Besides the good news regarding the awards, another plus point is the
number of human rights organisations involved in this.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
human rights awards
http://news.amnesty.org/index/ENGIOR800012007
Sunday, May 06, 2007
The Cost of...
BBC NEWS | Programmes | Documentary Archive
Many consumers are realising that the once simple method of choosing the cheapest product on offer is no longer so simple. Low prices may be an indication of abuse of labour rights of workers in the country of manufacture.
越来越多消费者在购买产品时，已了解到用最低廉的价格来选择产品已经不在那么简单。低廉的价格可能是因为制造产品的员工的薪金与福利不符合国际的劳工标准。
Many consumers are realising that the once simple method of choosing the cheapest product on offer is no longer so simple. Low prices may be an indication of abuse of labour rights of workers in the country of manufacture.
越来越多消费者在购买产品时，已了解到用最低廉的价格来选择产品已经不在那么简单。低廉的价格可能是因为制造产品的员工的薪金与福利不符合国际的劳工标准。
Saturday, May 05, 2007
Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices
Ministry of Manpower | Tripartite Alliance for Fair Employment Practices (TAFEP)
sgwatchDOG hopes that the new guidelines will make it easier to "shame" companies that place discriminatory job ads.
sgwatchDOG hopes that the new guidelines will make it easier to "shame" companies that place discriminatory job ads.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
US: Wal-Mart Denies Workers Basic Rights (Human Rights Watch, 1-5-2007)
Human Rights Watch, 1st May 2007
In line with Labour Day, which happens today, a report by HRW on attempts by Wal-Mart to prevent workers from joining unions.
In line with Labour Day, which happens today, a report by HRW on attempts by Wal-Mart to prevent workers from joining unions.
Friday, April 20, 2007
Europe MPs 'gagged' by Singapore
BBC NEWS | World | Asia-Pacific | Europe MPs 'gagged' by Singapore
Another sign of PAP's reluctance to allow discussions about politics in Singapore.
Another sign of PAP's reluctance to allow discussions about politics in Singapore.
Wednesday, April 11, 2007
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and Google Earth
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum and Google Earth
An innovative use of technology to highlight human rights abuses.
Thursday, March 01, 2007
Scuffle for organs sparks donor debate in Singapore
Such a sad story, sgwatchDOG feels sick just imagining the scenes where "police officers entered the ward and restrained the distraught family while Sim's body was quickly whisked away"...
----------------------------------
Reuters.com
Scuffle for organs sparks donor debate in Singapore
Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:55 AM ET
By Koh Gui Qing
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - As members of Sim Tee Hua's family sat at his bedside to pray for his recovery, they were horrified to learn that the hospital staff were about to turn off his life-support machine and use his organs for transplants.
The scenes that followed have shocked and upset not just Sim's family but many other Singaporeans, sparking a debate over the country's organ donor policy, which assumes that all citizens are willing donors, unless they have registered with the government that they wish to opt out.
Doctors at Singapore General Hospital had declared Sim brain-dead and said they could not delay switching off life support any longer because of the risk of damage to Sim's organs.
Sim's family had no objection to his organs being used for transplants but wanted doctors to wait one more day before turning off the life support machine.
But as Sim's 68-year-old mother and about 20 other relatives knelt weeping before the doctors, begging them to wait, nine police officers entered the ward and restrained the distraught family while Sim's body was quickly whisked away.
"The hospital staff were running as they wheeled him out of the back door of the room. They were behaving like robbers," said Sim Chew Hiah, one of Sim's elder sisters.
The Sim family's experience has prompted a wave of letters to the local media, with some people saying they would opt out in protest, and added fire to a debate about organ trading.
Lee Wei Ling -- a prominent doctor who is the daughter of Lee Kuan Yew, the first prime minister of modern Singapore -- last month urged the government to legalize organ trading, or the buying or selling of human organs for cash.
"Organ trading is frowned upon and usually not allowed in countries where political correctness reigns," said Lee in a letter to the Straits Times.
"If monetary incentive makes a potential living donor more willing to save another life, what is wrong in allowing that?"
Her views have some support from the public.
"If I can sell my organs, give my children a better life, and save someone else's life too, why not? Not everyone drives a Mercedes," said Khalid, 32, who gave only his first name.
Currently, anyone caught buying or selling human organs in Singapore may be jailed up to a year or fined up to US$6,500.
POOR DONORS
Those who oppose the trading of human organs say it promotes greater social injustice.
"To trade it and sell it for a 100 pounds, 200 pounds, or to the highest bidder, that is to prostitute your organ," said Dr Choi Kin, president of the Hong Kong Medical Association.
Such donors are likely to be the poor and uneducated people from countries such as Brazil and India, who can sell a kidney for as little as $1,000, the World Health Organization said.
And they are usually exploited by organ traffickers, who can charge wealthy clients up to $100,000 to $200,000 for a new organ, according to the WHO.
The chronic shortage of organs available for transplant is a global problem. In the U.S. alone, more than 6,200 patients die each year while waiting for an organ, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing, a U.S.-based non-profit medical group.
The shortage has forced doctors and governments to look for alternatives, such as the use of pigs' kidneys, hearts and lungs, or the purchase of human organs.
Many patients have also traveled abroad for transplants, notably to China, which has been accused by rights groups of harvesting organs from executed prisoners.
Since 1995, more than 270 Singaporeans have gone abroad, mostly to China, for organ transplants, the Health Ministry said.
DEFINITION OF DEATH
To ease the organ shortage, Singapore amended its Human Organ Transplant Act in 2004 to expand the pool of organ donors and the type of organs that could be donated.
Hospitals can remove the kidneys, liver, heart and corneas of all non-Muslim Singapore citizens or permanent residents when they die, unless they have objected.
Muslims can choose to donate their organs, as in Iran and Malaysia, although many believe that the dead should be buried with all their organs intact.
Doctors say a system which assumes all citizens are organ donors is necessary because even though many people are in favor of donating their organs, few actually come forward.
While many European countries, including Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, and Spain, have laws similar to Singapore's Transplant Act, it can still be a sensitive issue.
When Brazil passed a similar law in 1998, it triggered a public outcry. The Federal Attorney later conceded that families could prevent the removal of organs for transplant.
Critics say laws which assume all citizens are organ donors are inadequate because the definition of death is debatable. Others are concerned that life-support may be turned off prematurely or that people may be unaware of the opt-out option.
"It should be up to the citizens to decide. These are their bodies, their organs, and therefore their decisions," said Dr Choi Kin. "If an accident should occur, it would be too late for them to opt out, even if they do not agree to donate."
In Singapore, some doctors had urged amending the Transplant Act, giving families the right to block such donations.
After the outcry over the Sim family's forced donation, the hospital and health ministry said in a statement that they would "continue to find practical solutions to minimize the emotional distress of families and staff in such situations."
Sim's kidneys went to patients who had waited six to eight years for donor organs, the ministry said.
His parents were offered five years of subsidized hospital fees -- and his family received a thank-you letter from the ministry for their "generous organ donation."
----------------------------------
Reuters.com
Scuffle for organs sparks donor debate in Singapore
Wed Feb 28, 2007 9:55 AM ET
By Koh Gui Qing
SINGAPORE (Reuters) - As members of Sim Tee Hua's family sat at his bedside to pray for his recovery, they were horrified to learn that the hospital staff were about to turn off his life-support machine and use his organs for transplants.
The scenes that followed have shocked and upset not just Sim's family but many other Singaporeans, sparking a debate over the country's organ donor policy, which assumes that all citizens are willing donors, unless they have registered with the government that they wish to opt out.
Doctors at Singapore General Hospital had declared Sim brain-dead and said they could not delay switching off life support any longer because of the risk of damage to Sim's organs.
Sim's family had no objection to his organs being used for transplants but wanted doctors to wait one more day before turning off the life support machine.
But as Sim's 68-year-old mother and about 20 other relatives knelt weeping before the doctors, begging them to wait, nine police officers entered the ward and restrained the distraught family while Sim's body was quickly whisked away.
"The hospital staff were running as they wheeled him out of the back door of the room. They were behaving like robbers," said Sim Chew Hiah, one of Sim's elder sisters.
The Sim family's experience has prompted a wave of letters to the local media, with some people saying they would opt out in protest, and added fire to a debate about organ trading.
Lee Wei Ling -- a prominent doctor who is the daughter of Lee Kuan Yew, the first prime minister of modern Singapore -- last month urged the government to legalize organ trading, or the buying or selling of human organs for cash.
"Organ trading is frowned upon and usually not allowed in countries where political correctness reigns," said Lee in a letter to the Straits Times.
"If monetary incentive makes a potential living donor more willing to save another life, what is wrong in allowing that?"
Her views have some support from the public.
"If I can sell my organs, give my children a better life, and save someone else's life too, why not? Not everyone drives a Mercedes," said Khalid, 32, who gave only his first name.
Currently, anyone caught buying or selling human organs in Singapore may be jailed up to a year or fined up to US$6,500.
POOR DONORS
Those who oppose the trading of human organs say it promotes greater social injustice.
"To trade it and sell it for a 100 pounds, 200 pounds, or to the highest bidder, that is to prostitute your organ," said Dr Choi Kin, president of the Hong Kong Medical Association.
Such donors are likely to be the poor and uneducated people from countries such as Brazil and India, who can sell a kidney for as little as $1,000, the World Health Organization said.
And they are usually exploited by organ traffickers, who can charge wealthy clients up to $100,000 to $200,000 for a new organ, according to the WHO.
The chronic shortage of organs available for transplant is a global problem. In the U.S. alone, more than 6,200 patients die each year while waiting for an organ, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing, a U.S.-based non-profit medical group.
The shortage has forced doctors and governments to look for alternatives, such as the use of pigs' kidneys, hearts and lungs, or the purchase of human organs.
Many patients have also traveled abroad for transplants, notably to China, which has been accused by rights groups of harvesting organs from executed prisoners.
Since 1995, more than 270 Singaporeans have gone abroad, mostly to China, for organ transplants, the Health Ministry said.
DEFINITION OF DEATH
To ease the organ shortage, Singapore amended its Human Organ Transplant Act in 2004 to expand the pool of organ donors and the type of organs that could be donated.
Hospitals can remove the kidneys, liver, heart and corneas of all non-Muslim Singapore citizens or permanent residents when they die, unless they have objected.
Muslims can choose to donate their organs, as in Iran and Malaysia, although many believe that the dead should be buried with all their organs intact.
Doctors say a system which assumes all citizens are organ donors is necessary because even though many people are in favor of donating their organs, few actually come forward.
While many European countries, including Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Switzerland, and Spain, have laws similar to Singapore's Transplant Act, it can still be a sensitive issue.
When Brazil passed a similar law in 1998, it triggered a public outcry. The Federal Attorney later conceded that families could prevent the removal of organs for transplant.
Critics say laws which assume all citizens are organ donors are inadequate because the definition of death is debatable. Others are concerned that life-support may be turned off prematurely or that people may be unaware of the opt-out option.
"It should be up to the citizens to decide. These are their bodies, their organs, and therefore their decisions," said Dr Choi Kin. "If an accident should occur, it would be too late for them to opt out, even if they do not agree to donate."
In Singapore, some doctors had urged amending the Transplant Act, giving families the right to block such donations.
After the outcry over the Sim family's forced donation, the hospital and health ministry said in a statement that they would "continue to find practical solutions to minimize the emotional distress of families and staff in such situations."
Sim's kidneys went to patients who had waited six to eight years for donor organs, the ministry said.
His parents were offered five years of subsidized hospital fees -- and his family received a thank-you letter from the ministry for their "generous organ donation."
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
Have child in a year, get $1,000
The Electric New Paper, Singapore
This scheme really demeans women's rights...
-------------------------------------
# Matchmaking agency's gimmicks raise eyebrows
# $1 downpayment
# Interest-free instalments
JUST $1 as downpayment for a traditional China bride.
With a baby bonus carrot to boot.
That's the latest marketing gimmick by a matchmaking agency, Mr Cupid International Matchmakers.
By Dawn Chia
20 February 2007
JUST $1 as downpayment for a traditional China bride.
With a baby bonus carrot to boot.
That's the latest marketing gimmick by a matchmaking agency, Mr Cupid International Matchmakers.
But there's a catch to its eyebrow-raising offer.
Grooms will still have to pay the remaining matchmaking package eventually - in interest-free monthly instalments.
Mr Martin Wong, Mr Cupid's managing director, explained his agency's 'new initiatives'.
He told The New Paper: 'Our initiatives are introduced in accordance with the directives of the Government - which are to encourage people to marry and procreate.
'We want to encourage more people to marry by easing their financial burden when they get married, especially for those who may have to pay for a car, flat and other household expenses.'
The cost of a matchmaking package is $8,000 - a special price for the Chinese New Year period.
It is only applicable to brides from Fujian, China.
Here's how the $1 package works:
# Clients pay a $2,000 downpayment for the matchmaking package
# Upon successful selection of a bride in Fujian, clients will receive a $1,999 hongbao from the matchmaking agency
# The remaining $6,000 is payable in interest-free instalments over 10 months (or $600 monthly). Civil servants may opt for a special 15-month extended plan (or $400 monthly)
# There is a baby bonus for those who give birth to their first child within two years of marriage.
Couples who give birth to their first child within 12 months of marriage will be given a baby bonus of $1,000. Those who do so within 24 months will get $500.
Without the promotion, a China bride package costs $9,000 and does not include the $1,999 red packet, the instalment scheme and baby bonus.
In launching this interest-free instalment and catchy $1 promotion, Mr Wong is well aware of the potential backlash.
While potential clients will no doubt welcome the offer, some people have raised a cautionary flag. (See report on facing page.)
But as competition looms and industry players get more aggressive, Mr Wong sees the need to up the ante and offer something different to potential grooms.
BOLD MOVE
The $1 offer is a bold move for a once-conservative matchmaking industry, which started out by matchmaking men with brides from China.
Over the years, market forces and demand have driven agency owners to look to Vietnam, Cambodia and Kalimantan for more brides.
But Mr Wong is confident that his 'good intentions' will not be missed.
He said: 'The $2,000 token sum we collect upfront is to prevent people from abusing the system.
'We will be conducting the same checks as we do for all our packages - extensive interviews, character checks, income stability and so on.'
His agency is the only matchmaking outfit with CaseTrust accreditation - an accreditation scheme for retail and service sectors promoting fair and ethical business practices so that consumers can buy with confidence.
While Vietnamese brides are still hot favourites among many Singapore bachelors, Mr Wong noted that there is a growing number who are enquiring about China brides again.
Since last June, four in 10 customers who approached him ended up choosing a China bride. The rest chose Vietnamese women.
