Latest news with #JohorConsumerClaimsTribunal
The Star
2 days ago
- Business
- The Star
Tribunal rejects Singaporean's tax refund claim due to jurisdiction issue
Lim says the claimant had written a negative review of the company which was later picked up by a digital media portal. A SINGAPOREAN had his claim against an electrical appliances outlet dismissed by the Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal. Claimant SB Koo had demanded the respondent refund customs tax paid by him, claiming the respondent had cheated him. Respondent Izonic Electrical Sdn Bhd director Lim Chee Khoon said the company was willing to meet with Koo. 'We are willing to meet him to resolve the matter, but he refused,' Lim said outside the Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal at Menara Ansar, Johor Baru. Lim said the claimant wrote a negative review of the company and this was picked up by a digital media portal on the island republic. The respondent said the portal ran the story with the heading 'Singaporean man allegedly asked to pay S$268 for 'customs tax' after buying RM1,400 water filter in JB'. Lim said the portal published the story on Feb 2 after the claimant made the purchase of the electrical items on Jan 17. Lim, 37, said Koo, 61, went to the mall in Taman Abad, Johor Baru, with his wife. The couple decided to buy home electrical appliances on display at the outlet. The items were a water filter, Thermos pot, induction cooker, stainless-steel wok and a set of four ceramic bowls, totalling RM4,588. 'They were given a RM50 voucher which brought the bill down to RM4,538,' Lim said, adding that the claimant paid using a debit card. Lim then sent the couple home to their Housing Development Board flat by car on Jan 17. Lim claimed that he paid S$268 (RM888) in taxes on Koo's behalf at the Causeway and was later reimbursed. Lim also made an appointment to instal the water filter on Jan 18, which the claimant agreed to. 'The claimant called our Singaporean representative on Jan 18 to inform him that he was busy and not at home,' said the respondent. Lim said the representative called Koo many times to fix another appointment date but his calls went unanswered. During the hearing, Tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli reminded both parties any decision made by the Tribunal could not be challenged. Hafez dismissed Koo's claim, explaining that it was not the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to hear cases related to tax disputes as the case should be filed with the small claims court. A small claims court is a specialised court handling civil disputes involving relatively small amounts of money, offering a faster and more affordable alternative to traditional litigation. Those needing Tribunal assistance can call 07-227 1755 or 07-227 1766, or visit the Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal at Level 17, Menara Ansar, Jalan Trus, Johor Baru.
The Star
24-06-2025
- Automotive
- The Star
Tribunal orders car dealer to refund booking fee to claimant
Jayandi claims that the salesman did not tell her the RM500 booking fee was non-refundable. AN operations executive changed her mind a week after deciding to buy a used car and paying a RM500 booking fee. When the car dealer refused to refund the money, she took up the matter with the Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal. The tribunal ordered the refund to be paid back to her, minus expenses incurred by the dealer in the process of the purchase. S. Jayandi, 58, from Larkin in Johor Baru and works in Singapore, had on Jan 6, 2025, visited the dealer's shop to buy the car. 'I decided to buy a 14-year-old continental car for RM16,000,' she said, adding that she paid RM500 to the salesman and had an invoice as proof of payment. However, when she returned home, her son and son-in-law advised her not to buy the car as getting spare parts and components for the model would be difficult. Jayandi took their advice and asked the dealer to refund the booking fee, but it was refused. 'I was told that under the company's policy, the money was non-refundable as written on the invoice issued to me,' she said outside the Tribunal in Menara Ansar, Johor Baru. Jayandi claimed that the salesman attending to her did not tell her the booking fee was non-refundable and neither did she sign any documents for the intended purchase. Having given her old car to her son, Jayandi needed one to drive to Singapore for work daily. As the dealer had incurred cost to send the car for inspection at Puspakom and for servicing, tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli awarded only RM200 to Jayandi. He ordered the dealer to refund the RM200 within two weeks. Those needing assistance in regard to Consumer Claims Tribunal matters can call 07-227 1755 or 07-227 1766.
The Star
15-06-2025
- Business
- The Star
Contractor ordered to refund client RM25,000 for delay in Mersing dream home construction
Mohd Najib's dream bungalow in Mersing was only 37% completed. FOR a Johor Baru lorry driver, the joy of seeing his family's single-storey bungalow completed might not come for a while. Last year, Mohd Najib Mohd Yunos, 45, from Taman Pulai Indah, hired a building contractor to construct his dream home. He entrusted plans for the 25ft by 32ft house with 800sq ft built-up floor area to the contractor whose registered business address is in Endau. The bungalow, costing RM108,000 and situated in Kampung Air Puteri, Mersing, about 126km from Johor Baru, was to have been built using pre-fabricated construction. According to the claimant, the construction agreement was signed between him and the contractor on Sept 23, 2024. 'The contractor had to finish building the house by Sept 23 this year,' he said when met outside the Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal in Menara Ansar, Johor Baru. Mohd Najib made two progressive payments of RM40,000 and RM24,800 respectively on Sept 20 and 21, 2024, on the respondent's claim that 60% of the house had been completed. He made another payment of RM21,600 on Oct 23 after the contractor said 80% of the house had been completed. Mohd Najib said a few weeks after that, the contractor called to borrow money, but he did not entertain this request. 'The contractor sent a reminder via message on Dec 22, asking me to settle the final payment of RM21,600 in order for him to finish the project.' He added that the contractor claimed that construction was progressing well. Upon a site inspection, however, the claimant found that the house was less than 50% completed and building progress was behind schedule. Having lost confidence in the contractor, the claimant refused to make the final payment. In February, Mohd Najib filed a case with Tribunal, demanding the contractor refund RM50,000 for failing to finish the project. The case was heard on March 20, 2025, before tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli who ordered both parties to hire registered quantity surveyors to assess the project's progress. 'It is necessary to hire a quantity surveyor as the RM50,000 claimed by the claimant is the maximum and we need an independent third party to evaluate the project,' Hafez had ordered. When the hearing resumed on May 14, the quantity surveyor report submitted by the claimant showed that the project was only 37% completed. The respondent asked the tribunal for more time to engage a quantity surveyor. Hafez rejected the respondent's request and ordered him to refund RM25,000 to the claimant within two weeks. The president also rejected the RM21,600 final payment in the respondent's counterclaim. Those who need assistance regarding Tribunal matters can call 07-227 1755/1766.
