Record of claims against merchants providing poor goods or services

I welcome anyone who has filed a Small Claims claim to send to me scanned copies of the court documents so that this blog will highlight consumer's claims.

Better still, if you have won your case, send me scanned copies of the court decision and I will publicize it.

Please note that if you send fake copies, then the other party will have legal remedies against you. You will also expose yourself to criminal punishment.

Suggestion - read the contract

Do we need more regulation of spas or other service providers? Perhaps. But part of the problem lies with customers not reading the contract.

But contracts are so complicated, you cry. Yes, but you are the one with the power of the dollar. As the recent minibond scandal has shown, sign documents without reading them at your peril. If any service provider uses contracts that are too complicated, do not sign them. If the staff makes any promises to you, write down on both copies of the contract that you are signing (on your copy and the company's copy). This is not 100% protection but at least there is some written record of the promises made to you. Spa contracts often involve thousands of dollars in fees so surely you can spare a few minutes to read the contract and question the staff if anything is unclear.

Clemen Chiang Appeal to be heard on 26 November 2009

Options trader and lecturer Clemen Chiang will be have his appeal against the decision of the Small Claims Tribunal heard in the High Court on 26 November 2009. He will successfully sued by his former students for misrepresentation over his doctorate in options trading which actually awarded by an unaccredited US university.

The name of the case is Freely Pte Ltd v Ong Kaili. Freely Pte Ltd is Chiang's company and is represented by Senior Counsel Giam Chin Toon. The case will be heard in Court 6D.

It is understood that Clemen Chiang is now running a successful website covering women's cosmetics.

Wellness chain with bad reputation

There is a well-known wellness chain about which many readers have complained to me. This wellness chain promises free sessions but attendance there is an opportunity to hardsell.

Unfortunately, for legal reasons, I am unable to provide the name of this chain. However, if any reader is angry enough to file a claim against them or any other shop, gym, contractor or seller or service provider, let me know, and I will report your claim in this blog so that others will be warned.

Exclusive sale agreement for property and misrepresentation

A reader has asked about the success rate relating to misrepresentation. I know of no statistics but I do know that taping your conversation with a lying agent is the best remedy.

For example, if the agent promises you that an exclusive sales agreement can be terminated within 7 days, even though this is not in the sale agreement, tape the conversation for your own protection. This taping method can also be used at a later stage.

Call the agent up, ask him or her about their past promises. If they admit on tape their past promises, then your case is very strong.

Another suggestion - get a friend or relative to pose as a customer to call this agent. If the agent makes the same 7-day cancellation promise to your friend/relative, again, your case becomes stronger.

Food poisoning cases

Some readers suffer food poisoning as a result of eating at a particular restaurant or fast food joint. If proven, this would be a breach of an implied promise by the food outlet to serve you hygienic food. You can claim for your medical expenses, loss of income and pain and suffering. Of course, in most cases, your damages are not likely to be in the thousands of dollars or even hundreds of dollars range.

Proof is also another problem. Because we consume numerous types of food, it is difficult to know the source of any poisoning, especially since symptoms may not occur immediately. However, if several persons eating at the same place all had the same poisoning, the case becomes stronger - in other words, the greater the number of customers affected, the stronger your case. Alternatively, if enough persons fall ill, complain to the National Environment Agency which regulates food outlets. They should be able to investigate and the results of the investigation may support your case

Defamation suits against complainants and consumers

A reader has asked whether you can be sued for defamation over your Small Claims Tribunal claim against a company. You cannot be sued for defamation as regards your claims in any lawsuit or in respect of anything you say inside court. This is called absolute privilege.

However, as regards what you say outside court - beware. The defence of qualified privilege (which is partial protection) might protect you if you make your defamatory comments only to those who have a duty or interest in receiving your comments. 2 examples of this -

a)complaints to the government regulator of the company you are complaining about;

b)complaints about the behaviour of a club or association member in relation to club matters, to fellow members of a club of which you are also a member.

Please note that being a busybody about other's behaviour may lead to you losing this protection of qualified privilege.