These China brides work and live in small towns and have never travelled outside of China.
Most work as retail assistants, factory production operators and restaurant waitresses, and earn between 800 yuan ($160) and 1,000 yuan a month.
Mr Tan, a civil servant in his late 40s, has already snapped up the $1 offer. He is earning about $3,000 a month.
He said: 'I've been putting off marriage for many years, and my mother has been nagging at me to settle down.
'It hit me that I'm not getting any younger, so when I approached the agency and learnt about this offer, I took it up.'
Mr Tan, who claimed he has never been in a relationship, doesn't see the $1 offer as a dollar value placed on his potential bride-to-be.
Yet he admitted that if he successfully found a bride, he would 'hide the truth' about how they met from his friends and colleagues.
He said: 'Other people might think that I'm paying for a wife and gossip about it, but I'm really paying for the agency's service.
'I can afford to pay for the package upfront, but since there's this interest-free instalment, I might as well take advantage of it.'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Counsellor: Don't put monetary value on marriage
CLEVER marketing gimmick, or a slap to the institution of marriage?
This is the question which ran through the minds of some people we asked.
And while some, like MP Halimah Yacob, didn't think a gimmick would push people into marriage, others had their reservations.
Family counsellor and therapist Charles Lee warned about having monetary values attached to a marriage and children.
Said Mr Lee: 'People should marry and have kids because they are emotionally and psychologically prepared, not because there is a monetary incentive dangled before them.'
Even Madam Halimah cautioned that going too far with promotions could be hurtful.
'We should not treat a marriage or the woman we want to marry as a product,' she said. 'It will cheapen the institution of marriage and demean the woman.'
Still, she acknowledged that most people are mature enough to think for themselves.
'People will get married and have kids when they are ready to, not because of a promotion like that,' she said.
'The $1 scheme is a creative and innovative way of attracting customers, but I don't think it will be the most important factor for rational people looking at marriage.'
Added Mr Lee: 'It is ultimately up to the consumer to be aware of the pitfalls, and be discerning enough to know if a particular scheme is suitable for him or her.'
As for whether the scheme could hurt the marriage, counsellor and psychologist Harry Low didn't think it would have much impact.
He said: 'If you want to hurt someone, you don't have to say you married her for only $1 or any other amount.
'Monetary value or worth is not the only thing you can use to hurt someone.'
This scheme really demeans women's rights...
-------------------------------------
# Matchmaking agency's gimmicks raise eyebrows
# $1 downpayment
# Interest-free instalments
JUST $1 as downpayment for a traditional China bride.
With a baby bonus carrot to boot.
That's the latest marketing gimmick by a matchmaking agency, Mr Cupid International Matchmakers.
By Dawn Chia
20 February 2007
JUST $1 as downpayment for a traditional China bride.
With a baby bonus carrot to boot.
That's the latest marketing gimmick by a matchmaking agency, Mr Cupid International Matchmakers.
But there's a catch to its eyebrow-raising offer.
Grooms will still have to pay the remaining matchmaking package eventually - in interest-free monthly instalments.
Mr Martin Wong, Mr Cupid's managing director, explained his agency's 'new initiatives'.
He told The New Paper: 'Our initiatives are introduced in accordance with the directives of the Government - which are to encourage people to marry and procreate.
'We want to encourage more people to marry by easing their financial burden when they get married, especially for those who may have to pay for a car, flat and other household expenses.'
The cost of a matchmaking package is $8,000 - a special price for the Chinese New Year period.
It is only applicable to brides from Fujian, China.
Here's how the $1 package works:
# Clients pay a $2,000 downpayment for the matchmaking package
# Upon successful selection of a bride in Fujian, clients will receive a $1,999 hongbao from the matchmaking agency
# The remaining $6,000 is payable in interest-free instalments over 10 months (or $600 monthly). Civil servants may opt for a special 15-month extended plan (or $400 monthly)
# There is a baby bonus for those who give birth to their first child within two years of marriage.
Couples who give birth to their first child within 12 months of marriage will be given a baby bonus of $1,000. Those who do so within 24 months will get $500.
Without the promotion, a China bride package costs $9,000 and does not include the $1,999 red packet, the instalment scheme and baby bonus.
In launching this interest-free instalment and catchy $1 promotion, Mr Wong is well aware of the potential backlash.
While potential clients will no doubt welcome the offer, some people have raised a cautionary flag. (See report on facing page.)
But as competition looms and industry players get more aggressive, Mr Wong sees the need to up the ante and offer something different to potential grooms.
BOLD MOVE
The $1 offer is a bold move for a once-conservative matchmaking industry, which started out by matchmaking men with brides from China.
Over the years, market forces and demand have driven agency owners to look to Vietnam, Cambodia and Kalimantan for more brides.
But Mr Wong is confident that his 'good intentions' will not be missed.
He said: 'The $2,000 token sum we collect upfront is to prevent people from abusing the system.
'We will be conducting the same checks as we do for all our packages - extensive interviews, character checks, income stability and so on.'
His agency is the only matchmaking outfit with CaseTrust accreditation - an accreditation scheme for retail and service sectors promoting fair and ethical business practices so that consumers can buy with confidence.
While Vietnamese brides are still hot favourites among many Singapore bachelors, Mr Wong noted that there is a growing number who are enquiring about China brides again.
Since last June, four in 10 customers who approached him ended up choosing a China bride. The rest chose Vietnamese women.
These China brides work and live in small towns and have never travelled outside of China.
Most work as retail assistants, factory production operators and restaurant waitresses, and earn between 800 yuan ($160) and 1,000 yuan a month.
Mr Tan, a civil servant in his late 40s, has already snapped up the $1 offer. He is earning about $3,000 a month.
He said: 'I've been putting off marriage for many years, and my mother has been nagging at me to settle down.
'It hit me that I'm not getting any younger, so when I approached the agency and learnt about this offer, I took it up.'
Mr Tan, who claimed he has never been in a relationship, doesn't see the $1 offer as a dollar value placed on his potential bride-to-be.
Yet he admitted that if he successfully found a bride, he would 'hide the truth' about how they met from his friends and colleagues.
He said: 'Other people might think that I'm paying for a wife and gossip about it, but I'm really paying for the agency's service.
'I can afford to pay for the package upfront, but since there's this interest-free instalment, I might as well take advantage of it.'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Counsellor: Don't put monetary value on marriage
CLEVER marketing gimmick, or a slap to the institution of marriage?
This is the question which ran through the minds of some people we asked.
And while some, like MP Halimah Yacob, didn't think a gimmick would push people into marriage, others had their reservations.
Family counsellor and therapist Charles Lee warned about having monetary values attached to a marriage and children.
Said Mr Lee: 'People should marry and have kids because they are emotionally and psychologically prepared, not because there is a monetary incentive dangled before them.'
Even Madam Halimah cautioned that going too far with promotions could be hurtful.
'We should not treat a marriage or the woman we want to marry as a product,' she said. 'It will cheapen the institution of marriage and demean the woman.'
Still, she acknowledged that most people are mature enough to think for themselves.
'People will get married and have kids when they are ready to, not because of a promotion like that,' she said.
'The $1 scheme is a creative and innovative way of attracting customers, but I don't think it will be the most important factor for rational people looking at marriage.'
Added Mr Lee: 'It is ultimately up to the consumer to be aware of the pitfalls, and be discerning enough to know if a particular scheme is suitable for him or her.'
As for whether the scheme could hurt the marriage, counsellor and psychologist Harry Low didn't think it would have much impact.
He said: 'If you want to hurt someone, you don't have to say you married her for only $1 or any other amount.
'Monetary value or worth is not the only thing you can use to hurt someone.'
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Poverty Analysis
Measuring Inequality
The Department of Statistics (SingStat) has just released a report which confirms that the income gap is increasing. In the report, the Gini coefficient is mentioned. Above is a World Bank webpage on poverty analysis which explains how the Gini coefficient works. Some of you may remember that Human Rights Day 2006 had a slogan of "Fighting Poverty: a matter of obligation, not charity". The SingStat report can be seen here.
The Department of Statistics (SingStat) has just released a report which confirms that the income gap is increasing. In the report, the Gini coefficient is mentioned. Above is a World Bank webpage on poverty analysis which explains how the Gini coefficient works. Some of you may remember that Human Rights Day 2006 had a slogan of "Fighting Poverty: a matter of obligation, not charity". The SingStat report can be seen here.
Tuesday, February 06, 2007
Features service articles - Decent work in New Zealand: Thinking globally, acting locally - Department of Communication
Features service articles - Decent work in New Zealand: Thinking globally, acting locally - Department of Communication
A great showcase of the good labour rights in New Zealand...
A great showcase of the good labour rights in New Zealand...
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Monday, January 29, 2007
Tuesday, December 05, 2006
United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mechanisms
United Nations Human Rights Monitoring Mechanisms
To look into the human rights situation in Singapore, we need to first know the current issues. To do this, a monitoring mechanism is key. sgwatchDOG will be learning from the UN article above.
To look into the human rights situation in Singapore, we need to first know the current issues. To do this, a monitoring mechanism is key. sgwatchDOG will be learning from the UN article above.
Monday, December 04, 2006
Search engine aids rights workers
BBC NEWS | Technology | Search engine aids rights workers
Not sure if we need another search engine...
Not sure if we need another search engine...
Human Rights Day, 10 December 2006
OHCHR Human Rights Day, 10 December 2006
Human Rights Day is with us again. Lets do our part in improving the situation for everyone in the world. sgwatchDOG commemorates this year's human rights day by writing a series of articles on human rights monitoring. Watch this space.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
eGazette
Current Notices
The eGazette contains notices from all the various Ministries in Singapore. As such, one can often find gems of information in this "vault". Do note that the free access section only lists the latest notices for the last 7 days.
The eGazette contains notices from all the various Ministries in Singapore. As such, one can often find gems of information in this "vault". Do note that the free access section only lists the latest notices for the last 7 days.
Monday, October 30, 2006
The way the police treat us verges on the criminal
Guardian Unlimited | Comment is free | The way the police treat us verges on the criminal
An article commenting about affairs in the UK, but the points mentioned apply in Singapore also.
----------------------------
Guilty until proven innocent now seems to be the watchword of a government that increasingly treats its law-abiding citizens with absolute contempt
Henry Porter
Sunday October 29, 2006
The Observer
An article commenting about affairs in the UK, but the points mentioned apply in Singapore also.
----------------------------
Guilty until proven innocent now seems to be the watchword of a government that increasingly treats its law-abiding citizens with absolute contempt
Henry Porter
Sunday October 29, 2006
The Observer
A father and his eight-year-old son got off a train at Blackpool on a Friday evening two weeks ago to be confronted by a number of police officers moving passengers towards a scanner. There was a mildly threatening manner about them and it was clear that they expected everyone to pass through the scanner, which they said was being used to search for knives.
The man, whose name is Danny, quietly told the police that unless they had a very good reason, he would not be searched. One or two passengers hesitated, then joined him in refusing to go through the scanner. The police were clearly disgruntled, but couldn't do anything because Danny was right: they had to have reasonable grounds for suspecting he was carrying a knife in order to search him. 'I am not some rabid left winger or civil libertarian,' he wrote in an email to me. 'It just seems we are allowing a police state to be developed without an argument.' On the phone, he seemed to modify this by saying that the police behaviour had been oppressive.
Thank God there are still people like Danny who know the law and understand that part of its fragile essence is the respect for the rights of the innocent citizen when confronted with authority. The British Transport Police may insist that its Operation Shield, as this random trawl is known, is for the common good in that it fights knife crime, but think twice about the attitude it betrays and you realise that it is another small erosion in the esteem for the individual. Such behaviour makes everyone a suspect.
Tony Blair talks incessantly about respect, yet there are few who have done more to degrade authority's respect for the public. Nowhere is that better seen than in the behaviour of the police, which gradually becomes more coercive and imbued with the idea that we are all bad hats until we prove otherwise. We now live in a country where the idea of wrongful arrest has become a historic curiosity and where anyone can be arrested for the slightest offence and compelled to become part of the government's DNA database.
We live in a country where young boys - one was just seven - are taken aside and questioned for trying to knock conkers out of chestnut trees on public ground. Where a grandmother whose neighbour accused her of not returning a ball kicked into her garden was arrested, fingerprinted and required to give her DNA. The police went through every room in her house, even her daughter's drawers, before letting her go without charge or caution.
Where two sisters can be arrested after a peaceful protest about climate change, held in solitary confinement for 36 hours without being allowed to make a phone call, then told not to talk to each other as a condition of their bail. As this paper reported, their money, keys, computers, discs and phones were confiscated, their homes searched.
There is much more, all of it enabled by Blair's laws and encouraged by a vindictive and erroneous contention that defendants' rights must be reduced in the pursuit of more and quicker prosecutions. Our prisons are full, problem teenagers are, by default, exiled to a kind of outlawry and every citizen becomes the subject of an almost hysterical need by the authorities to check up on and chivvy them.
The government regards us not just as wedded to too many regrettable vices - smoking, speeding, drinking too much, eating unhealthy food and taking no exercise - but also as innately prone to law-breaking. Perhaps with good reason, since, according to the Liberal Democrat homes affairs spokesman, Nick Clegg, some 3,000 criminal offences have been created by Labour. The more crimes there are, the more criminals there will be.
Mass surveillance has begun on our motorways and in our town centres. Metropolitan drivers increasingly find themselves pressed into numberplate-recognition camera traps on the same principle that inspires Operation Shield. Everyone has something to hide unless they can prove otherwise, which is why the police also enthusiastically pursue samples for the DNA database. (Incidentally, by next year, the total number of profiles will rise to three million, one in five of which will belong to black people.)
The police are in their very own heaven and demand more and more powers of instant justice, a contradiction in terms if ever there was one. These will allow them to crush people's cars, issue more on-the-spot fines and ban 'undesirables' from any area they choose without having to go to court. Even parish councils are to become part of this culture of minatory bossiness. Instead of having to apply to central government to introduce new bylaws, they are to be given powers by Ruth Kelly, the Communities and Local Government Minister, to levy instant £100 fines for skateboarding, not cleaning up dog mess, busking and, no doubt, scrumping for apples and playing Pooh sticks. How will it end - with CCTV cameras watching small boys for inappropriate behaviour in the vicinity of horse chestnuts?
In his frantic terminality, Blair plans the sinister information-sharing index, otherwise known as the universal child register, and last week was musing that we should all have our DNA stored on the national base. Link this to his earlier remarks about identifying problem children who might grow up to be a menace to society by intervening before they were born and you begin to feel the chill of the technology-driven authoritarianism.
