense ratios.

In addition, investors will receive a digital pre-transaction alert warning them that a product is complex, alongside a reminder to read the relevant documents, complete relevant learning modules, or seek advice.

Chua said: “This kind of warning makes it extremely clear that a product is complex. It outlines the specific risks and features, details who the product is suitable for, and asks questions like, ‘Can you afford to lose up to 100 per cent of your investment?’ and ‘How many years can you hold it for?’”

This evolution in the financial landscape comes as the MAS shifts towards a disclosure-based regime, under which investors are presented with the necessary information to make informed decisions.

“As Singapore matures and as more people invest and purchase financial products, it’s appropriate for people to be aware of their responsibilities,” Chua said.

Chor Khieng Yuit is senior correspondent at The Straits Times. She believes in financial education for the masses, particularly the low-income, the elderly and people with special needs.

Banks and financial institutions

金融业纠纷解决中心首席执行官蔡恩熙指出，在最近一个财政年度处理的 432 起索赔案件中，有 147 起涉及人寿保险公司。

发布于2026年9月11日上午9:30

更新于2026年9月11日上午10:36

由于销售监管和投诉处理流程的改进，新加坡针对银行的市场行为索赔减少了 9.5%。

针对人寿保险公司和财务顾问的索赔案件有所增加，其中许多针对财务顾问的纠纷与投资型保单 (ILP) 有关。

监管改革将使复杂产品（包括投资连结保险）的财务建议成为可选项，同时强调加强投资者保障和更清晰的产品风险披露。

新加坡——据金融业纠纷解决中心（FIDReC）称，过去三个财政年度，针对银行和金融公司的市场行为索赔呈下降趋势。

相比之下，针对人寿保险公司和持牌财务顾问的索赔呈上升趋势。

FIDReC 首席执行官 Eunice Chua 在 7 月下旬举行的新加坡金融顾问协会 (AFAS) 年会上强调了这一趋势。

FIDReC 的市场行为纠纷通常涉及提供不恰当的财务建议、对金融产品作出虚假和误导性陈述，或未充分披露客户做出决策所需的信息。

FIDReC 通过调解或裁决帮助个人、小企业和慈善机构解决与持牌金融机构（包括银行、人寿保险公司和顾问）之间的此类纠纷。

活动结束后，蔡先生在接受《海峡时报》采访时分享了FIDReC年度报告的数据，该报告将于11月发布。

在截至2026年6月的财政年度，FIDReC共处理了432起市场行为投诉。其中，191起针对银行和金融公司，比上一财政年度减少了9.5%。

虽然银行和金融公司仍然占所有市场行为索赔的最大份额（44.2%），但这一比例一直在下降。

这一降幅可能表明银行在处理市场行为问题方面取得了进展。

蔡先生表示，根据FIDReC的观察，多年来，各银行一直在不断加强其销售监管和投诉处理流程。

她补充说：“我们看到，为了确保销售顺利完成，采取了更多步骤——例如检查清单、核实、回访等。”

新加坡银行协会 (ABS) 理事王爱文表示，各银行已加强对销售和咨询流程的监管，销售人员必须定期接受培训，以保持其专业和道德标准。

她指出，“信任是日积月累建立起来的”，并补充说，银行通过在费用和产品功能方面保持透明、对错误承担责任以及公平对待客户来赢得这种信任。

银行也利用客户的反馈和投诉来改进其产品和服务标准。

FIDReC 的争议解决结果提供了客户洞察的来源之一，蔡先生观察到银行利用这些洞察来更好地服务客户。

她引用了两年前的一个例子，当时 FIDReC 重点介绍了保费融资案例研究——即通过贷款购买人寿保险单的做法。

这些案例促使银行意识到，当客户使用溢价融资来提供金融产品时，他们可能并不了解整体收益会受到怎样的影响。

为了响应 FIDReC 的调查结果，许多银行现在将预期贷款利率与产品的预期收益一起列出。

蔡先生表示，这能让客户更清楚地了解扣除利息后的预期收益。

在行业层面，各银行通过ABS聚集在一起，分享最佳实践，讨论新兴风险，并探索提高诚实、公平对待客户标准的途径。

ABS 还会进行神秘顾客调查，这项调查通常会持续 18 个月。

Ong-Ang表示，这些演练可以独立评估一线员工与顾客的互动情况。

她补充说：“这些发现有助于银行确定需要改进的领域，强化良好做法，并加强培训、监督和控制。”

