"How does an RM know exactly when a confidential survey about her own performance was sent to her client? My SCB Singapore experience and the MAS regulatory implications."

I want to share my experience with SCB Singapore private banking that I think has serious regulatory implications worth discussing here. **THE CONDUCT:** During my private banking relationship with SCB Singapore — every time the Bank's official RM satisfaction survey was issued to me — my Relationship Manager contacted me immediately after. On each occasion she told me explicitly that her required passing score was 8, 9, or 10 out of 10. I gave her those scores every time. Not honestly — because she managed my financial portfolio and I did not feel I could give her an unfavourable rating without consequences; because I also believed she has visibility of my scoring. THE KEY REGULATORY QUESTIONS: **1. HOW DID SHE KNOW?** The most important question is how my RM obtained consistent and precise knowledge of when confidential surveys about her own performance were issued. Possible explanations: — Direct system access to survey data — Internal notifications from the survey administration department — Informal advice from colleagues  Each explanation points to a systemic failure — not just unprofessional individual conduct.  **2. IS THIS SYSTEMIC?** The standardised threshold — 8, 9, or 10 — communicated consistently as a known benchmark suggests an institutionally established performance standard. If this applies across all RMs — the incentive structure applies to every RM in the Bank.  **3. REGULATORY REPORTING INTEGRITY:** To the extent that SCB uses client satisfaction survey data in any regulatory reporting to MAS —including as evidence of fair dealing compliance — the integrity of that data is directly compromised.  **SCB'S RESPONSE TO MY FORMAL COMPLAINT:** "We have reminded the relevant staff to exercise care when discussing client surveys." I will let this community assess whether a staff reminder is an adequate response to the regulatory concerns described above.  **QUESTIONS FOR THIS COMMUNITY:** 1. Has anyone experienced similar survey solicitation from an SCB RM or any other Singapore bank RM? 2. What are the MAS regulatory implications of RM satisfaction survey data being systematically compromised? 3. Is there a mechanism for clients to collectively raise this with MAS as a systemic issue?   Note: I have not named the RM involved out of respect for personal privacy. My complaint is with the institution. Look for the full story with evidentiary proof on my LinkedIn profile page - posts www.linkedin.com/in/nesan-kandasamy-ab253249 **Report similar experiences to:** MAS: www.mas.gov.sgFIDReC: www.fidrec.com.sg