What runs through all this seems to be a rather surprising dislike of the British people. It was once possible to believe the government's unusual attention to law, order and behaviour was benevolent yet ill-conceived. Now it looks more like the result of late-onset sociopathy, influenced by a long period in power and the degenerate entanglement between Downing Street and the seething red-top newspapers.
The prevailing account of Britain in the current political establishment has become deeply pessimistic and, to my mind, wrong. Yes, we have problems with home-grown terrorism, loutishness, a swelling underclass, unintegrating minorities, but there is another story. Britain is also a success and it should occur to one of our political leaders to defy the orthodoxy of decline and compliment the nation on its adaptability and deep reserves of virtue and toleration.
Think of the charitable activity in this country, of the level of public debate that wells up in BBC programmes such as Any Questions, the deep interest in history, the eagerness of the audiences at arts festivals all over Britain, the humour and generosity of spirit, the commitment to local communities, to understanding each other's needs and of the array of passions and hobbies which absorb so many millions of people whose quiet, law-abiding fulfilment as Britons goes undescribed by the furious negativity of the moment. It is these people, with their stored-up virtue and unself-conscious decency, who the government seeks to turn into suspects and infantilise by its morbid intrusion.
It is not the government's business to encroach on our experience as individuals in a democracy, to threaten us with so much oppressive legislation and always to assume our guilt. But there is another reason and that is because we are soon going to have to have the debate about individual liberty in the context of rapid climate change. That will only work if the government treats us like adults and says: 'Look, this is potentially the greatest crisis civilisation has ever faced and we need your help.' The resulting contract must be between equals - the people and the state - and in a relationship where respect flows both ways.That, ultimately, is what this nagging and suspicious government threatens.
Sunday, October 29, 2006
Sunday, October 22, 2006
The Special Rapporteurs
BBC NEWS Programmes Documentary Archive The Special Rapporteurs
sgwatchDOG finds out more about the UN special rapporteurs. For example, these rapporteurs are not paid by the UN...
sgwatchDOG finds out more about the UN special rapporteurs. For example, these rapporteurs are not paid by the UN...
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Tuesday, September 19, 2006
What it should have been
Well, this is a strange development of events...
"Sep 9, 2006
Activists held, ordered to leave
By Tania Tan
"In Saturday's report 'Activists held, ordered to leave', we said that the police had tracked the cellphone signals of the activists from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
"Sep 9, 2006
Activists held, ordered to leave
By Tania Tan
ANIMAL rights activists were detained and ordered to leave Singapore yesterday before they could stage their planned protest outside a KFC fast-food outlet in Victoria Street.
Police acted on Thursday after they were alerted to the plans of a duo from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (Peta) to parade naked outside the outlet wearing banners saying 'Naked Truth: KFC Tortures Chicks'.
Police tracked the cellphone signals of American Jason Baker, 34, and Canadian Ashley Fruno, 20, and found the pair at a coffee shop in Bencoolen Street at 3.30pm.
They were taken to a police station at about 7pm and allowed to leave three hours later, after being told to board the next available flight out of Singapore.
A third member, Filipina Sonia Astudillo, 26, who arrived here later on Thursday, was immediately detained and also told to leave.
Police confirmed that all three were told to leave, before they could repeat a stunt they had carried out in Bangkok and Kuala Lumpur days earlier.
Peta activitists are protesting against KFC because, unlike McDonald's and Burger King, the fried chicken franchise has yet to sign on to 'welfare policies', and had ignored recommendations for animal welfare improvements, the US-based Peta claims.
A KFC spokesman: 'KFC is committed to good animal welfare practices and all KFC poultry suppliers meet or exceed animal welfare legislation and industry standards.'
Mr Baker said just before his flight to Hong Kong at 3pm yesterday: 'We are shocked at being deported.'
This is not the first time the group has protested here. Its most recent attempt was made in February, when a Peta member paraded along Orchard Road in a chicken suit and gas mask, protesting the poultry culling sparked by the avian flu threat.
'The police didn't bat an eyelid then,' said Mr Baker, who is also director of the Asia-Pacific arm of Peta.
'Perhaps they were using us to send a message to IMF protesters,' he added, referring to the annual International Monetary Fund and World Bank meetings to be held here next week."
What it should have been"In Saturday's report 'Activists held, ordered to leave', we said that the police had tracked the cellphone signals of the activists from the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
This is wrong. The police had responded to calls from the public who witnessed the duo behaving suspiciously.
We are sorry for the error."
Wednesday, September 13, 2006
PTC approves fare increases
http://www.ptc.gov.sg/news16.pdf
sgwatchDOG reads the Public Transport Council's fare increase document with interest...
sgwatchDOG reads the Public Transport Council's fare increase document with interest...
Monday, September 11, 2006
062404.pdf (application/pdf Object)
egazette
Interesting nuggets of information are always on show at the E-gazette website. Take the one above, for example. It mentions that,
"pursuant to paragraph 2.3 of the Code of Conduct for Ministers (Cmd No. 8 of 2005), the Prime Minister, having considered it to be in the national interest, has granted the
Minister Mentor, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, permission to be a special advisor to Citigroup Inc., with effect from 5th September 2006."
Interesting nuggets of information are always on show at the E-gazette website. Take the one above, for example. It mentions that,
"pursuant to paragraph 2.3 of the Code of Conduct for Ministers (Cmd No. 8 of 2005), the Prime Minister, having considered it to be in the national interest, has granted the
Minister Mentor, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, permission to be a special advisor to Citigroup Inc., with effect from 5th September 2006."
Joint Statement From World Bank And IMF On CSO Participation In The Annual Meetings In Singapore
Press Release
Well, the press release from the World Bank & IMF makes their stand crystal clear... they want all accredited civil society representatives to be allowed into Singapore...
Well, the press release from the World Bank & IMF makes their stand crystal clear... they want all accredited civil society representatives to be allowed into Singapore...
Friday, September 08, 2006
MAS Consultation Papers
MAS :Financial Sector
sgwatchDOG just stumbled unto MAS's public consultation page. It seems that some papers were not cross-posted on the Feedback Unit's webpage. The latest MAS consultation paper involves an issue (ILP rules relaxation) that could impact consumers significantly...
sgwatchDOG just stumbled unto MAS's public consultation page. It seems that some papers were not cross-posted on the Feedback Unit's webpage. The latest MAS consultation paper involves an issue (ILP rules relaxation) that could impact consumers significantly...
feedback on the feedback unit
e-Consultation Paper
With a new Chairperson for the Feedback Unit, it seems that change is in the air...
With a new Chairperson for the Feedback Unit, it seems that change is in the air...
Thursday, September 07, 2006
Secondhand Dealers Licence/ Certificate Of Exemption
Secondhand Dealers Licence/ Certificate Of Exemption
useful info for consumers to consider the next time they wish to consider buying a 2nd hand product...the vendor needs to have a license granted by the Police.
useful info for consumers to consider the next time they wish to consider buying a 2nd hand product...the vendor needs to have a license granted by the Police.
Wednesday, September 06, 2006
Information On Repair Contractors Available For Minor Repair Works In HDB Flats
HDB InfoWEB : Press Release
Good to see that HDB is pro-active in protecting consumers who may be "cheated" by companies who overcharge or may not be qualified to conduct repair works...
Good to see that HDB is pro-active in protecting consumers who may be "cheated" by companies who overcharge or may not be qualified to conduct repair works...
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
IPTO - Registry of Pawnbrokers - FAQ
IPTO - Registry of Pawnbrokers - FAQ
Similar to below, but for consumers considering pawning items...
Similar to below, but for consumers considering pawning items...
Monday, September 04, 2006
A helping hand with your HDB housing needs
Refreshing to see that the Housing and Development Board has initiatives to help the poor and elderly.
Wednesday, August 09, 2006
Friday, July 07, 2006
Thursday, April 06, 2006
Reporters sans frontières - Singapore
Reporters sans frontières - Singapore
Government steps up online censorship in run-up to elections
Government steps up online censorship in run-up to elections
Reporters Without Borders has condemned rules gagging free expression online, in the same way as for traditional media, in the run-up to parliamentary elections in Singapore.
Singapore Information, Communications and Arts minister, Balaji Sadasivan, repeated on 3 April 2006, the strict rules in force since 2001 on Internet use in electoral periods. The Singapore government has already warned Internet users who are likely to discsuss politics online that they are at risk of legal action. No official date has been announced for the elections but they are due to be held in the next few months.
"Once again the Singapore authorities are showing their determination to prevent the holding of a genuinely democratic debate on the Internet,” the press freedom organisation said.
During a parliamentary debate on 3 April 2006, Balaji Sadasivan repeated and enlarged on the very restrictive measures applying to Internet use during election campaigns. Bloggers and website managers do not have the right to back a particular candidate’s programme.
Outside of elections periods, bloggers have to register with the Media Development Authority (MDA) if they want to openly and regularly defend a political line. But during election periods, the fact of being registered does not allow them to express opinons on political issues. Website managers are subjected to the same rules.
These restrictions will now also apply to new Internet technology. The minister specified that use during the campaign of podcasting and videocasting, two new devices for putting audio or video online, will be banned if they carry political content. During the last election campaign, in November 2001, the main opposition party, the Singapore Democratic Party, made use of podcasting.
Sinapan Samydorai, chairman of the freedom of expression organisation Think Centre, who has been forced to register his website, said that there has been no improvement since the last elections in 2001, during which official party websites were the only authorised source of political news and information.
Another Singaporean blogger, known under the pseudonym of Alex, highlighted the confusion that has been caused by the minister’s remarks about the exact limits of Internet-users rights to express themselves politically in his country. “The minister’s statements raise more new questions than it provides clarification”, he told Reporters Without Borders.
BBC NEWS | Technology | Singapore attacked over blog gag
BBC NEWS | Technology | Singapore attacked over blog gag
Singapore attacked over blog gag
The Singapore government has been condemned for gagging political discussion on the web in the run up to the country's parliamentary elections. The government has extended censorship laws to ban podcasts and videocasts that carry political content.
Websites and blogs are already under strict control and must be registered with the government.
Media watchdog Reporters without Borders said the ban would prevent democratic debate on the net.
The ban was outlined by Communications and Arts minister, Balaji Sadasivan of the People's Action Party (PAP) in a parliamentary speech.
It is enforced under a 2001 law that seeks to prevent overt advertising by political parties.
New technology
The ban will come as a blow to PAP opponents, the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP).
It has used both podcasts and videocasts in an attempt to get round traditional media censorship laws in their campaign.
The party said on their website that the latest announcement was aimed "squarely at the SDP's efforts to harness the new technology to advance its platform in the upcoming general elections".
For its part, Reporters without Borders said: "Once again the Singapore authorities are showing their determination to prevent the holding of a genuinely democratic debate on the internet."
No date has yet been announced for the election.
Outside of election periods, bloggers and website managers have to register with the Media Development Authority (MDA) if they want to write about party politics.
However during elections even registered users are prohibited from open political discussion.
The government said that anyone breaking the ban faces legal action.
The announcement is an extension of the Singapore government's strict censorship policy that applies to all media.
Recently the government relaxed some of its laws in an attempt to market the country as a hub for arts and culture.
The film, Brokeback Mountain, passed film censors this year, in spite of the country's stringent laws against homosexuality.
Friday, February 24, 2006
New UN rights council put forward
BBC NEWS | In Depth | New UN rights council put forward
moves to reform the human rights organisation within the UN...should be a good thing.
moves to reform the human rights organisation within the UN...should be a good thing.
Monday, December 12, 2005
not just consumer rights anymore
when sgwatchDOG was first conceived, there was always a lingering desire to look at the overall human rights situation in singapore, and not just on consumer rights. well, sgwatchDOG has finally decided to broaden its scope, and will, with immediate effect, look into issues of human rights in singapore.
Saturday, December 10, 2005
war on timeshare
sgwatchdog shifts into its 2nd phase, moving from reporting to direct action, by declaring war on timeshare companies in singapore. more info soon...
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Comparison of MediShield and Private Integrated Plans
a pdf file comparing medishield & private schemes. below is part of the write-up.
"One of the objectives of the MediShield reform is to promote a competitive medical insurance market which can offer Singaporeans greater choice of private insurance plans. When the reform was implemented on 1 Jul 2005, there was immediate benefit to Singaporeans as private insurers responded positively to the reform. Three existing insurers (AIA, Great Eastern and NTUC Income) significantly enhanced coverage for policyholders with hardly any changes to premiums. A fourth insurer (Aviva) was a new entrant to the market which introduced different insurance plans."
"One of the objectives of the MediShield reform is to promote a competitive medical insurance market which can offer Singaporeans greater choice of private insurance plans. When the reform was implemented on 1 Jul 2005, there was immediate benefit to Singaporeans as private insurers responded positively to the reform. Three existing insurers (AIA, Great Eastern and NTUC Income) significantly enhanced coverage for policyholders with hardly any changes to premiums. A fourth insurer (Aviva) was a new entrant to the market which introduced different insurance plans."
Thursday, October 20, 2005
steps to resolving your consumer issue
adapted from the article from Australian Consumers' Association, with local context added in.
Step 1: Know your rights! If you know what you're entitled to, you can ask for it with confidence.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/
the statutes website shows all the acts in singapore. some relevant acts applicable would be
1. CONSUMER PROTECTION (FAIR TRADING) ACT
2. SALE OF GOODS ACT
3. UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT
4. MISREPRESENTATION ACT
note: some acts are listed under english acts, so if u don't find it under the alphabet listing, take a look there
Step 2: Go to the source. Approach the retailer or organisation that provided the service and explain the problem as soon as possible.
call the company involved, and speak to the person who handled your transaction. some consumers find it better to sms, as there is proof of the conversation.
Step 3: Write a letter to the manager or the organisation's customer service department.
if it is still unresolved at this stage, a simple email, fax, or letter sent to the company would be good. give a reasonable dateline for the company to respond.
Step 4: Lodge a complaint. Approach the government or industry body that deals with complaints in that area, such as the fair trading/consumer affairs department, health complaints body or industry ombudsman.
at this stage, u may need some assistance from other organisations
1. CASE
2. NATAS
3. AEAS
4. FIDREC
5. RADAC
6. STB
Step 5: Lodge a claim with the small claims tribunal.
http://www.smallclaims.gov.sg/index.html
the small claims tribunal is a simple court procedure to resolve an issue that is still unresolved at this stage.
Step 1: Know your rights! If you know what you're entitled to, you can ask for it with confidence.
http://statutes.agc.gov.sg/
the statutes website shows all the acts in singapore. some relevant acts applicable would be
1. CONSUMER PROTECTION (FAIR TRADING) ACT
2. SALE OF GOODS ACT
3. UNFAIR CONTRACT TERMS ACT
4. MISREPRESENTATION ACT
note: some acts are listed under english acts, so if u don't find it under the alphabet listing, take a look there
Step 2: Go to the source. Approach the retailer or organisation that provided the service and explain the problem as soon as possible.
call the company involved, and speak to the person who handled your transaction. some consumers find it better to sms, as there is proof of the conversation.