人寿保险公司和财务顾问

尽管银行成功减少了消费者纠纷，但人寿保险公司和财务顾问却发现市场行为索赔激增。

蔡先生指出，在最近一个财政年度处理的 432 起索赔案件中，有 147 起涉及人寿保险公司，比上一个财政年度增加了 36.1%。

另外，金融顾问和保险经纪人共收到 85 起市场行为投诉，比上年同期增长 30.8%。

新加坡人寿保险协会（LIA Singapore）执行董事陈伟杰指出，区分索赔和金融业争议解决委员会（FIDReC）随后作出的不当行为认定非常重要。

他指出，“提出的索赔最终可能被证实，也可能被否定”，并补充说，虽然索赔数量值得密切关注，但它们本身不应被视为不当行为普遍存在的证据。

他表示，人寿保险行业正积极努力将潜在的纠纷降至最低。

他强调，如果发现有不当行为的证据，行业将承担公平对待客户的责任，并将惩罚任何不当行为或误导性销售策略的责任人。

此外，该行业通过年度神秘顾客调查、FIDReC 的争议结果以及由保险文化和行为指导委员会 (ICCSC) 委托进行的保险信任指标研究来跟踪消费者体验。

ICCSC 是一个联合行业委员会，由新加坡金融管理局 (MAS)、LIA 等行业协会、AFAS 等分销和中介协会以及高级保险主管组成。

Chan指出，这些演练和研究提供的见解使保险公司能够及早发现新出现的问题，并采取积极措施改进其培训、运营流程和产品披露，从而建立公众信任。

与人寿保险公司一样，财务顾问也面临着市场行为索赔案件的增加。

然而，蔡指出，针对财务顾问的索赔案件中，与投资连结保险（ILP）相关的案件数量不断增加，这主要是由于该产品的复杂性所致。

AFAS名誉秘书Graham Choo解释说，ILP（投资连结保险）看起来像是简单的寿险产品，但与传统保险不同的是，如果其基础投资表现不佳，它们可能会亏损。

他还补充说，ILP的费用“可能不太容易理解”，因为它们的结构与普通单位信托基金不同。ILP客户既要支付保险费用，又要支付投资费用，而单位信托基金客户只需支付与投资相关的费用。

Choo强调，推销投资连结保险的顾问必须更加努力地解释投资风险和费用，以便客户充分了解其保单价值的驱动因素。

从更广泛的角度来看，财务咨询公司寻求与客户建立长期合作关系。

AFAS 副总裁 Salim M. Amin 表示，这些公司首先要确保其面向客户的顾问具备相关的产品知识和强大的道德原则，从而建立信誉。

顾问随后必须通过提供良好的售后支持和在客户经历重大人生事件时提供支持来维护客户关系。

萨利姆表示，财务咨询是财务顾问与其客户之间的一段终身旅程，而不是一次性的交易。

针对复杂投资产品的可选建议

随着即将到来的监管变化将更多责任转移给零售投资者，使得专业建议对于复杂的投资产品而言成为可选项，这种长期指导将变得更加重要。

根据即将出台的政策，大多数散户投资者在购买结构性票据、衍生品以及监管改革后的保险挂钩产品等复杂产品之前，将不再需要寻求指导。

投资者在购买股票、交易所交易基金、房地产投资信托基金和固定收益工具等非复杂产品时，已经不需要寻求财务建议。

不过，投资者仍然可以选择寻求建议。

FIDReC的蔡指出，投资者可以选择继续与他们信任的理财代表合作。

她提醒说，自行购买复杂产品的自主投资者，在发生纠纷时，可能更难以虚假陈述、误售或重大信息披露不足为由提出索赔。

为了在赋予投资者更多自主权和提供充分的消费者保护之间取得平衡，我们将通过加强“产品亮点说明书”和交易前提醒来同时加强对投资者的保护。

复杂产品的产品亮点说明书将采用红色标签，而非非复杂产品的标准黄色标题条，该标签将清晰地展示关​​键产品特性、风险和费用比率。

此外，投资者还会收到数字交易前提醒，告知他们该产品较为复杂，并提醒他们阅读相关文件、完成相关学习模块或寻求建议。

蔡先生表示：“这种警告非常清楚地表明产品很复杂。它概述了具体的风险和特点，详细说明了产品适合哪些人群，并提出了诸如‘你能承受高达100%的投资损失吗？’和‘你能持有多少年？’之类的问题。”

随着新加坡金融管理局 (MAS) 向信息披露制度转变，金融格局也随之发生了这种变化。在信息披露制度下，投资者将获得必要的信息以做出明智的决定。

蔡先生说：“随着新加坡的成熟，越来越多的人投资和购买金融产品，人们理应意识到自己的责任。”

卓庆玉是《海峡时报》的资深记者。她致力于普及大众金融知识，尤其关注低收入人群、老年人和残疾人士。

银行和金融机构