Rilek1Corner

Tag: CASE

  • CASE Alert: Ownership Of Vehicle Bought From Cars Today Not Transferred To Buyers

    CASE Alert: Ownership Of Vehicle Bought From Cars Today Not Transferred To Buyers

    The consumers’ watchdog has issued an alert about a car dealer after receiving 12 complaints from customers who claim the ownership of the vehicles they bought had not been transferred to them.

    The Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) is investigating after buyers reported facing sudden repossession after buying their vehicles from Cars Today in Kaki Bukit.

    The claims total almost $500,000.

    In most cases, the cars were bought several months ago, but their ownership was not transferred, despite the buyers making several enquiries with the firm.

    Many of the customers had their cars towed away at the weekend and others have been told by Cars Today’s owner James Poh to expect a repossession.

    Mr Poh, 60, admitted to The Straits Times yesterday that his company is struggling to repay a $1 million loan from credit company Kenso Leasing.

    He claimed that Kenso suddenly demanded repayment within seven days on Feb 6.

    As Mr Poh could not come up with the money in time, Kenso said it would repossess 43 cars from his customers.

    Mr Poh said in Mandarin: “I begged (Kenso) for a six-month extension, but they said no.

    “Many buyers have been calling me, but I don’t have the money to repay them, I have no choice.This is my fault and I don’t know how to fix it.”

    The Straits Times visited Cars Today’s headquarters at the Entrepreneur Business Centre, 18 Kaki Bukit Road 3, last night and found it empty, its doors padlocked. At least three letters from lawyers or summons from the Small Claims Tribunal were on the floor.

    The Straits Times understands the space was let to new tenants last weekend, as Cars Today owes three months’ rent.

    A commodity trader, who spoke anonymously, said he stands to lose his downpayment of $18,000 after repossession.

    He has formed a WhatsApp group for other buyers facing the same plight, which currently has 14 members, and said he has heard of 10 cars having been towed away since last Friday.

    Another buyer, Mr Marc Tay, is expecting his car to be repossessed any day now. He spent almost $31,000 on a Honda Civic last November.

    The 25-year-old, who works in business development, said: “I tried to contact the financing company and told them I would willingly surrender the car if they would wait till after Chinese New Year, but they wouldn’t even consider this small request.

    “This is a big blow for me. I’ve just started working, and it’s my own money – this whole incident has caused a big dent in my financial plans.”

    Case has advised affected customers to make a police report immediately and consult a lawyer as the claims are more than $10,000 and exceed the jurisdiction of the Small Claims Tribunal.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • S Iswaran: Exercise Restraint And Let Due Process Take Its Course

    S Iswaran: Exercise Restraint And Let Due Process Take Its Course

    SINGAPORE – Some individuals have “gone too far” in their reactions against the unethical practices of the errant retailer at Sim Lim Square, said Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office S Iswaran today (Nov 8), as he said that police have begun looking into reports on the case, as well as a related report on harassment.

    In a Facebook post today (Nov 8), Mr Iswaran, who is also Second Minister for Home Affairs & Trade and Industry, spoke up about the recent incident at Sim Lim Square. He urged people to “exercise restraint” and not to take matters into their own hands. “Let due process take its course,” he wrote.

    Photo: Screengrab from Minister S Iswaran’s Facebook page

    Mr Jover Chew, owner of the shop Mobile Air at Sim Lim Square, was in the spotlight recently following reports of Vietnamese tourist Pham Van Thoai going on his knees to beg for his money back, and that the shop refunded a customer more than S$1,000 in coins.

    On Thursday, a T-shirt printed with an expletive was placed outside his shop, which was closed. Mr Chew’s particulars, which were leaked online, were also reportedly used to order three large pizzas to his home on Wednesday. His private photos were also leaked.

    Mr Iswaran said that the Government is looking into measures to protect consumers better but this may “take some time”, especially if the laws require amending.

    “More immediately, we are working with CASE and other stakeholders to educate consumers on their rights, so that they do not fall prey to such sales tactics, and know where and how to seek recourse when necessary,” he added.

    Member of Parliament Vikram Nair also wrote on Facebook today of his interest in looking into Singapore’s consumer protection laws. Referring to an article by TODAY, he singled out the suggestion by a lawyer to give the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) additional powers to administer fines to errant businesses.

    Photo: Screengrab from MP Vikram Nair’s Facebook page

    “Although it is highly unusual to give a consumer association such powers, I believe the public expects CASE to not only be a consumer advocate, but also to intervene more directly in cases where consumers,” he wrote.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com

  • The CASE For And Against Online Vigilantism

    The CASE For And Against Online Vigilantism

    By now, many would be familiar with Mr Jover Chew and his shop at Sim Lim Square.