Step 3: Write a letter to the manager or the organisation's customer service department.
if it is still unresolved at this stage, a simple email, fax, or letter sent to the company would be good. give a reasonable dateline for the company to respond.
Step 4: Lodge a complaint. Approach the government or industry body that deals with complaints in that area, such as the fair trading/consumer affairs department, health complaints body or industry ombudsman.
at this stage, u may need some assistance from other organisations
1. CASE
2. NATAS
3. AEAS
4. FIDREC
5. RADAC
6. STB
Step 5: Lodge a claim with the small claims tribunal.
http://www.smallclaims.gov.sg/index.html
the small claims tribunal is a simple court procedure to resolve an issue that is still unresolved at this stage.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
consumer blacklist - 001
name: L.G.M. LIMITED (SINGAPORE BRANCH)
registration: F 05553K
hideout: 391B Orchard Rd #14-01 Ngee Ann City Tower B Singapore 238874
blacklisted for: violating the consumer protection (fair trading) act, 3-day cooling-off period
registration: F 05553K
hideout: 391B Orchard Rd #14-01 Ngee Ann City Tower B Singapore 238874
blacklisted for: violating the consumer protection (fair trading) act, 3-day cooling-off period
Monday, October 10, 2005
when is insurance not insurance?
DBS Singapore Personal Banking Insurance
u walk into a bank, requesting the bank to open a fixed deposit account. u walk out with a "regular savings plan". it turns out to be an investment-linked policy. if u look at the website, u will see that the word "insurance" is conspicuously missing. the term "assurance" is used instead, or even worst "moneyback".
u walk into a bank, requesting the bank to open a fixed deposit account. u walk out with a "regular savings plan". it turns out to be an investment-linked policy. if u look at the website, u will see that the word "insurance" is conspicuously missing. the term "assurance" is used instead, or even worst "moneyback".
Thursday, September 01, 2005
FIDReC
FIDReC
finally, fidrec opens its doors to the public. what is it? see below...
The Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre Ltd (FIDReC) is an independent and impartial institution specialising in the resolution of disputes between financial institutions and consumers. FIDReC subsumes the work of the Consumer Mediation Unit (CMU) of the Association of Banks in Singapore and the Insurance Disputes Resolution Organisation (IDRO).
finally, fidrec opens its doors to the public. what is it? see below...
The Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre Ltd (FIDReC) is an independent and impartial institution specialising in the resolution of disputes between financial institutions and consumers. FIDReC subsumes the work of the Consumer Mediation Unit (CMU) of the Association of Banks in Singapore and the Insurance Disputes Resolution Organisation (IDRO).
Friday, August 05, 2005
One in seven new mobiles 'faulty'
BBC NEWS | Technology
An estimated two million of the 18 million mobiles sold last year in the UK could have been faulty, according to a Which? magazine consumer report.
It found that one in seven new mobiles had problems, 70% of which occurred in the first six months.
Twenty-seven percent of mobile owners with problems were not happy with the help they received either, said Which?
Video phone operator 3 had the poorest record, with one in three handsets on its network having problems.
Which? said that this could be down to "teething problems" with third generation mobile technology.
"They're newer and they are more sophisticated so it is reasonable to think they might have more teething problems," Abigail Waraker, assistant editor of Which? told the BBC News website.
Rachel Channing from 3 told the BBC News website that it was unrealistic to try and compare 3G technology, which is complex and new, to GSM technology.
Downloading full-length music videos, making video calls and so on is relatively novel for many people, so there was more chance of things going wrong.
FAULT REPORTS WITHIN YEAR OF PURCHASE
3 - 32%
Orange - 16%
T-Mobile - 15%
Vodafone - 15%
BT Mobile - 14%
02 - 13%
Virgin - 8%
Tesco - 4%
Source: Which? survey
She also criticised the sample size of the survey. "The sample they picked out was only 50 customers. We have three million. It was only 16 who had experienced problems, so we don't think it is a representative sample," she said.
She added that the problems reported related to its oldest 3G handset model, released about two years ago.
"The technology is evolving so rapidly and the performance as you release them improves every time.
"Those handsets have been superseded by ones that perform much better on the network," she said.
The survey revealed a whole range of problems, from faulty keypads, failure to connect to the network, or problems in storing phone book entries, for instance.
By law, if a mobile has a fault within six months and the store cannot show it was the customer's fault, the shop must sort it out.
'Not good enough'
The report did not make distinctions between what was a handset fault, or a network fault because people would not necessarily know themselves the reason for a fault.
What it highlighted though was a big problem that new mobile owners experience when there is an issue.
"People get passed from pillar to post," Pete Tynan, the report's author told the BBC News website.
"In fact is it is up to the place you bought it from to sort it out. Don't let them fob you off," he said.
Even if the problem was that the SIM card was not connecting to the network, for instance, it is still legally the retailer's responsibility to solve the problem as they sold the package in the first instance.
"A one-in-seven chance your phone's going to develop a fault is way too high," said Malcolm Coles, editor of Which?.
"Not only that, but retailers who should be bending over backwards to help customers who've already suffered the inconvenience of a fault, aren't giving people the help they need when they complain."
The survey of more than 5,000 people on Which?'s online consumer panel also found that certain handset brands were more likely to experience faults than others.
Motorola and Sony Ericsson handsets proved most likely to have technical hitches, with 20% of people reporting problems with them.
Nokia and Samsung scored better, with one in 10 owners experiencing faults.
Mobiles are fast becoming the most common consumer electronic devices in the world, according to analysts.
By the end of 2009, 2.6 billion mobiles will be in use around the world, according to Gartner analysts.
An estimated two million of the 18 million mobiles sold last year in the UK could have been faulty, according to a Which? magazine consumer report.
It found that one in seven new mobiles had problems, 70% of which occurred in the first six months.
Twenty-seven percent of mobile owners with problems were not happy with the help they received either, said Which?
Video phone operator 3 had the poorest record, with one in three handsets on its network having problems.
Which? said that this could be down to "teething problems" with third generation mobile technology.
"They're newer and they are more sophisticated so it is reasonable to think they might have more teething problems," Abigail Waraker, assistant editor of Which? told the BBC News website.
Rachel Channing from 3 told the BBC News website that it was unrealistic to try and compare 3G technology, which is complex and new, to GSM technology.
Downloading full-length music videos, making video calls and so on is relatively novel for many people, so there was more chance of things going wrong.
FAULT REPORTS WITHIN YEAR OF PURCHASE
3 - 32%
Orange - 16%
T-Mobile - 15%
Vodafone - 15%
BT Mobile - 14%
02 - 13%
Virgin - 8%
Tesco - 4%
Source: Which? survey
She also criticised the sample size of the survey. "The sample they picked out was only 50 customers. We have three million. It was only 16 who had experienced problems, so we don't think it is a representative sample," she said.
She added that the problems reported related to its oldest 3G handset model, released about two years ago.
"The technology is evolving so rapidly and the performance as you release them improves every time.
"Those handsets have been superseded by ones that perform much better on the network," she said.
The survey revealed a whole range of problems, from faulty keypads, failure to connect to the network, or problems in storing phone book entries, for instance.
By law, if a mobile has a fault within six months and the store cannot show it was the customer's fault, the shop must sort it out.
'Not good enough'
The report did not make distinctions between what was a handset fault, or a network fault because people would not necessarily know themselves the reason for a fault.
What it highlighted though was a big problem that new mobile owners experience when there is an issue.
"People get passed from pillar to post," Pete Tynan, the report's author told the BBC News website.
"In fact is it is up to the place you bought it from to sort it out. Don't let them fob you off," he said.
Even if the problem was that the SIM card was not connecting to the network, for instance, it is still legally the retailer's responsibility to solve the problem as they sold the package in the first instance.
"A one-in-seven chance your phone's going to develop a fault is way too high," said Malcolm Coles, editor of Which?.
"Not only that, but retailers who should be bending over backwards to help customers who've already suffered the inconvenience of a fault, aren't giving people the help they need when they complain."
The survey of more than 5,000 people on Which?'s online consumer panel also found that certain handset brands were more likely to experience faults than others.
Motorola and Sony Ericsson handsets proved most likely to have technical hitches, with 20% of people reporting problems with them.
Nokia and Samsung scored better, with one in 10 owners experiencing faults.
Mobiles are fast becoming the most common consumer electronic devices in the world, according to analysts.
By the end of 2009, 2.6 billion mobiles will be in use around the world, according to Gartner analysts.
Wednesday, August 03, 2005
Housing Agencies Under The Listed Housing Agents Scheme
Housing Agencies Under The Listed Housing Agents Scheme
make sure that your housing agent belongs to the listed housing agents scheme before engaging them to help buy/sell your HDB flat. At the very least, u can seek help from HDB if things go sour.
make sure that your housing agent belongs to the listed housing agents scheme before engaging them to help buy/sell your HDB flat. At the very least, u can seek help from HDB if things go sour.
Saturday, July 23, 2005
BBC NEWS | Technology | Ringtone ads face stiff controls
BBC NEWS Technology Ringtone ads face stiff controls
Rules on ringtone ads are being beefed up following a deluge of complaints to watchdog that regulates premium rate phone services in the UK.
Icstis has welcomed the new safeguards to protect consumers signing up for premium rate subscription services, such as ringtones and wallpapers.
It says misleading ads have meant many people have run up large bills because all costs are not spelled out.
More than 100 people complained to the watchdog about the Crazy Frog ringtone.
The new rules were draw up by the UK's mobile phone operators to determine how premium rate subscription services are marketed by content providers.
The deadline for complying with them is 30 August.
The rules go as far as to dictate font sizes and how prices should be displayed in TV adverts.
In recent months, many people have mistakenly run up large bills by inadvertently subscribing to ringtone and text services when they thought they were just buying one tune.
The popularity of the Crazy Frog ringtone has led many people to download it to their phone without realising that it is only part of a bundle of tunes they will regularly be billed for.
"Teenagers are particularly vulnerable as they do not always fully appreciate the conditions attached to such services," said George Kidd, Icstis director.
The wildly popular Crazy Frog has made history by becoming the first ringtone to reach the top of the pop charts.
It is part of a package of ringtones created by mobile content company Jamster, and sold through a mobile service provider called MBlox.
Consumers who may think they are buying the Crazy Frog ringtone are signing up for a subscription plan.
Each week, they receive a new text message for which they are charged £3, enabling them to download another ringtone.
The new rules, drawn up by mobile operators and backed by premium service watchdog Icstis, will force content sellers to make it clear what people have bought and how much ongoing costs are.
They demand that details of prices and how often people are billed are prominent in adverts. For TV adverts, scrolling price banners and small fonts are outlawed.
In print, adverts prices and conditions must be in the main body of an advert rather than the small print.
They also stipulate that as soon as someone has signed up for a service they are sent a text message telling them what they are getting.
Customers must also get a reminder of how to unsubscribe every month or every time £20 is spent.
Mr Kidd said the rules built on the universal "stop" command that was introduced in 2004. This lets people unsubscribe by sending the word "stop" to the short code associated with the service they have signed up for.
Adrian Harris, founder of the Grumbletext website where people log problems with phone services, said he welcomed the new safeguards up to a point.
If all firms complied with the rules then consumers would definitely be better off, he said.
But, he said, the big problem was policing ringtone sellers. He called on Icstis to be more active in seeking out offending firms rather than just investigating on a case-by-case basis.
At the end of June the Department of Trade and Industry announced a big increase in fines for firms that break rules on the selling of premium rate phone services.
After the increase the maximum fine is £250,000 - more than double the previous upper limit of £100,000.
Rules on ringtone ads are being beefed up following a deluge of complaints to watchdog that regulates premium rate phone services in the UK.
Icstis has welcomed the new safeguards to protect consumers signing up for premium rate subscription services, such as ringtones and wallpapers.
It says misleading ads have meant many people have run up large bills because all costs are not spelled out.
More than 100 people complained to the watchdog about the Crazy Frog ringtone.
The new rules were draw up by the UK's mobile phone operators to determine how premium rate subscription services are marketed by content providers.
The deadline for complying with them is 30 August.
The rules go as far as to dictate font sizes and how prices should be displayed in TV adverts.
In recent months, many people have mistakenly run up large bills by inadvertently subscribing to ringtone and text services when they thought they were just buying one tune.
The popularity of the Crazy Frog ringtone has led many people to download it to their phone without realising that it is only part of a bundle of tunes they will regularly be billed for.
"Teenagers are particularly vulnerable as they do not always fully appreciate the conditions attached to such services," said George Kidd, Icstis director.
The wildly popular Crazy Frog has made history by becoming the first ringtone to reach the top of the pop charts.
It is part of a package of ringtones created by mobile content company Jamster, and sold through a mobile service provider called MBlox.
Consumers who may think they are buying the Crazy Frog ringtone are signing up for a subscription plan.
Each week, they receive a new text message for which they are charged £3, enabling them to download another ringtone.
The new rules, drawn up by mobile operators and backed by premium service watchdog Icstis, will force content sellers to make it clear what people have bought and how much ongoing costs are.
They demand that details of prices and how often people are billed are prominent in adverts. For TV adverts, scrolling price banners and small fonts are outlawed.
In print, adverts prices and conditions must be in the main body of an advert rather than the small print.
They also stipulate that as soon as someone has signed up for a service they are sent a text message telling them what they are getting.
Customers must also get a reminder of how to unsubscribe every month or every time £20 is spent.
Mr Kidd said the rules built on the universal "stop" command that was introduced in 2004. This lets people unsubscribe by sending the word "stop" to the short code associated with the service they have signed up for.
Adrian Harris, founder of the Grumbletext website where people log problems with phone services, said he welcomed the new safeguards up to a point.
If all firms complied with the rules then consumers would definitely be better off, he said.
But, he said, the big problem was policing ringtone sellers. He called on Icstis to be more active in seeking out offending firms rather than just investigating on a case-by-case basis.
At the end of June the Department of Trade and Industry announced a big increase in fines for firms that break rules on the selling of premium rate phone services.
After the increase the maximum fine is £250,000 - more than double the previous upper limit of £100,000.
Thursday, July 14, 2005
How to Complain successfully
Australian Consumers' Association
Whether you've got a complaint against a store, car dealer, tradesperson, professional, bank or other organisation, follow our tips to exercise your rights and get satisfaction!
Step 1: Know your rights! If you know what you’re entitled to, you can ask for it with confidence.
