Search the Community

interesting... Singapore most complaint car brand? Volkswagen still bugged by consumer complaints Christopher TanThe Straits TimesMonday, May 25, 2015 20150525_ST_volks.jpg 1 0 0 0 0 Print VOLKSWAGEN (VW) continues to have the dubious honour of hogging the pole position when it comes to customer complaints. Data from the consumer watchdog, Consumers Association of Singapore (Case), showed that the German brand garnered 12 new-car complaints from customers from January last year to the first four months of this year. The figure was more than double that of complaints made against BMW and Mercedes-Benz, which shared the second spot. The two brands had five complaints each for the same period. Comparing complaints measured as a ratio against new cars each of the three brands sold, VW's performance was even bleaker. It had 3.41 complaints for every 1,000 cars sold, versus 1.2 for BMW and 0.76 for Mercedes-Benz. VW fared worse than its previous record. Between January 2013 and April last year, it had 11 complaints, earning it the top spot on Case's list. The Straits Times understands most of the complaints pertain to glitchy gearboxes. Civil engineer Uttar Kumar, 52, who bought a VW Passat 1.4 in December 2012, was among those who filed a Case complaint this year. He said he did so after Volkswagen Singapore failed to resolve problems with the car's gearbox despite numerous attempts. He said he noticed the car made abnormal noises on the first day. The noises grew louder and the car became jerky. "It was in the workshop almost every two to three weeks," Mr Kumar recalled. The car, he said, is still not satisfactory, despite its clutch, a component of the gearbox that is used in changing gears, having been replaced in 2013. "It's still not smooth, it shakes when it starts, there is power loss and sometimes there is a grinding noise," he said. Volkswagen Singapore spokesman James Page dismissed claims that its cars were defective. For instance, he said two of the three complaints filed with Case in the first four months of this year were unfounded. "There was absolutely nothing wrong with the cars," he said. "The customers involved perceived there to be some faults, and requested a warranty extension and a car replacement respectively. We could not accede to their requests and they lodged complaints with Case." In the third case, the customer did have some genuine issues with his car, he said, and repairs were covered under the car's warranty. Volkswagen Singapore also extended the warranty by one year. "Nonetheless, he still made a complaint to Case," he said. Checks with independent service quality firm JD Power revealed that VW's ranking in other markets has not been sterling, either. In the United States, JD Power's 2015 Vehicle Dependability Study found VW had 165 problems per 100 cars - more than the industry average of 147. In Malaysia, the brand ranked last in the firm's 2014 Customer Service Index. Even in its home market Germany, VW ranked above average - but below brands such as Toyota, Mitsubishi and Skoda - in the 2014 Vehicle Ownership Satisfaction Study. [email protected] This article was first published on May 25, 2015. Get a copy of The Straits Times or go to straitstimes.com for more stories. - See more at: http://business.asiaone.com/news/volkswagen-still-bugged-consumer-complaints#sthash.Z8VrPB7W.SBUBorFC.dpuf