    The spotlight has recently been on him and Mobile Air after reports of foreign customers’ bad experience surfaced in mainstream media.

    RELATED STORIES

    But when Mr Chew showed no remorse in subsequent interviews, including with The New Paper, and Mobile Air continued its daily operations despite the bad press, infuriated netizens took matters into their own hands.

    On Tuesday night, Facebook page SMRT Ltd (Feedback) named and shamed Mr Chew, 32, and his wife.

    Photos of them, their contact numbers and Mr Chew’s properties were also listed on the Facebook page.

    And it seems that Mr Chew has succumbed to the pressure. When The New Paper visited Sim Lim Square yesterday, the shop was closed. Mr Chew has also diverted his calls to another number.

    Previously, Mobile Air did not cease operations despite regularly making it to the Consumers Association of Singapore’s (Case) blacklist of Sim Lim Square tenants.

    Some businesses on the list, like Cyber Maestro, simply switch their signboards and it’s business as usual.

    Cyber Maestro, which was slapped with a court injunction on Monday, gave way to a new tenant, Megacentrix Technologies, and subtenant VS One in August.

    But a check revealed that the person behind VS One is related to the boss of Cyber Maestro.

    The two businesses also share the same registered address. The shareholders of the two businesses are husband and wife. This is where the problem lies, said lawyer Steven Lam.

    “With the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act (CPFTA), what comes out of it is a civil remedy,” he said.

    “You can sue the offending business, but many of them simply close down and wind up.

    “Then, they open another company under different shareholders who are shadow directors.”

    He suggested a dedicated enforcement body to clamp down on errant retailers for more “regulatory bite”.

    Mr Lam also cautioned against netizens’ online shaming.

    “Although it may seem to be effective, don’t forget there’s the Prevention of Harassment Act. They have to be a bit careful about where the line is drawn.”

    Singapore Management University’s law professor Eugene Tan feels that the netizens’ disgust with Mr Chew does not justify their actions.

    INTRUSIVE

    He said: “At another level, it’s over-zealous and self-righteous. Regardless of the legitimacy of the cause, the actions by netizens are disproportionate and intrusive. Two wrongs don’t make a right.”

    Case executive director Seah Seng Choon thinks that a civil law is sufficient for now.

    “I think that for the time being, given that we have a civil law in place, this is really sufficient,” he said.

    “We can try to speed up our action by serving voluntary compliance agreements faster or hopefully get injunctions speedier to stop errant retailers.”

    Mr Seah added that Case is already “doing a lot behind the scenes” to help consumers resolve their cases.

    As CPFTA is a civil act, it will take some time to go through the necessary process to stop the unfair practices, he pointed out.

    “It is a big thing for the person affected, but we can’t jump in at the first instant when there’s a complaint. Sometimes, it may be just a one-off (incident) because of some bad employees,” Mr Seah said.

    “Errant retailers can continue their businesses, but they must understand that the law will catch up with them.”

    Rather than a legal issue, lawyer Kang Kim Yang feels that the onus is on consumers to be more cautious.

    “To me, it doesn’t seem like an elaborate way of deception. You may say that the retailers are morally wrong, but sometimes, they are playing within the rules,” he said.

    “Consumers should be reading the fine print and inquire at a few other shops before making an informed decision.”

    [email protected]

    Blacklisted shops

    These shops at Sim Lim Square have been blacklisted by the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case) for the period of August to October.

    Shop name: Number of complaints

    Mobile Air 25

    Gadget Terminal 13

    Mobile22 10

    Mobile Apps 9

    Mackin 7

    Mobile Planet 7

    K-One Mobile 4

    Megacentrix Technologies 4

    SLR Pro 4

    Cyber Maestro 3

    Source: Consumers Association of Singapore

     

    Source: http://news.asiaone.com

  • Galaxy Trio and Get-Rich-Quick Schemes Are Scams

    Credit: Singapore Police Force
    Credit: Singapore Police Force
    https://www.facebook.com/galaxytrioterbaik
    Credit: Alfie Romeo, https://www.facebook.com/galaxytrioterbaik

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=251EOwBSvgY

    If you see fraud, and you do not call fraud, you are a fraud.

    Recently I have noticed a large number of ‘get-rich-quick’ (GRQ) schemes that seem to target the Malay community such as Galaxy Trio. 
    Galaxy Trio claims that (directly taken from a promoter’s post):

    ● Not a business, Investment or MLM

    ● No monthly maintenance
    ● Low risk
    ● Highest return
    ● Safest concept
    ● Achievable by all
    ● NO SELLING REQUIRED
    ● Not a Ponzhi or pyramid Scheme
    ● A proven platform
    ● Training and full guidance provided

    And that by signing up for this program you can turn your initial investment of $2k into $11k.