The Star
10-06-2025
- Automotive
- The Star
Dealership ordered to refund buyer RM4,600 for failing to deliver car
IT HAS been over six months since an account executive booked a new car but the vehicle has yet to be delivered to her. Nuraliah Izzati Mohamad Mirizan had gone to a car dealership at one of the hypermarkets along the Kota Tinggi-Johor Baru trunk road on Nov 3, 2024. The dealer, she recalled, had been displaying cars at the common area of the hypermarket for many years. 'My mother had even bought a car from the dealership without any issues,'' said Nuraliah Izzati. The 22-year-old claimant chose a sedan priced at RM49,980 and paid a RM100 booking fee on the same day. She then paid the dealer a RM4,500 deposit via two bank transfers of RM2,250 each on Nov 19 and 20. 'The car was supposed to have been delivered in January this year, as promised by the saleswoman,'' Nuraliah Izzati said when met outside the Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal at Menara Ansar, Johor Baru. However, the company failed to fulfil its promise. The claimant said she felt lucky that she had not signed the bank loan for the car although the loan had been approved on Nov 19, based on documents forwarded to her by the company. 'I went to see the saleswoman again in February and she promised to deliver the car in March before Hari Raya Aidilfitri, which fell on March 31,' Nuraliah Izzati recalled. The claimant added that she had wanted to use the car during the Hari Raya period but once again, the company failed to deliver the vehicle. Dissatisfied with the service rendered by the company, Nuraliah Izzati called the car manufacturer's headquarters in Selangor to check on the status of the car. 'To my surprise, the saleswoman had not even booked the car under my name when I paid the booking fee on Nov 3, 2024,'' said the claimant. Tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli ordered the respondent to refund RM4,600 (comprising the RM100 booking fee and RM4,500 deposit) to the claimant within two weeks. Those needing assistance with regards to Tribunal matters can call 07-227 1755 or 07-227 1766.
The Star
19-05-2025
- Automotive
- The Star
Car dealer ordered to refund money for selling a lemon
Ramizi started having problems almost immediately with the car he bought. A MANAGER sought help from Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal after he was stuck with a highly problematic vehicle. Ramizi Bajuri, 41, was keen on a Japanese four-door sedan at a dealership in Jalan Parit Bilal, Batu Pahat, Johor. He contacted a salesman on May 25 last year about the vehicle. However, the salesman informed him that the car had been sold and proposed another car of the same model with a different registration plate. 'I asked the salesman about the condition of the car and he assured me that it was good,' said Ramizi. He paid a RM3,000 deposit and submitted documents to secure a loan from the company for the car priced at RM36,313. Ramizi also traded in his Japanese compact sedan for RM6,000. In total, he paid RM19,225 and secured RM17,088 in a credit loan for 36 months, with a monthly payment of RM475. 'I have yet to receive a copy of the car registration card, and the dealer promised that the company would be fully responsible if the vehicle gave any problems,' he told the Tribunal. The claimant took possession of the car on June 5 last year. On the way home he found malfunctions, namely the window on the passenger side and the left side mirror, and took it to the dealer for repairs. On June 12, he found problems with the gearbox and returned the vehicle to the dealer three days later for further repairs. 'It took them almost two weeks and on June 28, I took back the car. 'On July 1, I found that the engine oil had dried up,' he said. Ramizi refilled the oil that day and again found it totally dry on July 18, because of a leak. A few days later on his way to work, the claimant heard sounds coming from the tyres and went to the nearest workshop. 'The foremen found that the absorber and upper control arms of the car were spoilt, so I had them replaced for RM1,160,' he said. The engine oil issue recurred on Oct 6 after it was refilled on Sept 19. The claimant sent the car to the dealer on Oct 19 and the issue was fixed the same day. However, the problem resurfaced again on Nov 22 but this time, the dealer did not take any action when informed. 'I asked the dealer about replacing the car but he was only willing to buy the car back at a much lower price,' he said. Ramizi said his car problems did not stop. On Jan 11, he was detained by police at a roadblock when it was detected that the car had been flagged as a missing vehicle. 'I again discussed the car's problems with the dealer on Jan 12 and 13,' he said, adding that the solutions proposed were not to his satisfaction. Tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli ordered the respondent to refund RM18,000 to the claimant within two weeks. The claimant is to return the vehicle to the respondent. Those who need Tribunal assistance can call 07-227 1755/ 1766.