Now, this is what I call consumer protection. http://www.smh.com.au/business/fisher--paykels-fine-print-too-fine-leads-to-200000-fine-20141221-12bm3d.html Fisher & Paykel's fine print, too fine, leads to $200,000 fineStephen Cauchi Published: December 22, 2014 - 10:33AM Whitegoods and appliance company Fisher & Paykel has been fined $200,000 for telling customers they needed to buy an extended warranty to protect their product against repair costs, while putting the truth in fine print. Warranty provider Domestic & General, who issued the extended warranty on behalf of Fisher & Paykal, was also fined $200,000. The Australian Competiton and Consumer Commission commenced action against Fisher & Paykel and Domestic & General in the Federal Court in late 2013 over the warranty documents accompanying dishwasher sales. Under Australian consumer law, consumers may be entitled to a repair, replacement or refund on a product beyond the time period covered by the manufacturer's warranty if the product suffered "major failure" or is not of "acceptable quality". However, the ACCC alleged that Domestic & General sent out 48,214 letters to purchasers of a dishwasher that had a two-year warranty. The letter stated that "your dishwasher is now a year old, which means you have 12 months remaining - after that your appliance won't be protected against repair costs. Fisher & Paykel can help." The letter then offered, for a fee, an extended two-year warranty on top of the original warranty. Federal Court Justice Michael Wigney said in his judgment, released on Friday, that Fisher & Paykel conceded that the statement was "false and misleading and the making of it was conduct that was misleading and deceptive". The misleading statement was "prominent" in that it was displayed in the main text of the letter on the front page, he ruled. Even though the relevant part of Australian consumer law was mentioned in the letter, said Justice Wigney, it was "in relatively fine print on the reverse side of the letter". The fine print included the statement that "you are entitled to a replacement or refund for a major failure and compensation for any other reasonably forseeable loss or damage. You are also entitled to have the goods repaired or replaced if the goods fail to be of acceptable quality and the failure does not amount to a major failure." The court heard that 1326 consumers purchased extended warranties, paying between $100 and $220. After proceedings against Fisher & Paykel and Domestic & General began in the Federal Court, all of these consumers were contacted and "unconditionally offered a full refund" on the extended warranty, said Justice Wigney. Only 107 consumers did so. It is "unclear why so few consumers claimed a refund," said Justice Wigney. Fisher & Paykel and Domestic & General were also ordered to pay $15,000 in costs. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission began a national awareness campaign on extended warranties in 2012. "While extended warranties may offer protection over and above that provided by the Australian Consumer Law, they do not replace the underlying consumer guarantees," according to the ACCC. This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/business/fisher--paykels-fine-print-too-fine-leads-to-200000-fine-20141221-12bm3d.html

Im wondering how to make our Gov wake up their mind. Its not the 1st time I came across such news, in fact, such case happened to 1 of my close buddy at AMK. It obvious case that its the pedestrian fault and why driver tio charge until so jialat? Is Gov trying to encourage the pedestrian to be more careless as they are protected by law no matter what? I undestand that the jaywalker already deceased and I shouldnt rubbing salt on others wound but I really pity the driver... he is the actual innocent fellow here. I hope government could be more fair when handling such cases. Dont give people the wrong impresssion and continue to try their luck on the road. _________________________________________________________________________________________________ source: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/fine-driving-ban-for/1330614.html SINGAPORE: A 77-year-old retiree was fined S$7,000 and banned from driving for five years on Tuesday (Aug 26) for causing the death of a pedestrian through his negligence. Willie Chan York Jen pleaded guilty to causing the death of 75-year-old Mr Mohamed Ibrahim Yusoff while driving along Lorong 2 Toa Payoh at the cross junction of Lorong 6 Toa Payoh on Dec 21 last year. At about 5.45pm that day, Chan was driving along Lorong 2 Toa Payoh and heading towards the Pan Island Expressway (PIE) on his way home after playing badminton with friends. He stopped at a red light while travelling on the four-lane road at Lorong 2 Toa Payoh. When the traffic light turned green in his favour, he proceeded to drive straight across the cross junction. He did not see Mr Ibrahim, who began crossing the road when the red-man traffic signal was displayed. Chan failed to keep a proper lookout and Mr Ibrahim was hit by the front right corner of his car. Mr Ibrahim sustained head injuries, and was bleeding from the mouth and became short of breath. He fell unconscious and was taken to Tan Tock Seng Hospital, where he died later that night. Chan could have been jailed up to two years and/or fined for causing death through a negligent act.