    These above claims are FALSE. These schemes are merely referral schemes which involve a new member (coughing up S300-$2000) being required to find NEW referrals in order to recoup the initial investment and gain something out of this scheme.

    Organisers of such schemes claim it is ‘low risk, high return’. How is it low risk when there is no possible way of refunding the initial investment? How can it be the ‘safest concept’ to making money?

    If the deal seems too good, it probably isn’t. Such GRQ schemes show our fellow Malays with ‘fans’ of money in order to attract new members. No advertising on the actual product being sold or even a product list, just flamboyant displays of money fans.

    This is perhaps the worst and most unethical form of marketing available: selling hope. These schemes sell the hope of making quick fast money with no downside and that manyfold returns are ‘achievable by all’. Worst of all, these schemes target the Malay community for their scams, with the knowledge that they might be more susceptible to the BS of GRQ schemes.

    galaxytrioscam
    Credit: Berita Harian SG

    MUIS has recently released an irsyad on MLM and the like. I think that the irsyad underplays the nature of such schemes.

    I hope this has shed some light on what these schemes actually do and their inequitable nature and pray that members of our community do not get scammed any further.

    Read more on Hariz Bastion Junid’s perspective here

    Source: Hariz Bastion Junid

    EDITOR’S NOTE

    More and more readers are writing to Rilek1Corner to share information about the Get-Rich-Quick scams. We thank you for the contribution and we assure you that identities will be kept secret. We were also informed that readers who had openly share their grievances/concerns were harassed and threatened. We urged those affected parties to contact the authorities immediately. If you are uncertain on how to go about doing it, please do contact Rilek1Corner and we will gladly be of assistance to you. Otherwise you can do so by:

    You can lodge a complaint with the Department either in writing or in person:

    Written Complaint

    Complaint in Person

    Complaint via Electronic Police Centre

    Written Complaint

    The complaint letter may be submitted to:

    Director
    Commercial Affairs Department
    391 New Bridge Road #06-701
    Police Cantonment Complex Block D
    Singapore 088762

    The following information should be contained in the report:

    • An account of the relevant facts;
    • Copies of the relevant documents, if available; and
    • Your name, NRIC / passport number, contact number and address.

    Complaint in Person

    You may appear in person at the above address. To avoid any inconvenience, you are advised to call the Department at 1800-325 0000 (Toll-Free) to make an appointment. Our office hours are as follows:

    Monday – Friday (8.30am to 5.30pm)

    Complaint via Electronic Police Centre

    Alternatively, you may lodge an online complaint via the ePC at the following web-site:

    http://www.spf.gov.sg/epc/

    In order to lodge an online complaint, your NRIC Number, Date of Birth and Email Address are required.

    READ MORE ON GALAXY TRIO AND PONZI/MLM/GRQ RELATED ARTICLES HERE

  • Melayu Singapura Senang Terpedaya Dengan Skim Cepat Kaya ‘Galaxy Trio’

    galaxytrioscam

    Laporan media Berita Harian, Sabtu 15 Feb 2014, menonjolkan ciri-ciri Skim GALAXY TRIO yang mirip dengan ciri-ciri skim piramid.

    Salah satu ciri Galaxy Trio yang menonjol adalah ianya tidak memerlukan anggotanya untuk menjual barang. Galaxy Trio tidak mempunyai sebarang produk untuk dijual.

    Anggota Galaxy Trio diberi ganjaran berdasarkan jumlah anggota baru yang berjaya ditarik untuk menyertai skim rujukan atau `referral’ syarikat tersebut. Ciri ini juga begitu mirip ciri piramid.

    Skim piramid adalah HARAM di sisi undang-undang di Singapura dan di banyak lagi negara lain.

    Sesetengah negara Islam juga telah mengeluarkan FATWA yang MENGHARAMKAN skim piramid ini (Contohnya, Malaysia, Mesir dan Arab Saudi).

    Ust Dr Zaharuddin, seorang pakar kewangan Islam, juga telah banyak menulis dan berseminar untuk menjelaskan kenapa SKIM PIRAMID itu HARAM dalam Islam.

    galaxytrioscam1
    Lapuran BH juga menonjolkan betapa 80% anggota Skim Galaxy Trio adalah orang Melayu.Mudah2an tidak berlaku lagi kes orang Melayu kena main dengan skim-skim cepat kaya yang mempunyai unsur-unsur gharar atau yang tidak jelas lagi meragukan.WaLlahua’lam bissowab

    Sumber: Mohd Khair, Berita Harian Singapura