Client testimonials
CLIENT FEEDBACK

What Clients Say About
Working with Us

Feedback from borrowers, financial institutions, and fintech operators who have worked with Perak Partners on facility reviews, restructuring engagements, and regulatory advisory matters.

← Back to Home
340+
ENGAGEMENTS COMPLETED
4.9
AVERAGE CLIENT RATING
17+
YEARS IN PRACTICE
100%
WRITTEN DELIVERABLES

Client Reviews

Collected from clients across facility review, restructuring, and regulatory engagements.

HA
Halim Abdul Rahman
CFO · Petaling Jaya

"The written commentary was structured so our board could identify what to negotiate without needing a follow-up briefing. They flagged two non-standard provisions and explained what we should raise with the lender. We raised them. The lender accepted one and declined the other with a reason. That is about as much as you can reasonably expect from a facilities review, and it was delivered within the committed timeframe."

Facility Agreement Review · March 2025
FI
Faridah Ibrahim
General Counsel · Kuala Lumpur

"We brought Perak Partners in when our existing external counsel could not give us a clear reading of a BNM policy document affecting our product structure. The advice cited the paragraph-level text from the guideline — not a condensed summary we then had to verify ourselves. The engagement was scoped clearly in advance and the fee was as stated. No revision after the work was done."

Regulatory Advisory · February 2025
RO
Ruhaya Osman
Director of Finance · Shah Alam

"We were in an informal workout with two lenders and needed someone to help us frame the restructuring terms in a way that kept the relationship intact. Perak Partners took a measured approach — the communications were factual and did not escalate the situation. The weekly board updates were genuinely useful. The matter resolved with an amendment and extension that both lenders accepted."

Debt Restructuring Advisory · January 2025
ZY
Zainul Yusof
Co-founder · Fintech, Kuala Lumpur

"MSBA 2011 licensing was something we had read but not fully mapped against our specific payment flow. Perak Partners went through the exemption criteria in detail, identified which provisions applied, and helped us draft the BNMLink pre-application description. The process was more involved than anticipated — but the advice was genuinely aligned with the primary guideline text throughout, not a summarised version of it."

Regulatory Advisory · March 2025
SW
Siti Widad
Head of Treasury · Klang Valley

"We had a murabahah revolving credit facility being documented and needed a review that covered both the conventional cross-default mechanics and the Shariah structuring — without splitting the work between two firms. Perak Partners handled both without routing the Islamic finance component out. The commentary addressed the SAC resolution that applied to the profit rate mechanism, which was the detail we most needed clarity on."

Facility Agreement Review · February 2025
NB
Norzahari Baharom
Managing Director · Selangor

"We used Perak Partners for a project finance facility review with an unusual security structure. The marked-up document was more detailed than I expected at this fee level. The commentary on the charge over shares provisions was particularly thorough. Turnaround was six working days — within the committed timeframe. The fixed scope and fixed fee format was refreshing; there was no ambiguity at invoice."

Facility Agreement Review · April 2025

Case Studies

Engagement narratives shared with client consent. Names and identifying details are withheld.

CASE STUDY · 01 · DEBT RESTRUCTURING
CHALLENGE

A Malaysian manufacturing company with three active lenders was approaching a financial covenant test date with insufficient headroom. The board had not yet approached any lender and was uncertain whether to seek a waiver, a covenant amendment, or a broader restructuring of the maturity schedule.

APPROACH

Perak Partners reviewed the three facility agreements against the client's current financial position and identified a definitional inconsistency in the EBITDA calculation across two facilities. Two restructuring term sheet options were prepared — a 12-month covenant holiday and a full covenant redefinition — and a lender engagement strategy was developed. Weekly board updates were provided from the point of engagement.

OUTCOME

All three lenders agreed to the 12-month covenant holiday within six weeks of the first engagement letter. The company met the resumed covenant test comfortably in the following period. The engagement resolved without any formal enforcement action and the lender relationships were preserved throughout.

Timeline: 8 weeks · Informal workout resolved
CASE STUDY · 02 · REGULATORY ADVISORY
CHALLENGE

A fintech operator building a cross-border remittance product needed to determine whether its payment flow fell within the MSBA 2011 licensing requirement or an available exemption. Internal teams had read the MSBA 2011 but reached conflicting conclusions on which paragraph applied to their specific structure.

APPROACH

The payment flow was mapped against the MSBA 2011 definitions and relevant BNM policy documents, with specific paragraph citations throughout. The analysis found the domestic collection activity triggered a licensing consideration while the foreign disbursement did not. Perak Partners drafted the BNMLink pre-application description and coordinated follow-up responses during the pre-application exchange with BNM.

OUTCOME

BNM confirmed the domestic collection activity required a registration — the lighter category rather than a full licence. The client proceeded to registration, completed within the standard BNM processing timeframe. The product launched approximately four months after first instruction, with a clear regulatory basis documented throughout.

Timeline: 12 weeks · MSBA registration completed
CASE STUDY · 03 · FACILITY REVIEW
CHALLENGE

A property development group was reviewing a RM 45 million term loan with an ijarah tranche alongside a conventional tranche. The board had two weeks before the signing deadline and needed a borrower-side review covering both structures before committing to the documentation.

APPROACH

The review covered both tranches — conventional and ijarah — including the cross-facility mechanics, within seven working days. The board-ready commentary flagged four provisions: a completion deadline shorter than standard for this project type, an unusually broad key personnel event of default, an ijarah profit rate redetermination clause, and a cross-default threshold set below market standard for the borrower's credit profile.

OUTCOME

The borrower raised all four points with the lender. The completion deadline was extended by three months. The key personnel definition was narrowed. The cross-default threshold was raised to market standard. The ijarah profit rate clause was accepted as drafted following Perak Partners' explanation of the SAC resolution basis. The borrower signed with three of four negotiated improvements.

Timeline: 7 working days · 3 of 4 provisions negotiated

Professional Credentials

Verifiable professional standing underpinning all client engagements.

Malaysian Bar

All practitioners hold current membership with annual CPD compliance in banking and finance law.

AIBIM Affiliation

Associate membership supporting current awareness of Islamic banking industry developments and SAC resolutions.

Repeat Clients

A majority of engagements in any given quarter are from clients returning for a second or subsequent matter.

KL Sentral Address

Level 14, Menara CIMB — a practical location for clients working within Malaysia's financial services sector.

Get in Touch

Telephone
+60 3 2270 8146
Address
Level 14, Menara CIMB
Jalan Stesen Sentral 2, 50470 KL
Hours
Mon–Fri: 9:00 am – 6:00 pm
Sat: 10:00 am – 1:00 pm
BEGIN YOUR ENGAGEMENT

Ready to discuss your matter?

Send a brief description of the facility, restructuring context, or regulatory question. We respond within one working day.

Contact Perak Partners