Casey Chua correction

A reader has corrected me - Casey Chua claimed a doctorate in psychology and not hypnotherapy.

Thanks

Options guru sells house

A source informs me that a well-known "options expert" had sold his multi-million dollar house on Sentosa. However, completion (the time when the contract is completed and most of the price is paid by the buyer) is not due for several months.

Liquidation of assets takes place often when a person is facing a liquidity crunch eg when he faces numerous lawsuits.

Hypnotherapist dies in Court

Casey Chua, a defendant in the Small Claims Court, died suddenly in the court. He was being sued by for $60,000 by 11 claimants over his claims that he had a doctorate in hypnotherapy and 25 years' practice in this field. The claimants were suing for return of their course fees and their associate fees to his hypnotherapy centre.

Mr Chua had earlier refused to show proof of his qualifications but later stated that he received his doctorate from a university (East View University) that does not appear to be accredited in the United States of America.

It is unclear if the lawsuits against him would carry on. The general rule is that the death of a defendant does not terminate a lawsuit. The claims could thus continue against Mr Chua's estate. In this case, those handling his assets (his personal representatives) would have to pay off his debts against court judgments against him before they can distribute his assets. However, the procedure is slightly complicated (for more on this area, see the Probate and Administration Act).

Getting out of a contract

Someone inquired about getting out of a contract. However, this query is extremely vague as it could mean any of the following -

a) not wanting to perform any future obligations under the contract but not wanting to have anything to do with the other party either;

b) wanting to terminate the contract and recover all of some payments previously made to the other party, because of a change of mind about wanting the benefit of the contract; and

c) same as b) except that the other party is alleged to have done something wrong under the contract.


Option b) is normally not valid since both parties have signed a contract and it cannot be changed without both parties agreeing.

a) is possible but if you owe money under the contract, it is possible that the other party may sue you.

c) is the most likely option. There are 2 main legal arguments used to terminate a contract -

1. if the other party did something wrong before the contract eg made a false statement of fact (called a misrepresentation) to you, such as telling you that certain beauty treatment was compatible with the medication that you were on; or

2. if the other party breached an express or implied term of the contract which was an important promise in the whole contract.

However, in both cases, recovering all or some of your payments will require going to the Small Claims Tribunal.

Dirty tactics

Several readers have complained about a well known spa. If any of these readers will file a Small Claims Tribunal claim against the Spa, I will mention details of the case here. It is easy to complain, but if you feel strongly about a matter, please take the time to teach the Spa a lesson.

Another reader was given a free session at a gym and was promised no hard selling tactics during this session. Of course, this promise turned out not to be true. She asked whether that was fraudulent misrepresentation. This occurs when the promising party knows that the statement made is not true. Probably such did occur since the hard selling can almost be guaranteed at some gyms and spas. However, proving damage is difficult - what loss did you suffer? It is not something serious like a person harassing you for days or weeks.

ACCA Law examination

If you have any queries relating to the ACCA Law paper, Singapore variant,

you are welcome to post to the blog -
http://accalawsg.blogspot.com/.

Depending on my time constraints, I will try to answer your queries.

True Spa - new allegations?

Some posters claim that True Spa tries to pressure its customers to buy more packages from the company.

I have no idea how persistent their sales persons are, but it is unlikely that this will constitute duress or undue influence which are quite different.

However, it is arguable but not certain that there is an implied term that any gym or spa will allow you to enjoy the facilities in peace. Extreme harassment and persistent high pressure tactics may well be a breach of the implied term allowing you to claim damages or perhaps to even terminate the contract. A lot will depend on how bad the situation is so no definite answer can be provided.

Hiring a lawyer

Should you hire a lawyer instead of using the Small Claims Tribunal?

The Tribunal process is cheap and simple but may be time consuming with several meetings for mediation, etc. A lawyer is definitely more expensive but may well save you time in the end.

If you can find several persons who have similar claims, then hiring a lawyer is much cheaper as the legal fees can be shared. However, note that a lot depends on the situation - for example, if the facts of each customer's situation are quite different, then the lawyer will have to do more work and therefore charge more.

