Shop give wrong items and refuse to change

[villier]

I bought a visor from ******* ** *****. Boss claim that it is street legal, only 20% tinted. But the visor is not at the shop, so have to pay full sum as the visor is at somewhere else. So agreed, i paid $70 for it. So no actual product was shown.

2 days later, went back to the shop, collect the visor. (Don't know that it is not the one that i've paid for)

Next following day, while riding, lucky/unlucky stop by TP for the visor. Tested with the KIT, shows only 11% visibility. Was fine $50. Only then i know that the visor is not the one that i PAID!

Next day, went back to shop, the BOSS claim that the visor has been used, goods sold are not exchangedable or returned. And was written in black and white. Furthermore, Customer will not buy it. And he told me, when the 20% tinted visor come he will call me. (Still expect me to buy from him again. And that means he doesn't have the STOCK!. And he just take any visor and give me!)

 

 

Has bring this matter to C.A.S.E

 

Will i win in this situation?

Edited May 22, 2009 by villier

[lwfc]

hard to win la.. just take it and suck thumb..

[Wen Qiang]

according to the consumer's right in singapore, u'll most prob get ur money back.

[lwfc]

the problem is, he didnt check before leaving with the item.

 

now it's more of a word against word issue. no black and white saying that he bought a st legal 20% tinted visor.

[Wen Qiang]

the problem is, he didnt check before leaving with the item.

 

now it's more of a word against word issue. no black and white saying that he bought a st legal 20% tinted visor.

 

 

he mentioned that he wasnt given the option to view e actual product as e boss say in order to view must pay first. so if it was me i think i will have no idea how it looks like also wen e stock eventually come. e 20% legal thinggy shuld be a stand cos e receipt shuld have written e model of e visor he bought. and if there is a way to prove the said visor is comfirm 20% den i see him getting his money back.

[fantom]

he mentioned that he wasnt given the option to view e actual product as e boss say in order to view must pay first. so if it was me i think i will have no idea how it looks like also wen e stock eventually come. e 20% legal thinggy shuld be a stand cos e receipt shuld have written e model of e visor he bought. and if there is a way to prove the said visor is comfirm 20% den i see him getting his money back.

 

firstly we must understand that law doesnt believe in fact or truth, IT ONLY BELIEVE IN EVIDENCES. if there are no solid evidences like witnesses or documents/recipts (with clear spec of products). mostly legal advisers will just advice the victims to treat it as bad luck.

 

and CASE is a toothless tiger which (if) will send a non-legal letter to the boss, the boss can just dump it.

 

my business law lecturer ever said in class, sgp has no consumer rights.

[villier]

The receipt shows "Light Smoke Visor" but what i receive is a "Dark Smoke Visor"

[fantom]

The receipt shows "Light Smoke Visor" but what i receive is a "Dark Smoke Visor"

 

but "Light Smoke Visor" is not a spec. it's a descriptive name... spec is something that state the techincal info of a product.

 

unless the the receipt printed the tint % and the product serial no..

[Wen Qiang]

firstly we must understand that law doesnt believe in fact or truth, IT ONLY BELIEVE IN EVIDENCES. if there are no solid evidences like witnesses or documents/recipts (with clear spec of products). mostly legal advisers will just advice the victims to treat it as bad luck.

 

and CASE is a toothless tiger which (if) will send a non-legal letter to the boss, the boss can just dump it.

 

my business law lecturer ever said in class, sgp has no consumer rights.

 

 

i did go through a very similar case too before thats y im confident he will get his money back. and i guess u are wrong bout consumers rights cos without any black and white i still gt back my money under the consumer's right. it was 3 days after the agreement.

[shahrul_azmil3]

i agree with him on CASE is a toothless tiger which (if) will send a non-legal letter to the boss, the boss can just dump it.

 

 

it will bring up some options but nvr a legal letter ....

 

been tru some ordeal

[y2k_forever_rock]

Don't mind TS, perhaps u can PM me the shop name.. I will get my bros not to go to them at all.. I wish you will get back the $$ and also get the idiotic shop blacklisted and boycotted..

[Quincy]

can PM me also... thank you...

[fantom]

i did go through a very similar case too before thats y im confident he will get his money back. and i guess u are wrong bout consumers rights cos without any black and white i still gt back my money under the consumer's right. it was 3 days after the agreement.

 

 

Thats good for you. maybe you would like to enlighten us in DETAIL and impartially how you get back your money, beside the "3 days after the agreement".

 

In Singapore, there is Consumer Protection (Fair Trade) but not Consumer's Right. It offers protections, not rights. Note the differences in coverage.

[fantom]

yah. i also like to know which fxxking shop is that.

[Wen Qiang]

Thats good for you. maybe you would like to enlighten us in DETAIL and impartially how you get back your money, beside the "3 days after the agreement".

 

In Singapore, there is Consumer Protection (Fair Trade) but not Consumer's Right. It offers protections, not rights. Note the differences in coverage.

 

 

 

lets nt go into details but wat i can say is tt it was case who enlightened me back then bout e consumer's rights and they help me get back my $$. =) tat was bout 2 years ago. niway hopefully case can help TS get back his money e way they did for me too. and i think i know which shop TS referring to. lol..

[villier]

Is it against the forum rule if i post the $&*%$(#$*@# shop name here?

[Quincy]

Is it against the forum rule if i post the $&*%$(#$*@# shop name here?

 

if u do post the names of the shop & based on your sentences, it can lead to a legal issue. more than u ask for...

 

they can say u defamed them & press charges & its xxx times more than e price of ur visor. not worth doing so...

 

relax & settle via CASE. i believe they can help u out.

 

case close den u let us know e verdict. if u wins, its gonna be an exp for urself & also others whom r reading. if happens to us next time, we all know how to react...

Edited May 26, 2009 by Quincy

[fleas]

wads the name of the shop?

[Dafanshu]

give us some hints. let boycott it

[villier]

Hint: A******** ** ******

[Demon]

Hint: A******** ** ******

 

If you have stated factually, why quote the shop name in asterisk ?

 

[villier]

If you have stated factually, why quote the shop name in asterisk ?

 

 

Don't want to end up in legal issue. Too troublesome.

[Demon]

Don't want to end up in legal issue. Too troublesome.

 

if you speak the truth then there is nothing to fear. If your comments were not factual, you could also be sued by inference even if you mentioned the shop name in asterisk.

 

[villier]

if you speak the truth then there is nothing to fear. If your comments were not factual, you could also be sued by inference even if you mentioned the shop name in asterisk.

 

 

But the boss of the shop think he's right. I just don't want to waste my time for those legal stuff. They are troublesome.

[dragonforce]

i think i know which shop is he refering to already. anyway, with your receipt stating item a and you are given item b, you might have a case.

your worry will be that you are supposed to check your item after purchase, this would be their defense.