And the battle rages on. As you might have known, my best friend -d- has been duped by a couple of people that sold him really worthless speakers for a whopping $600. As I am not the victim, and just the teller of a very sad and brutal story, I shall let him conclude this little episode that he has sponsored for $50 (you’ll find out why $50).
WARNING: Very heavy reading ahead.
~ ~ ~
Happy 2009 everyone. If you have not already known, my 2008 culminated with a white van speakers scam and ever since, I have been actively seeking options on how to handle this incident.
I went down to the Small Claims Tribunal (SCT) to file a claim against the company which is utilising these techniques to sell their wares to unsuspecting victims. The registrar arranged a date (some day next week) for me to meet with the owner of the company in order to mediate a settlement. I asked the registrar what else can we do and she told me to go to the Consumer’s Association of Singapore (CASE).
So off I went to CASE to ask for their assistance in creating awareness but to my horror, the officer and CASE’s media team was not interested (At least the officer did attempt to ask their media team I guess). Sadly, They told me that this has been happening for so long and they have done a story on this before and thus, they will only key in my complaint against this company without taking any action or follow up. I think that doing this is useless because these companies have been known to change company and product names to prevent people from getting too familiar with their schemes. She said that I should go to SCT.
I gave the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) a call and the officer who attended to me told me that essentially, these companies are not cheating because the CAD’s definition of cheating is one of a higher order. The "cheating" that happened to me and many others are what they refer to as the layman’s understanding of cheating. He then told me to go down to the SCT or to CASE.
So what now? SCT and CAD tells me to go down to CASE. CASE tells me to go to SCT. Are we playing passing the baton game here? In colloquial speech, this is what we term as "LPPL" (It isn’t the best definition but the closest I could find. haha.)
The company also called me a couple of days back to offer an out of court settlement for $500 even though the receipt stated $300. The person kept persuading me to settle it out of court, saying that his boss didn’t want any trouble due to the upcoming Chinese new year and also because the court will only offer me less than $300 due to the receipt (which stated $300). They are very clever indeed and know how to weave around the law. I wonder why they would be so willing to offer me $200 more than the receipt if they are not guilty of selling it to me at $600. Who in the right frame of mind would be willing to do that? Well, this is simply because they will still earn $100 from me (since they sold it to me at $600) and get back the speakers to con others. I didn’t accede to their request and merely said I would consider it.
My plan initially was to take them to the SCT and later to a referee and to make their ’boss’ come down to make things inconvenient for them but I’ve come to realise through some forums that there is another way out for them. They can simply not turn up. Although a default judgement will be entered against them if they don’t show up, the next step to take is to file a "Writ of Seizure and Sale" to seize and sell the movable property belonging to the Judgment Debtor (the company).
Here’s comes the catch if I choose to take this path:
1) Bailiffs carry out execution upon the Applicant’s/Judgment Creditor’s [My] instructions. They are not responsible for tracing the whereabouts of the debtors or to ensure that the sum owed to Applicant/Judgment creditor is recovered.
2) There is no guarantee that the outcome of the Writ of Seizure & Sale will be successful, but the Judgment Creditor [ME] has to bear the execution costs incurred.
3) A filing fee of S$105 (at least) for the Writ of Seizure &
4) An initial deposit for the Bailiff’s Expenses is S$300.
5) Regardless of whether or not the execution is successful, the Bailiffs expenses for each attempt of the execution are deducted from these deposit(s). Therefore, the more attempts you make, the more costs incurred. You may have to pay further deposits if you want to make more attempts.
6) The cost may only be recovered if the execution is successful and the payment of the defendant or the proceeds of sale are enough to cover the judgment debt and the cost incurred.
7) For any other enforcement options please obtain advice from your own lawyer.
The above are just a few "catches" which I have quoted. For the full articles, you can find them here, here and here.
This is just so darn disappointing. In short, this means if you can’t afford legal counsel, or the company closes down (changes name in their case),the company or the boss files for bankruptcy, boss runs away or changes address, there’s NOTHING you can do.
No wonder people always say that the law only protects the rich.
When quizzed about this form of cheating as mentioned earlier, the reply that CASE, CAD, SCT and the Police gave me was simply unacceptable - If this has been going on for so long and yet people are still being duped, shouldn’t they have a duty to do something about it instead of shrugging it off as ’been there done that?’. What’s the point of having a consumer’s association? No wonder they didn’t dare name it Consumer’s Protection Association which the Aussies did. It’s also nice that they have a ScamNet to warn the public and provide advice though I feel that this is still inadequate. Scams should be covered as often as possible when there’s a new report of it. Conmen are not so silly. They lie low after they are being reported and will only strike again when people have been lulled into a false sense of security. Terrorism also works the same way.
Knowing that you Singaporeans are an apathetic bunch, I would like to remind you that while it may not affect you directly now, you’ll never know in future if it will affect the people around you. By then, it’s too late to start feeling guilty about not doing anything when you have the opportunity to.
So what do you readers think I should do now? Should I accept the $500 and let them have the last laugh, or risk getting nothing back because I can’t afford to file a WSS against them when they don’t turn up at the mediation? If anyone of you have some rich relatives or legally trained friends who are willing to help or finance the fight against them, I will certainly do it. Any help will be greatly appreciated.
Follow follow up
The company called me up to offer me $500 as a settlement. They told me that the SCT would only offer me $300 or less because of what was written on the receipt (Damn they’re good, they know the law too!). After checking out the forums and getting some legal advice from my friend’s friend, I realised that they are right. It was not worth pursuing further since $300 was probably the most I could have gotten from the SCT. I asked for $550 but they counter offered $520. I said no deal and they said ok then, “See you at the SCT”. In less than 2 mins, they called again and said ok, $550. Damn! I should have demanded $600 this time but since I rarely go back on my word (even with such people), I agreed. They would be coming at night to collect the speakers and do the refund.
It was then I decided to film the whole transaction down. I planted a camera in a shoe box and faced it towards the door. My best friend lent his support by coming down and doing an audio recording of the transaction. They made me sign a refund form which says that I had received a full refund although it was only $550 and not $600. I trashed talked with the guy and finally, he left. Unfortunately, you won’t be able to view the video. It is only for archival purposes since I won’t be pursuing the matter any further than trying to create awareness. Close friends may get to see it on my com but no, it’s not something for youtube. I still value my life and my family’s life. It was a good lesson. $50 taught me how to file for a small claim and I discovered that the law is so easily manipulated. If you are rich, the law can be your best friend. Too bad I’m not or else I’ll bring the buggers to court for sure.
~ ~ ~
0 comments:
Post a Comment