Also, remember that when you sue in the normal courts and you win, you can recover most of your legal fees. But make sure that the other party will not go bust or your lawsuit win is not of much use.

Oral promises

Oral promises by vendors are difficult to prove. There are also legal difficulties, such as the parol evidence rule, which may sometimes prevent oral promises from being introduced. However, the main problem appears that the court has to decide who to believe - the vendor or the customer.

As mentioned previously, the use of tape recordings are very useful in proving your case. Even if you did not tape record the conversation in relation to which you are suing, if you can prove that the sales persons of the vendors systematically lie and over promise, you have a strong case but of course, there are no guarantees of winning.

On the other hand, if you are complaining only of hard selling, that this not normally a defence except perhaps in rare cases.

The best defence to bad vendors is information. If you are suing anyone, send me details and I will post details about your claim. If you have won a lawsuit, even better - let the whole world know about your win. Good luck and if in doubt, consult a lawyer.

Clemen Chiang, Freely Business School

It looks like Clemen Chiang will be liable for hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in compensation if his appeal to the High Court against the Small Claims Tribunal judgments do not succeed. Although he did business under the name Freely Business School, this appears to be a sole proprietorship, not a limited company (to be sure, those interested should do a full Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority search at

https://www.psi.gov.sg/NASApp/tmf/TMFServlet?app=MYBIZFILE-DIR-ENTITY#ClientValidationSummary, and pay the necessary fees.)

If he had used a limited company, as most readers will know, only his company will be liable for its debts, and not him personally.

Clemen Chiang - suing him for losses?

Some internet posts have suggested suing Clemen Chiang for their trading losses. Is this possible?

My view is that this would be difficult but not impossible. Some questions to consider - did he promise a fool-proof no-loss trading method in his course? If he did, then perhaps you could sue provided you followed his instructions exactly.

On the other hand, if he taught you methods that do not work at all. That would be a breach of an implied term in the contract between you and him for him to provide you with knowledge of options trading. Not very familiar with options so can't really say for sure, but my view is you would need other options experts to come to court to prove that his methods do not work at all. All in all, claiming your losses would not be easy.

Consult your lawyer if the amounts involved are large to make a claim worth your while.

Clemen Chiang, Freely Business School 4

This post is about teaching standards at commercial schools and training organisations including Clemen Chiang's.

If a school or trainer does not keep its/his promises, then you can sue them for breach of contract. However, what kind of level of teaching can we expect from the school or trainer - this is not easy to determine. There will be of course some clear cases. For example, if a school promises to prepare you to take the 'A-level" General Mathematics examination but only teaches you basic arithmetic, that would be a clear case of breach of contract. On the other hand, if it teaches you calculus in a confusing way, is it their fault or your fault for not understanding?

Proving that teaching or training is below the standard that can be reasonably expected is time-consuming and messy. It is interesting to note that based on newspaper reports, the claims against Clemen Chiang are based more on his lack of educational credentials then on the standard of his teaching. Some internet posts claim that his teaching is not worth much but this is hard to verify. Teaching standards even amoung Singapore government schools vary greatly, so it would be difficult to say if the teaching of Clemen Chiang was up to the expected standard.

In Singapore, on the other hand, the usual test of a good teacher is what "paper" (i.e. qualifications) he has.

Legal jargon

This post will clarify some legal terms which you may encounter when suing in the Tribunal. These terms may have been explained in earlier posts.

Jurisidiction - the power of the Tribunal to decide claims. The Tribunal can only hear some types of cases depending on the dollar amount and the type of claim.

Enforcement - also known as execution. This refers to the procedures to seize assets of the debtor if he does not pay even after you have won the case against him.

Evidence - facts in support of your case. This may include personal accounts of what was witnessed, documents and photographs.

Hearsay - oral or written reports by persons who are not telling their story in court. Normally, such reports are considered hearsay and not allowed since these persons are not in court to tell their story. This area of law is complicated.

Mediation - a procedure where a 3rd party tries to persuade both parties not to figt their case fully, but to settle it. The settlement may include one party paying some money or correcting certain defects. Note that agreement to settlement is voluntary - either party may decide that they wish to carry on with the claim.