Comment posted in my survey.
My car ran into the parking barrier. Upon inspection only the arm was damaged. We both agreed to it and took photos respectively. The car park management later sent me a letter asking for 1,571 SGD payment to repair the barrier arm. The break down was like this:
• Labour to attend to ACCIDENT Case by the contractor $ 150.00
• 3M Magnetic Barrier Arm only $ 650.00
• Barrier arm Aluminium Bracket $ 80.00
• Delivery and installation charges $ 250.00
• Admin Charges 30% $ 339.00
7% GST $ 102.83
Total: $ 1,571.83
I disputed all the charges levied, especially the 30% admin charge that made no sense at all. I replied them saying i would take responsibility for the accident. But only on reasonable grounds. That barrier arm is simple to install (held on by 4 nuts and bolts), and the market price for it is only around 300 SGD (unbranded).
I advised them to file a claim with the Singapore Courts, and we will appear in court, state our cases and let the judge decide. That was March. I am still waiting to hear from them.
My comment
It is a sad episode when the company wanted to make a profit from an unfortunate event. It would be a nice gesture for them to charge only the direct cost and not seek to recover the labour and admin charges.
There are some industries who take advantage of unfortunate events. Nobody seems to regulate them at all.
ReplyDeleteI agree that sometimes we need to go to court to fight for our rights. This is one effective way to deal with such bullies or unreasonable people/companies. They may even back out if we do so. Bullies are sometimes cowards because they bully only when they think they can bully. Like Chinese say, if can eat, eat lah.
ReplyDeleteRex comments as follows,
ReplyDeletei think this fellow will lose the case. the law cant decide what is a "fair" admin charge of a company. it is law of the jungle, you are in error, they produce a valid document of charges, since there is no law on what is a "fair" charge, how can the judge make a decision? I dont think there is precedent in such case, is there.
rex
Sorry Rex;
ReplyDeleteme thinks that any judge who is unable to determine 'fairness' and 'justice'. He or she should not sit on the Bench as magistrate or justice.
The Courts' PRIMARY and MOST IMPORTANT DUTY is to ensure JUSTICE and FAIRNESS.
AND
it is the DUTY of THE MAGISTRATES and JUDGES to learn, understand and DETERMINE JUSTICE and FAIRNESS.
patriot
The law works on restoring value. If the company can prove that's the value lost, then the damages will amount to that.
ReplyDeleteIt will be hard to justify that 30% admin charge though.
Some costs are charged to them by the contractor.
ReplyDeleteAlso, you just helped them incurred extra paperwork which nobody wants to do.
You should have been more careful and not waste other people's time. Sometimes when people knock my car, I waste time away from work and other important things just to get the car checked and evaluated, which I do not need to get done in the first place if not for the stupidity and carelessness of the errant driver.
So who is going to compensate me for the loss of time and inconvenience on the event where it is not even my fault?
to anonymous May 17, 2010 5:57 PM
ReplyDeleteI assume u have never been careless, not even once in your lifetime?
Accidents happen. They WILL happen. We can reduce them, we can avoid them, but what if they DO happen?
It is people with mindset like yours that make our society such an ungracious one.
Your argument may make sense because you are on the other side. But would you still buy your own argument if you are the party that caused the accident?
Would you then hope, that the other party be reasonable and gracious, and forgiving?
If your argument holds then, why does even law practices leniency?
View the issue from both perspective!
Two yrs ago my husband and many of his colleagues using the same carpark in an industrial estate in the Eunos, had same experience of slight collision of parking barrier arm that resulted in the carpark management sending big bills for us to pay.
ReplyDeleteHowever, upon spending some time to closely observe the working of the barrier in the carpark, and upon checking out the experience of the drivers involved and other users of the carpark--- we realised that the timing and sensor of barrier coming down had been badly adjusted. No sufficient clearance was given and therefore frequent minor collisions occur which were welcomed by the carpark operator as lots of money had been generated.
When we finally learn the truth and flatly refuse to pay the inflated amount and confronted the operator, they finally relented and offered to reduce the charges to less than $100.
By the way, in our case, it was that the barrier had come down and hit on the front windscreen of our vehicle (which remained undamaged ) but (the operator claimed ) the barrier was found to be somewhat bent.
The operator had traced us through their CCTV and billed us with a hefty sum and refused to let us examine their video clip to prove the barrier was originally straight and that it was barrier being hit by us.
As we are not using the carpark anymore now, i am unsure if such incident still recur...
Very informative and creative content. This concept is a good way to enhance the knowledge.thanks for sharing
ReplyDelete