Step 2: Go to the source. Approach the retailer or organisation that provided the service and explain the problem as soon as possible.
Step 3: Write a letter to the manager or the organisation’s customer service department.
Step 4: Lodge a complaint. Approach the government or industry body that deals with complaints in that area, such as the fair trading/consumer affairs department, health complaints body or industry ombudsman.
Step 5: Lodge a claim with the small claims tribunal or equivalent if it's a fair trading issue.
Step 1: Know your rights!
Your first step in resolving a dispute with a store, tradesperson, professional or organisation is to find out your rights in the situation.
Check with the relevant complaints body, such as fair trading department, health complaints agency or other government body, industry association or ombudsman or professional organisation. They'll normally give advice over the phone.
You can also find contact details for these bodies and a range of consumer rights information under Your Rights.
Once you know your rights, you can be confident in exercising them.
Consider these approaches to settling a complaint.
“Well..um...I thought maybe you could … you know… um.. er… give me…”
Is this you? Hesitant and unsure in asking for a refund for faulty goods while the store is saying they’ll only offer a repair?
“I know that I’m entitled to a refund if goods are faulty. I don’t have to accept a repair.”
This shows you know your rights and are confident about asking for them.
Who'll get results faster?
The confident consumer is more likely to get satisfaction almost immediately.
If you're unsure about your rights you may get nowhere with the retailer and have to take the case to the local fair trading/consumer affairs authority to get the same result.
Step 2: Go to the source
Armed with knowledge of your rights, and our advice below, you can phone or go into the seller or service provider's premises — as soon as possible.
First gather any necessary paperwork like receipts, invoices, bills, advertisements, catalogues and print-outs of online orders to show you bought the goods or service, the date and how much you paid.
It's important to work out what you want, say a refund, compensation or apology, before you talk to the trader.
Write down the key points if you think that’ll help.
Be prepared to explain:
what the product or service is and when you bought it
the problem, when it developed and what needs to be done to rectify it
your rights in the situation.
Keep your cool
When you make contact, ask to speak to the person you dealt with and explain the situation calmly and firmly.
If they don’t have the authority to handle your complaint, ask to speak to someone who does, for example, the manager.
If you complain in person, it sometimes helps to take a friend for support and to be a witness but make sure they keep their cool, too.
Make notes
Write down the name and position of the person you speak to and make notes of this and any other conversations you have with the trader.
Also keep any correspondence and other documentation you receive from the trader.
You'll need as much evidence as possible if you have to lodge a complaint with Fair Trading/Consumer Affairs or the Small Claims Tribunal or equivalent.
Step 3: Write a letter
If your visit or phone call doesn't bring quick results, write a letter to the trader confirming the details of your complaint.
Some tips:
Ring the store for the name of the manager or get the name of the contact person for the organisation's customer service department and address the letter to them.
Keep your letter simple, straightforward and polite and write it in clear and easy-to-read language.
Get straight to the point in the first paragraph and carefully plan what you want to say in the rest of the letter.
Outline the problem, when it first occurred, what it will take to resolve the matter and what steps you've already taken.
Show you know your rights by including a sentence about why you're entitled to the type of redress you're requesting.
Be reasonable if you set a deadline for a response.
Enclose copies (not originals) of relevant documents, such as receipts, quotes and invoices.
Present information carefully in written complaints sent by fax or email — as you would in a letter.
Keep a copy of the letter and any others you write to the trader. As well as documenting your complaint, they will show you tried to resolve the issue yourself if you have to lodge a complaint with Fair Trading/Consumer Affairs.
Step 4: Lodge a complaint
The trader or service provider has told you they're not prepared to give you what you want or they haven't replied at all.
It's time to lodge a complaint with the fair trading/consumer affairs department, other relevant government complaint agency or industry ombudsman.
Put your complaint in writing. You can usually send it by mail, fax or email. You may even be able to lodge it on the complaint body's website.
What to include
Use your letter to the seller or service provider as a guide for your written complaint. Include:
a description of the problem
when it occurred
what it will take to resolve the matter
what steps you've already taken.
Supply copies of the necessary paperwork (not originals), such as correspondence between you and the trader, notes of conversations, receipts, invoices and quotes with your complaint.
The complaint body will attempt to negotiate a resolution between you and the seller or service provider.
For fair trading complaints, the fair trading/consumer affairs department can investigate traders and may take action in the courts when they've breached consumer protection laws.
However, the department usually can't force traders to resolve individual complaints.
To obtain an order against the trader which can be enforced through the courts, you have to lodge a claim with the fair trading/small claims tribunal in your state or territory. See Step Five: Small claims tribunal .
Step 5: Small claims tribunal
The Small Claims Tribunal or equivalent in your state or territory offers an inexpensive path to justice for fair trading disputes.
The fees and the maximum amount you can claim in these tribunals vary from state to state.
The hearings are usually relatively informal. Each party tells their side of the story and the referee makes an order.
Take any records you have of the dispute, such as notes of conversations and correspondence with the trader, and relevant documents like receipts, invoices and quotes.
Find an expert
To show a service was not performed properly or a product did not do what it was supposed to it's useful to approach an independent expert to make a written assessment of the situation. You can use this as evidence in the case.
The small claims tribunals, which are also known as fair trading tribunals and small claims courts in some states and territories, make orders for claims in dollar amounts.
If you obtain an order in your favour and the trader doesn't abide by it, you can enforce it by going to the Local Court or Magistrates Court.
If the amount you're claiming is outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal, you'll have to pursue the matter in the regular court system. So seek legal advice!
Whether you've got a complaint against a store, car dealer, tradesperson, professional, bank or other organisation, follow our tips to exercise your rights and get satisfaction!
Step 1: Know your rights! If you know what you’re entitled to, you can ask for it with confidence.
Step 2: Go to the source. Approach the retailer or organisation that provided the service and explain the problem as soon as possible.
Step 3: Write a letter to the manager or the organisation’s customer service department.
Step 4: Lodge a complaint. Approach the government or industry body that deals with complaints in that area, such as the fair trading/consumer affairs department, health complaints body or industry ombudsman.
Step 5: Lodge a claim with the small claims tribunal or equivalent if it's a fair trading issue.
Step 1: Know your rights!
Your first step in resolving a dispute with a store, tradesperson, professional or organisation is to find out your rights in the situation.
Check with the relevant complaints body, such as fair trading department, health complaints agency or other government body, industry association or ombudsman or professional organisation. They'll normally give advice over the phone.
You can also find contact details for these bodies and a range of consumer rights information under Your Rights.
Once you know your rights, you can be confident in exercising them.
Consider these approaches to settling a complaint.
“Well..um...I thought maybe you could … you know… um.. er… give me…”
Is this you? Hesitant and unsure in asking for a refund for faulty goods while the store is saying they’ll only offer a repair?
“I know that I’m entitled to a refund if goods are faulty. I don’t have to accept a repair.”
This shows you know your rights and are confident about asking for them.
Who'll get results faster?
The confident consumer is more likely to get satisfaction almost immediately.
If you're unsure about your rights you may get nowhere with the retailer and have to take the case to the local fair trading/consumer affairs authority to get the same result.
Step 2: Go to the source
Armed with knowledge of your rights, and our advice below, you can phone or go into the seller or service provider's premises — as soon as possible.
First gather any necessary paperwork like receipts, invoices, bills, advertisements, catalogues and print-outs of online orders to show you bought the goods or service, the date and how much you paid.
It's important to work out what you want, say a refund, compensation or apology, before you talk to the trader.
Write down the key points if you think that’ll help.
Be prepared to explain:
what the product or service is and when you bought it
the problem, when it developed and what needs to be done to rectify it
your rights in the situation.
Keep your cool
When you make contact, ask to speak to the person you dealt with and explain the situation calmly and firmly.
If they don’t have the authority to handle your complaint, ask to speak to someone who does, for example, the manager.
If you complain in person, it sometimes helps to take a friend for support and to be a witness but make sure they keep their cool, too.
Make notes
Write down the name and position of the person you speak to and make notes of this and any other conversations you have with the trader.
Also keep any correspondence and other documentation you receive from the trader.
You'll need as much evidence as possible if you have to lodge a complaint with Fair Trading/Consumer Affairs or the Small Claims Tribunal or equivalent.
Step 3: Write a letter
If your visit or phone call doesn't bring quick results, write a letter to the trader confirming the details of your complaint.
Some tips:
Ring the store for the name of the manager or get the name of the contact person for the organisation's customer service department and address the letter to them.
Keep your letter simple, straightforward and polite and write it in clear and easy-to-read language.
Get straight to the point in the first paragraph and carefully plan what you want to say in the rest of the letter.
Outline the problem, when it first occurred, what it will take to resolve the matter and what steps you've already taken.
Show you know your rights by including a sentence about why you're entitled to the type of redress you're requesting.
Be reasonable if you set a deadline for a response.
Enclose copies (not originals) of relevant documents, such as receipts, quotes and invoices.
Present information carefully in written complaints sent by fax or email — as you would in a letter.
Keep a copy of the letter and any others you write to the trader. As well as documenting your complaint, they will show you tried to resolve the issue yourself if you have to lodge a complaint with Fair Trading/Consumer Affairs.
Step 4: Lodge a complaint
The trader or service provider has told you they're not prepared to give you what you want or they haven't replied at all.
It's time to lodge a complaint with the fair trading/consumer affairs department, other relevant government complaint agency or industry ombudsman.
Put your complaint in writing. You can usually send it by mail, fax or email. You may even be able to lodge it on the complaint body's website.
What to include
Use your letter to the seller or service provider as a guide for your written complaint. Include:
a description of the problem
when it occurred
what it will take to resolve the matter
what steps you've already taken.
Supply copies of the necessary paperwork (not originals), such as correspondence between you and the trader, notes of conversations, receipts, invoices and quotes with your complaint.
The complaint body will attempt to negotiate a resolution between you and the seller or service provider.
For fair trading complaints, the fair trading/consumer affairs department can investigate traders and may take action in the courts when they've breached consumer protection laws.
However, the department usually can't force traders to resolve individual complaints.
To obtain an order against the trader which can be enforced through the courts, you have to lodge a claim with the fair trading/small claims tribunal in your state or territory. See Step Five: Small claims tribunal .
Step 5: Small claims tribunal
The Small Claims Tribunal or equivalent in your state or territory offers an inexpensive path to justice for fair trading disputes.
The fees and the maximum amount you can claim in these tribunals vary from state to state.
The hearings are usually relatively informal. Each party tells their side of the story and the referee makes an order.
Take any records you have of the dispute, such as notes of conversations and correspondence with the trader, and relevant documents like receipts, invoices and quotes.
Find an expert
To show a service was not performed properly or a product did not do what it was supposed to it's useful to approach an independent expert to make a written assessment of the situation. You can use this as evidence in the case.
The small claims tribunals, which are also known as fair trading tribunals and small claims courts in some states and territories, make orders for claims in dollar amounts.
If you obtain an order in your favour and the trader doesn't abide by it, you can enforce it by going to the Local Court or Magistrates Court.
If the amount you're claiming is outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal, you'll have to pursue the matter in the regular court system. So seek legal advice!
Monday, June 13, 2005
Why are timeshare companies being allowed to do business? a.k.a. conspiracy theory no. 6582
What are the disadvantages of banning timeshare companies, with legislation similar to the Multi-Level Marketing and Pyramid Selling (Prohibition) Act? Only the government can answer that, as all signs point to an industry that is breaking all the rules of corporate social responsibility. One possibility is that the actions of such companies keep the part of the population "occupied", such that they will not be thinking about more pertinent issues like human rights, separation of powers etc.
Tuesday, June 07, 2005
Fair Trade Commission [taiwan]
Fair Trade Commission
taiwan's version of a fair trading office, as usual, its government based, mainly in chinese, although the english info is quite substantial too.
taiwan's version of a fair trading office, as usual, its government based, mainly in chinese, although the english info is quite substantial too.
Friday, June 03, 2005
Insolvency & Public Trustee's Office
Insolvency & Public Trustee's Office
the government department handling insolvency [a.k.a. bankruptcy] issues. has info on how to pursue companies that have wound up.
the government department handling insolvency [a.k.a. bankruptcy] issues. has info on how to pursue companies that have wound up.
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
Small Claims Tribunals - Subordinate Courts of Singapore
Small Claims Tribunals - Subordinate Courts of Singapore
the other option for resolving issues for consumers, besides CASE.
the other option for resolving issues for consumers, besides CASE.
Wednesday, May 11, 2005
Resale of Flats
Resale of Flats
important info from HDB with regards to resale of flats. there are often lots of disputes, and the more u know, the better u are prepared to prevent potential problems
important info from HDB with regards to resale of flats. there are often lots of disputes, and the more u know, the better u are prepared to prevent potential problems
Sunday, May 08, 2005
Members of timeshare companies take legal action to recover money
Channelnewsasia.com
quite a nice article telling victims of timeshare holders that they can sue the companies involved, but some name were mis-spelled. The timeshare company name mentioned should be "Leisure Group Marketing" and not "Leisure Marketing Group". Also the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act was not mentioned in its entirety. It was called the "Consumer Act".
quite a nice article telling victims of timeshare holders that they can sue the companies involved, but some name were mis-spelled. The timeshare company name mentioned should be "Leisure Group Marketing" and not "Leisure Marketing Group". Also the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act was not mentioned in its entirety. It was called the "Consumer Act".
Can you reverse a credit card transaction?
Consumer Online: Home > Legal Rights > Credit card chargebacks > Introduction
a new zealand page, so the options to resolve the issue are different. for one, there is an Office of the Banking Ombudsman, which will be able to rule on such issues there. but one point which singaporeans can take away from this article, is that it is possible to reverse a credit card transaction. its not easy in singapore, but consumers should always give it a try.
a new zealand page, so the options to resolve the issue are different. for one, there is an Office of the Banking Ombudsman, which will be able to rule on such issues there. but one point which singaporeans can take away from this article, is that it is possible to reverse a credit card transaction. its not easy in singapore, but consumers should always give it a try.
Thursday, April 28, 2005
Sunday, April 17, 2005
Your Privacy Rights
Your Privacy Rights
more related info about privacy and disclosure of personal information, this time from an australian viewpoint.
more related info about privacy and disclosure of personal information, this time from an australian viewpoint.
Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
sounds like quite a useful Act. this law from canada protects personal information from being misused, which happens quite often in singapore. still trying to find if there is something similar here.
sounds like quite a useful Act. this law from canada protects personal information from being misused, which happens quite often in singapore. still trying to find if there is something similar here.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
TIMESHARE TIME BOMB NO SALE, NOT EVEN REFUND - MARCH 21, 2005
TIMESHARE TIME BOMB NO SALE, NOT EVEN REFUND - MARCH 21, 2005
TIMESHARE TIME BOMB NO SALE, NOT EVEN REFUND
Retiree and wife pay $14,000 for timeshare membership, which they find no use for
Two years later, a company offers to help them sell it for a profit, on payment of $550 fee
Eight months later, the couple are still waiting for a buyer, having rejected an offer of only $2,000 for the timeshare membershop
No refund of $550 fee if the membership remains unsold, company says
OU'VE coughed out close to $14,000 to buy a lifetime travel membership which promises you discounts on flights and accommodation in holiday destinations such as Australia and Europe,
21 March 2005
By Fawziah Selamat
YOU'VE coughed out close to $14,000 to buy a lifetime travel membership which promises you discounts on flights and accommodation in holiday destinations such as Australia and Europe,
That was two years ago. But you've since found no use for it.
So when you get a telephone call one day promising to help you sell your membership at a huge profit, you'll jump at the chance, right?
Which was precisely what retiree Salleh Salim and his wife Siti Maysara did.
That was eight months ago.
Today, they are still waiting, and wondering.
Wondering if their membership will ever be sold, and at what price.
Wondering what's going to happen to the money they've paid the company upfront to help them dispose of their holiday deal.
They are not alone.
There's been 10 other cases like theirs, says the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case).
Mr Salleh Salim and his wife said they were so happy when they got the offer from Vanasia Consultancy '00 to help them sell their membership that they visited the firm's office in Maxwell Road the next day.
Said Madam Siti, 38: 'The place was full of other people like us who wanted to know how they could sell their travel membership. The person who attended to us was also very busy manning calls even as she was talking to us.'
A Vanasia staff member told them the company could sell the travel membership within a few months, said Madam Siti.
From the upbeat mood around her, the housewife felt at one point the membership could even be sold for $20,000.
Vanasia's fee for the service?
A sum of $550 - to be paid upfront.
The service was valid for a year, according to a contract the couple signed.
Said Madam Siti: 'We were desperate to sell and... we jumped at the offer.'
They didn't ask what would happen if Vanasia failed to sell their membership.
Mr Salleh, 58, said he was so relieved he 'even contemplated giving the company a cut of the sale if indeed it could make a (good) sale'.
A letter from Vanasia to Mr Salleh indicated that the company's opening sale price would be $20,000, although that price would be subject to negotiation.
So the couple waited. And waited.
Now, eight months later, they find themselves still stuck with the membership which they had bought from timeshare company LGM Limited.
They are also poorer by another $550 which they had paid to Vanasia, which is described as a 'management consultant in the travel and timeshare industry' on its website.
With no sale so far, Vanasia's latest offer to the couple is to sell their membership for a little over $2,000 - a loss of close to $12,000 for Mr Salleh's original investment.
Said Mr Salleh: 'Vanasia wrote us a letter in December telling us that was the price they could get. We had been waiting a long time for a reply from the company. And after all that waiting, we received such a paltry proposal.'
Added Madam Siti, who said the couple took two years paying off the membership purchase in instalments of about $500 every month: 'That was when I began to wonder if Vanasia could indeed fulfill the promises it made.'
Two staff members of Vanasia told The New Paper on Sunday that the $550 fee paid by Mr Salleh would not be refunded even if the membership isn't sold.
Mr Salleh has, however, not asked for a refund from Vanasia so far.
He said: 'Vanasia keeps telling us that the 12-month period isn't up yet. The staff members told me I should wait till the period is over as they will be able to get higher and higher prices for my membership the longer I wait.'
'But I'm not sure if they can, judging from the service I've received from them so far.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHE PAID $750 AND HAS YET TO SEE ANY RESULTS
SALES manager Gina Gui, 36, was more than willing to suffer a loss of more than $4,000 on her timeshare membership which she had bought for $18,500.
When Vanasia offered to sell it for $14,000, she paid the company $750 for its service in November 2003.
She said: '$750 wasn't a big amount and I didn't mind paying the fee if the company could sell my timeshare.
'But, after nine months, Vanasia could only offer $1,500 for my timeshare.
'That's when I wanted a refund.'
Unlike the plan Mr Salleh had signed up for, Ms Gui claimed the plan she took up allowed for a refund. However, she has yet to get her money back.
'I was told that if Vanasia was unable to sell the membership, I would get my money back. Although, even then, I would have to pay $350 as an administration fee,' said Ms Gui.
'I was fine with that as nothing's for free. If a service has been rendered, I understand that I would have to pay for it.'
But, she claimed, so far, the company has not given the rest of her money back.
Ms Gui then lodged a complaint with Case last December.
She is one of 10 Vanasia clients who had expected to get the original price or make a loss on what they had paid for their timeshare or travel membership.
However, they received offers amounting to only a small fraction of the original price quoted to them by Vanasia, and subsequently lodged their complaints with Case.
Case has since taken the matter up with Vanasia to settle the disputes.
Said Case's executive director Seah Seng Choon in an e-mail: 'Vanasia informed consumers (after they had paid a fee for the company's resale service) that their timeshare could only be sold at 10 to 25 per cent of the original price.
'The 10 complainants told us they were not informed of this fact at the point of engaging the company's service and were not aware that they had to sell their timeshare at such a great discount.'
Case said such omission of material information may be a breach of the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act and constitutes an unfair act.
Consumers can seek redress under the Act.
Mr Seah added Vanasia's director Cheryl Desilver, 25, had told him Vanasia was prepared to settle the matter with all the complainants.
He said: 'We're still waiting for the outcome. If the complainants are unhappy with the outcome, Case will continue to act for them.'
Ms Gui told The New Paper on Sunday that even as she is waiting to settle her case with Vanasia, other timeshare resale companies have called her offering their services.
'One company even called me to say it knew about my case with Vanasia and could help sell my timeshare for me,' she said.
'I still don't know how any of the companies got my particulars and contact number in the first place.'
Madam Siti has not lodged a complaint with Case against Vanasia.
'Mr Daran Ravin (of Global Europ) said Vanasia still has four months left to sell the membership for us under the agreement signed,' she said.
'Mr Daran said we should not be making a complaint just yet as the agreement hasn't ended.
'So I think I have to wait out the time period and see whether the company is able to sell the membership at a good price.'
The timeshare industry took top spot in terms of complaints lodged with Case over the last 12 months.
It was responsible for 158 of the 443 complaints formally lodged and handled by Case.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAN'T SELL? 'That will never happen' says company
TO find out how Vanasia proposed to sell clients' membership in travel and timeshare schemes, The New Paper on Sunday went undercover. We used Mr Salleh's existing account and quizzed Vanasia staff on the company's practices.
A Vanasia customer service officer, who identified herself as Alison, attended to our call. So what does Vanasia do to sell its client's timeshare and travel membership?
'We put an advertisement of the client's membership on the window of our parent office in London,' said Ms Alison.
We were then told by her that the London company's name is Global Europe. A check revealed that a Singapore-registered company called Global Europ (Asia) Pte Ltd is the owner of Vanasia. In fact, Vanasia and Global Europ are located in the same building in Maxwell Road.
When asked how Vanasia came into possession of Mr Salleh's contact number and travel membership information Ms Alison said the particulars of people who have signed up for such membership go into a 'hypermart'. However, she could not explain what a 'hypermart' was.
We also asked LGM Limited, the timeshare company which sold the travel membership to Mr Salleh and Madam Siti, whether it had released client information to Vanasia. LGM did not reply by press time. What about the possibility of a refund then for Mr Salleh should Vanasia fail to sell his membership?
The agreement with Vanasia is valid for a year, said Ms Alison. And the company, she claimed, is confident it can sell the membership within that time. If it doesn't, the agreement would be extended for another year at no cost to the client.
This promise was also stated in a letter written to Mr Salleh last July by Vanasia. There was no mention of a refund of the $550 fee should Vanasia fail to sell the membership. So what if the membership isn't sold after the two years are up?
'That would never happen. We (Vanasia) have never had any problems in selling off a client's membership,' claimed Ms Alison.
When asked if Mr Salleh would get a refund of the $550 if Vanasia fails to sell the membership, the answer was no.
Ms Alison said Mr Salleh had signed for a plan that doesn't allow for a refund.
When we called Vanasia again and identified ourselves as reporters, its director Cheryl Desilver, 25, said Mr Salleh did not pay an additional $200 for a different plan which would have allowed for a refund.
When we asked about Global Europ, Ms Desilver said Global Europ is the parent company of Vanasia.
She added: 'London is not the only place where we advertise. We have links with offices in many countries to advertise clients' memberships.' Asked for the names of these companies, Ms Desilver declined, saying she didn't want clients to approach these companies themselves.
She explained that the $550 fee is for providing clients with advertising space on the Internet for a year. This, she added, was stated in the terms and conditions of their Resale Advertisement plan.
ACCESS TO INTERNET ADVERTISEMENT
Ms Desilver added that Mr Salleh would have been given a login name, password and membership number to access his Internet advertisement. This information had been given to him in a letter sent by Vanasia.
When we asked how potential buyers would then be able to gain access to the advertisement, Ms Desilver declined to answer. She said a face-to-face interview should be set up where all issues pertaining to Vanasia could then be discussed.
However, the company was hard to reach soon afterwards and Mr Daran Ravin, manager of Global Europ, refused our repeated requests for an interview.
An interview with Vanasia was initially set up for Thursday afternoon at the company's office in Maxwell Road.
But Ms Desilver later changed the venue to The New Paper's office.
Meanwhile, Madam Siti informed us she had been receiving calls from Vanasia, following our calls to the company.
'Vanasia told us that we could get our money back if we stopped talking to the press. If we didn't want our money back, they (assured) us our membership could be sold,' she said on Wednesday.
Madam Siti added that Vanasia had arranged a visit to her home to discuss the proposal on Thursday afternoon - the same day and time as our planned interview with Vanasia.
Later, Madam Siti said Vanasia told her the company would take action if she continued talking to The New Paper on Sunday. However, Ms Desilver denied that Vanasia staff members had been telling Madam Siti the company would file a suit against her.
When we arrived at Madam Siti's home in the East, only Global Europ's manager Daran Ravin was present.
A Ravindaran Kunju Raman was the initial owner of Vanasia until October 2003 when private limited company Global Europ (Asia) took over, according to a check with the Registry of Companies and Business.
Global Europ (Asia), however, lists both Mr Daran and Ms Desilver as the company's only shareholders.
Mr Daran refused our request for an interview, saying he was not prepared to answer our questions.
Madam Siti, however, was not given her money back when Mr Daran visited her.
Instead, she was told the agreement they signed with Vanasia had not ended.
Said Madam Siti: 'He kept asking me why we were talking to the press and said legal action might be taken should a negative story about Vanasia come out.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASK THESE QUESTIONS BEFORE SIGNING UP, LAYWYER SAYS
LAWYER Amolat Singh said consumers should ask certain questions before signing on the dotted line. These include:
How many timeshare schemes or travel memberships the company has sold.
How the company will sell its timeshare or travel memberships.
Whether the company will want exclusive rights to the membership (this affects the seller's ability to sell the membership on his own or find others to sell it for him).
Whether there is a time limit on the services rendered and, if so, what happens after the time limit has ended.
Whether there will be a refund should the company fail to sell the membership.
These questions might help people to decide whether to sign up for the resale service.
Mr Singh added that clients face an added problem should the company they've lodged complaints against be a private limited company, rather than a sole proprietorship.
'This means the people heading the company won't be personally liable even if clients can prove the company is in the wrong,' he said.
'In which case, clients may not be able to recover their losses if the company says it doesn't have the money to pay up.'
TIMESHARE TIME BOMB NO SALE, NOT EVEN REFUND
Retiree and wife pay $14,000 for timeshare membership, which they find no use for
Two years later, a company offers to help them sell it for a profit, on payment of $550 fee
Eight months later, the couple are still waiting for a buyer, having rejected an offer of only $2,000 for the timeshare membershop
No refund of $550 fee if the membership remains unsold, company says
OU'VE coughed out close to $14,000 to buy a lifetime travel membership which promises you discounts on flights and accommodation in holiday destinations such as Australia and Europe,
21 March 2005
By Fawziah Selamat
YOU'VE coughed out close to $14,000 to buy a lifetime travel membership which promises you discounts on flights and accommodation in holiday destinations such as Australia and Europe,
That was two years ago. But you've since found no use for it.
So when you get a telephone call one day promising to help you sell your membership at a huge profit, you'll jump at the chance, right?
Which was precisely what retiree Salleh Salim and his wife Siti Maysara did.
That was eight months ago.
Today, they are still waiting, and wondering.
Wondering if their membership will ever be sold, and at what price.
Wondering what's going to happen to the money they've paid the company upfront to help them dispose of their holiday deal.
They are not alone.
There's been 10 other cases like theirs, says the Consumers Association of Singapore (Case).
Mr Salleh Salim and his wife said they were so happy when they got the offer from Vanasia Consultancy '00 to help them sell their membership that they visited the firm's office in Maxwell Road the next day.
Said Madam Siti, 38: 'The place was full of other people like us who wanted to know how they could sell their travel membership. The person who attended to us was also very busy manning calls even as she was talking to us.'
A Vanasia staff member told them the company could sell the travel membership within a few months, said Madam Siti.
From the upbeat mood around her, the housewife felt at one point the membership could even be sold for $20,000.
Vanasia's fee for the service?
A sum of $550 - to be paid upfront.
The service was valid for a year, according to a contract the couple signed.
Said Madam Siti: 'We were desperate to sell and... we jumped at the offer.'
They didn't ask what would happen if Vanasia failed to sell their membership.
Mr Salleh, 58, said he was so relieved he 'even contemplated giving the company a cut of the sale if indeed it could make a (good) sale'.
A letter from Vanasia to Mr Salleh indicated that the company's opening sale price would be $20,000, although that price would be subject to negotiation.
So the couple waited. And waited.
Now, eight months later, they find themselves still stuck with the membership which they had bought from timeshare company LGM Limited.
They are also poorer by another $550 which they had paid to Vanasia, which is described as a 'management consultant in the travel and timeshare industry' on its website.
With no sale so far, Vanasia's latest offer to the couple is to sell their membership for a little over $2,000 - a loss of close to $12,000 for Mr Salleh's original investment.
Said Mr Salleh: 'Vanasia wrote us a letter in December telling us that was the price they could get. We had been waiting a long time for a reply from the company. And after all that waiting, we received such a paltry proposal.'
Added Madam Siti, who said the couple took two years paying off the membership purchase in instalments of about $500 every month: 'That was when I began to wonder if Vanasia could indeed fulfill the promises it made.'
Two staff members of Vanasia told The New Paper on Sunday that the $550 fee paid by Mr Salleh would not be refunded even if the membership isn't sold.