UK police increasingly asking victims to solve their own cases. Since, we don’t want this to happen to SG, thought it deserved a separate thread. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/04/police-telling-victims-solve-crimes-themselves Crime victims are increasingly being told by some police forces to carry out their own investigations by speaking to neighbours, checking for CCTV images and seeing if their stolen property has been put up for sale on secondhand websites, the official police watchdog has warned. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary says that for some high-volume types of offences, such as car crime, criminal damage and non-residential burglaries, this "DIY" approach to tackling crime is an "emerging trend" among some forces. They warn that in areas where the police have given up investigating these offences, they are "on the verge of being decriminalised". The HMIC's report on the use of police time says that in too many cases once the victim had been asked to carry out their own investigation by police call handlers, the crime report was filed away without any further contact with the victim. "Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary finds this expectation by these forces that the victims should investigate his own crime both surprising and a matter of material concern. "The police have been given powers and resources to investigate crime by the public, and there should be no expectation on the part of the police that an inversion of that responsibility is acceptable," says the report published on Thursday. Inspector of Constabulary, Roger Baker, who led the inspection, said: "It's more a mindset that we no longer deal with these things. Effectively what's happened is, a number of crimes are on the verge of being decriminalised. So it's not the fault of the individual staff – it's a mindset thing that's crept in to policing to say, 'We've almost given up.'" He added: "When a crime has been committed, it's the job of the police service to go and find out who's done it and bring them to justice. They're the cops and we expect the cops to catch people, and my proposition to you is that unless you've got the powers of Mystic Meg or something like that, you not turning up and using your skills … it's going to be mightily difficult to bring people to justice." The report concludes that police desk-based investigations of crime are failing to serve the public and mean "little or nothing more than recording a crime without taking further action. The HMIC investigation found that it is still policy to send an officer to attend all reports of crime in only six of the 43 police forces in England and Wales. In the other 37 forces a call-handler uses set criteria to assess whether somebody should be sent. The watchdog says it is unacceptable that its investigation found nearly half the police forces were unable to provide any details of the reported crimes their officers had attended and that a third were failing to identify repeat and vulnerable victims when they rang to report an incident. Baker said that it was only by fully understanding how they use their staff that police forces could ensure that they were efficient and responsive: "We found that this vital element of evaluation and analysis is still lacking in the majority of forces, with fewer than a quarter of forces investigating demand in order to prioritise and organise their workforce. In this age of austerity it's more important than ever that forces understand how to prioritise their resources." Irene Curtis, president of the Police Superintendents' Association responding to the report said forces had made significant efforts to protect the frontline in the face of cuts but it appeared "some of the basic functions of policing appear to be slipping through the cracks in some areas." She said: "The public and victims of crime in particular deserve the highest standard of service from the police, wherever they live, so it's important that these issues are addressed and forces must learn from the many examples of good practice highlighted in the report."

http://www.straitstimes.com/news/singapore/health/story/first-suspected-ebola-case-singapore-20140814 SINGAPORE - Singapore may have its first case of Ebola, the viral outbreak that has killed more than 1,000 people in West Africa. A Nigerian woman in her 50s was identified as a possible Ebola case by doctors at Gleneagles Hospital on Thursday morning. The woman is believed to have flown into Singapore recently and arrived at the hospital's emergency department with a fever. She was immediately isolated and transferred by ambulance to the Communicable Diseases Centre at Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH).

http://singaporeseen.stomp.com.sg/stomp/sg...has_to_pay.html Malaysian driver gets into accident here, but S'porean has to pay and pay STOMPer evolution was annoyed to learn he won't be able to file an insurance claim against a Malaysian driver after the latter caused an accident which damaged his car. The STOMPer wrote:

i got a burning question about this. recently got a new Tab 3 tablet, and a new case that has a magnetic tab. The problem is the tablet keep going to standby erratically, no screen touch sensitivity, and just hang for whole day. Was so pissed with it, i thought i got a lemon tablet. Decided to go to Samsung Service Centre. They were kind enough to change the entire screen. Collect it back and the problem is the same. So mad, went back to service centre again. The counter service staff took a look at my tablet and my case. Asked me to try using the tablet without the case. He explained my case has magnets that may affect the device. Ok, i ever read online about this magnetic problem, where some ppl complained about the magnetic cases. Decided to go with his advice. Sure enough, the tablet works like a charm now, without the stupid case. Anyone has this problem as well? The pic of the case i was using

In the last four years, Purisima, who can safely be described as litigious, has filed lawsuits against the People's Republic of China and several major banks including Wells Fargo, JP Morgan, and Wachovia.

Anyone has the latest update?

Looks like knives are now the weapon of choice...... http://forums.hardwarezone.com.sg/eat-drin...-a-4299974.html Singapore Alert : Ang Mo Kio case #2 A Slashing Incident took place at Ang Mo Kio -Victim's a 20 year young adult* -Reasons for slashing was due to Revenege* -Weapon : two 80cm long knife -Victim fainted in his pool of blood and was send to Intensive care ward.