Mr Salleh has, however, not asked for a refund from Vanasia so far.
He said: 'Vanasia keeps telling us that the 12-month period isn't up yet. The staff members told me I should wait till the period is over as they will be able to get higher and higher prices for my membership the longer I wait.'
'But I'm not sure if they can, judging from the service I've received from them so far.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SHE PAID $750 AND HAS YET TO SEE ANY RESULTS
SALES manager Gina Gui, 36, was more than willing to suffer a loss of more than $4,000 on her timeshare membership which she had bought for $18,500.
When Vanasia offered to sell it for $14,000, she paid the company $750 for its service in November 2003.
She said: '$750 wasn't a big amount and I didn't mind paying the fee if the company could sell my timeshare.
'But, after nine months, Vanasia could only offer $1,500 for my timeshare.
'That's when I wanted a refund.'
Unlike the plan Mr Salleh had signed up for, Ms Gui claimed the plan she took up allowed for a refund. However, she has yet to get her money back.
'I was told that if Vanasia was unable to sell the membership, I would get my money back. Although, even then, I would have to pay $350 as an administration fee,' said Ms Gui.
'I was fine with that as nothing's for free. If a service has been rendered, I understand that I would have to pay for it.'
But, she claimed, so far, the company has not given the rest of her money back.
Ms Gui then lodged a complaint with Case last December.
She is one of 10 Vanasia clients who had expected to get the original price or make a loss on what they had paid for their timeshare or travel membership.
However, they received offers amounting to only a small fraction of the original price quoted to them by Vanasia, and subsequently lodged their complaints with Case.
Case has since taken the matter up with Vanasia to settle the disputes.
Said Case's executive director Seah Seng Choon in an e-mail: 'Vanasia informed consumers (after they had paid a fee for the company's resale service) that their timeshare could only be sold at 10 to 25 per cent of the original price.
'The 10 complainants told us they were not informed of this fact at the point of engaging the company's service and were not aware that they had to sell their timeshare at such a great discount.'
Case said such omission of material information may be a breach of the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act and constitutes an unfair act.
Consumers can seek redress under the Act.
Mr Seah added Vanasia's director Cheryl Desilver, 25, had told him Vanasia was prepared to settle the matter with all the complainants.
He said: 'We're still waiting for the outcome. If the complainants are unhappy with the outcome, Case will continue to act for them.'
Ms Gui told The New Paper on Sunday that even as she is waiting to settle her case with Vanasia, other timeshare resale companies have called her offering their services.
'One company even called me to say it knew about my case with Vanasia and could help sell my timeshare for me,' she said.
'I still don't know how any of the companies got my particulars and contact number in the first place.'
Madam Siti has not lodged a complaint with Case against Vanasia.
'Mr Daran Ravin (of Global Europ) said Vanasia still has four months left to sell the membership for us under the agreement signed,' she said.
'Mr Daran said we should not be making a complaint just yet as the agreement hasn't ended.
'So I think I have to wait out the time period and see whether the company is able to sell the membership at a good price.'
The timeshare industry took top spot in terms of complaints lodged with Case over the last 12 months.
It was responsible for 158 of the 443 complaints formally lodged and handled by Case.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAN'T SELL? 'That will never happen' says company
TO find out how Vanasia proposed to sell clients' membership in travel and timeshare schemes, The New Paper on Sunday went undercover. We used Mr Salleh's existing account and quizzed Vanasia staff on the company's practices.
A Vanasia customer service officer, who identified herself as Alison, attended to our call. So what does Vanasia do to sell its client's timeshare and travel membership?
'We put an advertisement of the client's membership on the window of our parent office in London,' said Ms Alison.
We were then told by her that the London company's name is Global Europe. A check revealed that a Singapore-registered company called Global Europ (Asia) Pte Ltd is the owner of Vanasia. In fact, Vanasia and Global Europ are located in the same building in Maxwell Road.
When asked how Vanasia came into possession of Mr Salleh's contact number and travel membership information Ms Alison said the particulars of people who have signed up for such membership go into a 'hypermart'. However, she could not explain what a 'hypermart' was.
We also asked LGM Limited, the timeshare company which sold the travel membership to Mr Salleh and Madam Siti, whether it had released client information to Vanasia. LGM did not reply by press time. What about the possibility of a refund then for Mr Salleh should Vanasia fail to sell his membership?
The agreement with Vanasia is valid for a year, said Ms Alison. And the company, she claimed, is confident it can sell the membership within that time. If it doesn't, the agreement would be extended for another year at no cost to the client.
This promise was also stated in a letter written to Mr Salleh last July by Vanasia. There was no mention of a refund of the $550 fee should Vanasia fail to sell the membership. So what if the membership isn't sold after the two years are up?
'That would never happen. We (Vanasia) have never had any problems in selling off a client's membership,' claimed Ms Alison.
When asked if Mr Salleh would get a refund of the $550 if Vanasia fails to sell the membership, the answer was no.
Ms Alison said Mr Salleh had signed for a plan that doesn't allow for a refund.
When we called Vanasia again and identified ourselves as reporters, its director Cheryl Desilver, 25, said Mr Salleh did not pay an additional $200 for a different plan which would have allowed for a refund.
When we asked about Global Europ, Ms Desilver said Global Europ is the parent company of Vanasia.
She added: 'London is not the only place where we advertise. We have links with offices in many countries to advertise clients' memberships.' Asked for the names of these companies, Ms Desilver declined, saying she didn't want clients to approach these companies themselves.
She explained that the $550 fee is for providing clients with advertising space on the Internet for a year. This, she added, was stated in the terms and conditions of their Resale Advertisement plan.
ACCESS TO INTERNET ADVERTISEMENT
Ms Desilver added that Mr Salleh would have been given a login name, password and membership number to access his Internet advertisement. This information had been given to him in a letter sent by Vanasia.
When we asked how potential buyers would then be able to gain access to the advertisement, Ms Desilver declined to answer. She said a face-to-face interview should be set up where all issues pertaining to Vanasia could then be discussed.
However, the company was hard to reach soon afterwards and Mr Daran Ravin, manager of Global Europ, refused our repeated requests for an interview.
An interview with Vanasia was initially set up for Thursday afternoon at the company's office in Maxwell Road.
But Ms Desilver later changed the venue to The New Paper's office.
Meanwhile, Madam Siti informed us she had been receiving calls from Vanasia, following our calls to the company.
'Vanasia told us that we could get our money back if we stopped talking to the press. If we didn't want our money back, they (assured) us our membership could be sold,' she said on Wednesday.
Madam Siti added that Vanasia had arranged a visit to her home to discuss the proposal on Thursday afternoon - the same day and time as our planned interview with Vanasia.
Later, Madam Siti said Vanasia told her the company would take action if she continued talking to The New Paper on Sunday. However, Ms Desilver denied that Vanasia staff members had been telling Madam Siti the company would file a suit against her.
When we arrived at Madam Siti's home in the East, only Global Europ's manager Daran Ravin was present.
A Ravindaran Kunju Raman was the initial owner of Vanasia until October 2003 when private limited company Global Europ (Asia) took over, according to a check with the Registry of Companies and Business.
Global Europ (Asia), however, lists both Mr Daran and Ms Desilver as the company's only shareholders.
Mr Daran refused our request for an interview, saying he was not prepared to answer our questions.
Madam Siti, however, was not given her money back when Mr Daran visited her.
Instead, she was told the agreement they signed with Vanasia had not ended.
Said Madam Siti: 'He kept asking me why we were talking to the press and said legal action might be taken should a negative story about Vanasia come out.'
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ASK THESE QUESTIONS BEFORE SIGNING UP, LAYWYER SAYS
LAWYER Amolat Singh said consumers should ask certain questions before signing on the dotted line. These include:
How many timeshare schemes or travel memberships the company has sold.
How the company will sell its timeshare or travel memberships.
Whether the company will want exclusive rights to the membership (this affects the seller's ability to sell the membership on his own or find others to sell it for him).
Whether there is a time limit on the services rendered and, if so, what happens after the time limit has ended.
Whether there will be a refund should the company fail to sell the membership.
These questions might help people to decide whether to sign up for the resale service.
Mr Singh added that clients face an added problem should the company they've lodged complaints against be a private limited company, rather than a sole proprietorship.
'This means the people heading the company won't be personally liable even if clients can prove the company is in the wrong,' he said.
'In which case, clients may not be able to recover their losses if the company says it doesn't have the money to pay up.'
Friday, April 01, 2005
Who's My MP
Who's My MP
a good 1st stop for people who are not sure where to go for their consumer issues. find out who is your MP, then go for the relevant meet-the-people session
a good 1st stop for people who are not sure where to go for their consumer issues. find out who is your MP, then go for the relevant meet-the-people session
Sunday, March 27, 2005
Issues with Employment Agencies
Employment Inspectorate Department
The department seeks to foster effective management of foreign manpower through policing in partnership with other enforcement agencies and business community. The department focuses on the areas of illegal employment, illegal deployment and other violations of MOM's FM regulations.
The department seeks to foster effective management of foreign manpower through policing in partnership with other enforcement agencies and business community. The department focuses on the areas of illegal employment, illegal deployment and other violations of MOM's FM regulations.
Employment Act: Claims, Complaints and Investigation into offences
MOM : FAQs : Details
If there is a claim/complaint on salary matters relating to the provisions of the Act or terms of employment between an employee and his employer, what is the avenue for redress?
Either the employee or employer may lodge a claim with the Commissioner for Labour c/o Labour Relations Department, Ministry of Manpower. However, the following conditions must be satisfied:
(a) the employee involved must be covered by the Employment Act;
(b) the claim/complaint must be on matters arising not more than one year from the date of claim/complaint made to the Commissioner; and
(c) if the employee involved in the dispute has left employment, the claim must be lodged with the Commissioner within 6 months from the date of leaving employment.
If there is a claim/complaint on salary matters relating to the provisions of the Act or terms of employment between an employee and his employer, what is the avenue for redress?
Either the employee or employer may lodge a claim with the Commissioner for Labour c/o Labour Relations Department, Ministry of Manpower. However, the following conditions must be satisfied:
(a) the employee involved must be covered by the Employment Act;
(b) the claim/complaint must be on matters arising not more than one year from the date of claim/complaint made to the Commissioner; and
(c) if the employee involved in the dispute has left employment, the claim must be lodged with the Commissioner within 6 months from the date of leaving employment.
Complaints against medical practitioners
Complaints / Disciplinary Proceedings
Complaints against medical practitioners are dealt with under Section 40 of the Medical Registration Act 1997. The Complaints Committee can only proceed with the investigation after it has received an official complaint in writing and supported by a Statutory Declaration.
The complainant must state the full facts of his case and his allegations clearly in his letter of complaint against the doctor.
The Complaints Committee shall inform the doctor and the complainant of the outcome of their investigations when it is completed.
Complaints against medical practitioners are dealt with under Section 40 of the Medical Registration Act 1997. The Complaints Committee can only proceed with the investigation after it has received an official complaint in writing and supported by a Statutory Declaration.
The complainant must state the full facts of his case and his allegations clearly in his letter of complaint against the doctor.
The Complaints Committee shall inform the doctor and the complainant of the outcome of their investigations when it is completed.
Making a Complaint against Lawyers
Making a Complaint
Two different types of written complaints you can make to the Council of the Law Society
From the 1st September 1998, you can make two different types of written complaints against a lawyer in private practice to the Council of the Law Society (the Council).The Council is the governing body of the Law Society consisting of at least 18 lawyers.
Complaint of Professional Misconduct
Complaints of professional misconduct may for example, allege dishonesty, fraud, gross overcharging for work done, making misleading statements to you, divulging confidential information you have given to your lawyer, acting in conflict of interest or acting in breach of the Law Society's code of conduct for lawyers.
Complaint of inadequate professional service
A lawyer may be found to be providing inadequate professional service to you as a client when one or more of these circumstances are proved:
(1) failed to provide diligent legal service to you;
(2) failed to ensure that as your lawyer, he was competent to conduct your case;
(3) failed to complete your work within a reasonable time;
(4) failed to keep you as the client informed on the progress of your case;
(5) failed to acknowledge receipt of your money or securities;
(6) failed to provide a statement of accounts to you as the client;
(7) without reasonable grounds, failed to respond to your calls, letters or keep appointments;
(8) failed to explain to you important developments in your case;
(9) failed to explain to you the manner in which he would charge for his services, describe payments you as a client would be required to make, provide an estimate of fees to you and deliver bills of costs to you at regular intervals; and
(10) failed to discuss with you the possible risks or expense of proceeding with your case.
Two different types of written complaints you can make to the Council of the Law Society
From the 1st September 1998, you can make two different types of written complaints against a lawyer in private practice to the Council of the Law Society (the Council).The Council is the governing body of the Law Society consisting of at least 18 lawyers.
Complaint of Professional Misconduct
Complaints of professional misconduct may for example, allege dishonesty, fraud, gross overcharging for work done, making misleading statements to you, divulging confidential information you have given to your lawyer, acting in conflict of interest or acting in breach of the Law Society's code of conduct for lawyers.
Complaint of inadequate professional service
A lawyer may be found to be providing inadequate professional service to you as a client when one or more of these circumstances are proved:
(1) failed to provide diligent legal service to you;
(2) failed to ensure that as your lawyer, he was competent to conduct your case;
(3) failed to complete your work within a reasonable time;
(4) failed to keep you as the client informed on the progress of your case;
(5) failed to acknowledge receipt of your money or securities;
(6) failed to provide a statement of accounts to you as the client;
(7) without reasonable grounds, failed to respond to your calls, letters or keep appointments;
(8) failed to explain to you important developments in your case;
(9) failed to explain to you the manner in which he would charge for his services, describe payments you as a client would be required to make, provide an estimate of fees to you and deliver bills of costs to you at regular intervals; and
(10) failed to discuss with you the possible risks or expense of proceeding with your case.
Listing of Food Factory Grading Award
Listing of Food Factory Grading Award
What is the food factory grading system?
First introduced in 1987, the food factory grading system categorises food factories into four grades: A, B, C and D. The grading is based on their food hygiene and food safety standards.
Why grade food factories?
The aim is to raise food manufacturers’ awareness of hygiene and food safety standards and the need for improvement. It helps to create an environment for food manufacturers to upgrade and to strive for higher grades.
How are food factories graded?
The grading of food factories is based on a set of criteria covering all aspects of food hygiene and food safety standards in areas such as:
· Design and layout
· Cleanliness and housekeeping
· Food and personal hygiene practices
· Storage facilities
· Food transport facilities
· Waste disposal system
· Food safety assurance system
· Food recall system
· Food safety training
· Documentation
What is the food factory grading system?
First introduced in 1987, the food factory grading system categorises food factories into four grades: A, B, C and D. The grading is based on their food hygiene and food safety standards.
Why grade food factories?
The aim is to raise food manufacturers’ awareness of hygiene and food safety standards and the need for improvement. It helps to create an environment for food manufacturers to upgrade and to strive for higher grades.
How are food factories graded?
The grading of food factories is based on a set of criteria covering all aspects of food hygiene and food safety standards in areas such as:
· Design and layout
· Cleanliness and housekeeping
· Food and personal hygiene practices
· Storage facilities
· Food transport facilities
· Waste disposal system
· Food safety assurance system
· Food recall system
· Food safety training
· Documentation
Saturday, March 26, 2005
XBOX Replacement Cord
Replacement Cord
Microsoft is providing new power cords at no charge to replace the cords that originally came with some Xbox consoles. You will need your Serial Number and Manufacture date to verify if your Xbox Console requires a replacement cord. This is located on the bottom of your console.
Microsoft is providing new power cords at no charge to replace the cords that originally came with some Xbox consoles. You will need your Serial Number and Manufacture date to verify if your Xbox Console requires a replacement cord. This is located on the bottom of your console.
Small Claims Tribunals - Subordinate Courts of Singapore
Small Claims Tribunals - Subordinate Courts of Singapore
The Small Claims Tribunals are part of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore. The Tribunals were established on the 1st of February 1985, to provide a quick and inexpensive forum for the resolution of small claims between consumers and suppliers.
Jurisdiction of the Small Claims Tribunals
The Tribunals have jurisdiction to hear claims not exceeding $10,000, where the claims relate to disputes arising from:
1. a contract for the sale of goods; or
2. a contract for the provision of services; or
3. tortious damage to property (but not including damage arising in connection with motor vehicle accidents)
Where the Claimant and the Respondant consent in writing, the jurisdiction can be raised to $20,000.
All claims must be lodged or filed at the Small Claims Tribunals within one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.
Bringing A Claim in the Tribunals
The procedure for bringing a claim in the Tribunals is very simple. For more information on bringing a claim, please refer to the "Claim Procedures:- A to Z of Bringing a Claim in the Small Claims Tribunals" option.
Lawyers are not permitted to represent any of the parties in proceedings before the Tribunals. Unless the Tribunals decide that a claim is either vexatious or frivolous, costs are not awarded to the winning party.
To lodge or file a claim at the Tribunals, a party is required to pay a lodgment fee. The applicable lodgment fees are as follows:
Attending the Consultation / Mediation
After a claim is lodged or filed, the Tribunals will fix the claim for a Consultation / Mediation before the Registrar. The Tribunals will generally fix the Consultation / Mediation within 10 to 14 days from the date of lodging or filing of the claim. If a claim is not settled at the Consultation before the Registrar, it will generally be fixed for hearing within 7 days from the date of Consultation. For a tourist claim or an urgent claim, the Tribunals can fix both the Consultation / Mediation and the Hearing within 24 hours of the lodging or filing of the claim.
The Tribunals employ mediation extensively in their proceedings. At the Consultation before the Registrar, the Registrar will mediate the claim, to assist parties in resolving the dispute. If the claim is fixed for Hearing before the Referee, the Referee will also explore the possibility of settlement, before adjudicating the claim.
Our Operation Hours
Mondays to Thursdays: 8.30 am to 6.00 pm
Fridays : 8.30 am to 5.30 pm
(Lunch time: 1.00pm to 2.00pm)
Saturdays: 8.30 am to 1.00 pm
Filing or Lodging Times for your Claims and Counterclaims
Mondays to Fridays : 9.00 am to 12.00 noon and from 2.00 pm to 4.30 pm
Saturdays: 9.00 am to 12.00 noon
The Small Claims Tribunals are part of the Subordinate Courts of Singapore. The Tribunals were established on the 1st of February 1985, to provide a quick and inexpensive forum for the resolution of small claims between consumers and suppliers.
Jurisdiction of the Small Claims Tribunals
The Tribunals have jurisdiction to hear claims not exceeding $10,000, where the claims relate to disputes arising from:
1. a contract for the sale of goods; or
2. a contract for the provision of services; or
3. tortious damage to property (but not including damage arising in connection with motor vehicle accidents)
Where the Claimant and the Respondant consent in writing, the jurisdiction can be raised to $20,000.
All claims must be lodged or filed at the Small Claims Tribunals within one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.
Bringing A Claim in the Tribunals
The procedure for bringing a claim in the Tribunals is very simple. For more information on bringing a claim, please refer to the "Claim Procedures:- A to Z of Bringing a Claim in the Small Claims Tribunals" option.
Lawyers are not permitted to represent any of the parties in proceedings before the Tribunals. Unless the Tribunals decide that a claim is either vexatious or frivolous, costs are not awarded to the winning party.
To lodge or file a claim at the Tribunals, a party is required to pay a lodgment fee. The applicable lodgment fees are as follows:
| Consumer | Non-consumer | |
| Not exceeding $5,000 | $10 | $50 |
| Exceeding $5,000 but not exceeding $10,000 | $20 | $100 |
| Exceeding $10,000 but not exceeding $20,000 | 1% of claim amount | 3% of claim amount |
Attending the Consultation / Mediation
After a claim is lodged or filed, the Tribunals will fix the claim for a Consultation / Mediation before the Registrar. The Tribunals will generally fix the Consultation / Mediation within 10 to 14 days from the date of lodging or filing of the claim. If a claim is not settled at the Consultation before the Registrar, it will generally be fixed for hearing within 7 days from the date of Consultation. For a tourist claim or an urgent claim, the Tribunals can fix both the Consultation / Mediation and the Hearing within 24 hours of the lodging or filing of the claim.
The Tribunals employ mediation extensively in their proceedings. At the Consultation before the Registrar, the Registrar will mediate the claim, to assist parties in resolving the dispute. If the claim is fixed for Hearing before the Referee, the Referee will also explore the possibility of settlement, before adjudicating the claim.
Our Operation Hours
Mondays to Thursdays: 8.30 am to 6.00 pm
Fridays : 8.30 am to 5.30 pm
(Lunch time: 1.00pm to 2.00pm)
Saturdays: 8.30 am to 1.00 pm
Filing or Lodging Times for your Claims and Counterclaims
Mondays to Fridays : 9.00 am to 12.00 noon and from 2.00 pm to 4.30 pm
Saturdays: 9.00 am to 12.00 noon
COMMERCIAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
COMMERCIAL AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT
CAD will investigate offences under the Securities Industry Act, Companies Act, the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, Multi-Level Marketing and Pyramid Selling (Prohibition) Act, and complex fraud under the Penal Code.
Making a Complaint
If you suspect that an individual or company has committed an offence of a commercial nature, especially one in contravention of the Companies Act and The Securities and Futures Act, you can lodge a complaint with the Department by either making it in writing or in person :
Written Complaint
The complain may be submitted in writing to the Department at the following address :
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 :
1. An account of the relevant facts
2. Copies of the relevant documents, if available
3. Name, address, telephone number and Passport / NRIC no. of the person submitting the complaint.
A Complaint in Person
You may appear in person at the same address. To avoid any inconvenience, you are advised to call the Department at 6 325 0000 to make an appointment.
Our office hours are :
Monday to Thursday - 8.30 a.m to 6.00 p.m
Friday - 8.30 a.m to 5.30 p.m
CAD will investigate offences under the Securities Industry Act, Companies Act, the Corruption, Drug Trafficking and other Serious Crimes (Confiscation of Benefits) Act, Multi-Level Marketing and Pyramid Selling (Prohibition) Act, and complex fraud under the Penal Code.
Making a Complaint
If you suspect that an individual or company has committed an offence of a commercial nature, especially one in contravention of the Companies Act and The Securities and Futures Act, you can lodge a complaint with the Department by either making it in writing or in person :
Written Complaint
The complain may be submitted in writing to the Department at the following address :
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 :
1. An account of the relevant facts
2. Copies of the relevant documents, if available
3. Name, address, telephone number and Passport / NRIC no. of the person submitting the complaint.
A Complaint in Person
You may appear in person at the same address. To avoid any inconvenience, you are advised to call the Department at 6 325 0000 to make an appointment.
Our office hours are :
Monday to Thursday - 8.30 a.m to 6.00 p.m
Friday - 8.30 a.m to 5.30 p.m
Friday, March 25, 2005
Consumer Watch
Consumer Watch
Every Tuesday, 7.20am, 1.20pm and 6.20pm, 93.8FM
If you feel you have been shortchanged as a customer or think that your consumer rights have been violated, share your story with May Wong and Wu Shang Yuan on Consumer Watch where they'll investigate your problem.
Call the Consumer Watch hotline at 62512003 or email consumerwatch@mediacorpradio.com
Speak Up on Consumer Watch or Lose Out.
Every Tuesday, 7.20am, 1.20pm and 6.20pm, 93.8FM
If you feel you have been shortchanged as a customer or think that your consumer rights have been violated, share your story with May Wong and Wu Shang Yuan on Consumer Watch where they'll investigate your problem.
Call the Consumer Watch hotline at 62512003 or email consumerwatch@mediacorpradio.com
Speak Up on Consumer Watch or Lose Out.
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Which? - Expert advice from an independent source
Which? - Expert advice from an independent source
Read a copy of the offline Which magazine. Quite informative. Could be a good target to aim for in a local consumer magazine. Available for borrowing at Ang Mo Kio Library.
Read a copy of the offline Which magazine. Quite informative. Could be a good target to aim for in a local consumer magazine. Available for borrowing at Ang Mo Kio Library.
Friday, March 04, 2005
Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act
This Act is the first one specifically enacted for consumers in Singapore.
SPECIFIC UNFAIR PRACTICES
1. Representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, ingredients, components, qualities, uses or benefits that they do not have.
2. Representing that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, model, origin or method of manufacture if they are not.
3. Representing that goods are new or unused if they are not or if they have deteriorated or been altered, reconditioned or reclaimed.
4. Representing that goods have been used to an extent different from the fact or that they have a particular history or use if the supplier knows it is not so.
5. Representing that goods or services are available or are available for a particular reason, for a particular price, in particular quantities or at a particular time if the supplier knows or can reasonably be expected to know it is not so, unless the representation clearly states any limitation.
6. Representing that a service, part, repair or replacement is needed or desirable if that is not so, or that a service has been provided, a part has been installed, a repair has been made or a replacement has been provided, if that is not so.
7. Representing that a price benefit or advantage exists respecting goods or services where the price benefit or advantage does not exist.
8. Charging a price for goods or services that is substantially higher than an estimate provided to the consumer, except where the consumer has expressly agreed to the higher price in advance.
9. Representing that a transaction involving goods or services involves or does not involve rights, remedies or obligations where that representation is deceptive or misleading.
10. Representing that a person has or does not have the authority to negotiate the final terms of an agreement involving goods or services if the representation is different from the fact.
11. Taking advantage of a consumer by including in an agreement terms or conditions that are harsh, oppressive or excessively one-sided so as to be unconscionable.
12. Taking advantage of a consumer by exerting undue pressure or undue influence on the consumer to enter into a transaction involving goods or services.
13. Representing in relation to a voucher that another supplier will provide goods or services at a discounted or reduced price if the supplier making the representation knows or ought to know that the other supplier will not do so.
14. Making a representation that appears in an objective form such as an editorial, documentary or scientific report when the representation is primarily made to sell goods or services, unless the representation states that it is an advertisement or a promotion.
15. Representing that a particular person has offered or agreed to acquire goods or services whether or not at a stated price if he has not.
16. Representing the availability of facilities for repair of goods or of spare parts for goods if that is not the case.
17. Offering gifts, prizes or other free items in connection with the supply of goods or services if the supplier knows or ought to know that the items will not be provided or provided as offered.
18. Representing that goods or services are available at a discounted price for a stated period of time if the supplier knows or ought to know that the goods or services will continue to be so available for a substantially longer period.
19. Representing that goods or services are available at a discounted price for a particular reason that is different from the fact.
20. Using small print to conceal a material fact from the consumer or to mislead a consumer as to a material fact, in connection with the supply of goods or services.
SPECIFIC UNFAIR PRACTICES
1. Representing that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, performance characteristics, accessories, ingredients, components, qualities, uses or benefits that they do not have.
2. Representing that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, grade, style, model, origin or method of manufacture if they are not.
3. Representing that goods are new or unused if they are not or if they have deteriorated or been altered, reconditioned or reclaimed.
4. Representing that goods have been used to an extent different from the fact or that they have a particular history or use if the supplier knows it is not so.
5. Representing that goods or services are available or are available for a particular reason, for a particular price, in particular quantities or at a particular time if the supplier knows or can reasonably be expected to know it is not so, unless the representation clearly states any limitation.
6. Representing that a service, part, repair or replacement is needed or desirable if that is not so, or that a service has been provided, a part has been installed, a repair has been made or a replacement has been provided, if that is not so.
7. Representing that a price benefit or advantage exists respecting goods or services where the price benefit or advantage does not exist.
8. Charging a price for goods or services that is substantially higher than an estimate provided to the consumer, except where the consumer has expressly agreed to the higher price in advance.
9. Representing that a transaction involving goods or services involves or does not involve rights, remedies or obligations where that representation is deceptive or misleading.
10. Representing that a person has or does not have the authority to negotiate the final terms of an agreement involving goods or services if the representation is different from the fact.
11. Taking advantage of a consumer by including in an agreement terms or conditions that are harsh, oppressive or excessively one-sided so as to be unconscionable.
12. Taking advantage of a consumer by exerting undue pressure or undue influence on the consumer to enter into a transaction involving goods or services.
13. Representing in relation to a voucher that another supplier will provide goods or services at a discounted or reduced price if the supplier making the representation knows or ought to know that the other supplier will not do so.
14. Making a representation that appears in an objective form such as an editorial, documentary or scientific report when the representation is primarily made to sell goods or services, unless the representation states that it is an advertisement or a promotion.
15. Representing that a particular person has offered or agreed to acquire goods or services whether or not at a stated price if he has not.
16. Representing the availability of facilities for repair of goods or of spare parts for goods if that is not the case.
17. Offering gifts, prizes or other free items in connection with the supply of goods or services if the supplier knows or ought to know that the items will not be provided or provided as offered.
18. Representing that goods or services are available at a discounted price for a stated period of time if the supplier knows or ought to know that the goods or services will continue to be so available for a substantially longer period.
19. Representing that goods or services are available at a discounted price for a particular reason that is different from the fact.
20. Using small print to conceal a material fact from the consumer or to mislead a consumer as to a material fact, in connection with the supply of goods or services.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)