Long story cut short Bought a second hand ride a few weeks ago from creative auto. Deal and price was reasonable , so proceed for checks and inspection. Car is both inspected in STA and Agent In both reports car condition is satisfactory Went for regular servicing , workshop found out a leak in fuel tank causing a strong petrol smell. Quoted 2.7k to replace the whole fuel tank. Informed dealer about this issue , dealer giving bo chup attitude quoting my driving style damaged the fuel tank and saying he has both STA and agent's report to support his claims of saying vehicle was in good condition upon delivery Went down to case , they recommend to bring this case to small claims tribunal Question is Is there any chance to win this case if I bring it up to small claims tribunal? Is this covered under the lemon law?

Anyone here whom is familiar with any workshop that can provide differential oil and transfer oil change service? Thanks in advance!

http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/...-theft-20130422 77-year-old man arrested for case of snatch theft Published on Apr 22, 2013 7:10 PM Police arrested a 77-year-old man on Sunday afternoon for snatching a gold chain off a female victim at the void deck of a flat along Gangsa Road. The suspect pounced on his victim from behind at about 8.35am on Sunday morning, and shouts from her caught the attention of two individuals nearby, who managed to note his appearance and the direction he ran off to. Police arrested him in the same vicinity less than five hours later. He will be charged in court on Tuesday. If convicted for snatch theft, the man faces a maximum jail term of seven years and may also be caned.

Walau, totally sick...porker be careful hor.... [laugh] Man convicted of 14 charges in Sentosa's trolley-bag-death case By Claire Huang | Posted: 21 February 2013 1859 hrs Click to enlarge Photos 1 of 1 File photo of the Subordinate Courts Related News

Woman went missing in hotel and her body was found in the water tank xxx days later. Link Last known video of the woman shows her behaving strangely in the hotel lift: Some say she was playing hide and seek with a friend. Some say she can see hantu

If I were police, taser him! http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=600492099966036

therer are 4 bloody thread on this and you choose to start another.....you understand SEARCH befor eposting? you are starting your nonsense again and not the first time thread closed

continue here

anyone read the wanbao? I was quite surprise and also by the ppl getting involve.. What had happen to our Singapore.. Not going to go well with out competitive ranking..

AXA Insurance Singapore is making a test case out of its bid to reject any payout to the family of Chinese national Ma Chi, the Ferrari driver who died in a high-speed crash which left two others dead and two injured. If it succeeds in its High Court move, there will be insurance implications for other motorists, especially owners of the growing number of high-performance sports cars here. The insurer claims Mr Ma's recklessness meant that the May 12 tragedy was a "collision" and not an accident, and therefore it should not pay any compensation to his estate. If the courts agree, the insurer will be allowed to claim from Mr Ma's estate all third-party compensation it pays to the other victims. Source: http://www.straitstimes.com/breaking-news/...se-axa-20120909

Read this thread for what this case was about: http://www.mycarforum.com/index.php?showto...3&hl=karma* Just received a letter from tP today. Findings are as such THE DRIVER/RIDER OF JKBXXXX WAS GIVEN A STERN WARNING FOR CARELESS DRIVING UNDER RULE 29 OF THE ROAD TRAFFIC RULES Poor mudder farker kena surgery, kena bike hammer and still get warning......bless him! Well, that is closure to my case and guess I can repair the bumper....

How come no news about her? So quiet, no statement from her? I thought she still alive right? The most important witness and evidence and yet nothing at all from her??? Police never took statement from her? Again back to China??? Pardon me if I missed out any information on her in the newspaper or media but I do not remember seeing anything. Family of deceased taxi driver going to claim against the Machi estate? Seriously WTF is the investigation and media doing? knn only know how to dig out rubbish and sexy news, really hopeless. pui. I hope AXA wins the case against the Machi family and in the process dig out cans and cans of worms in the system. Think by law AXA still need to pay out to the innocent victim but exclude Machi's family and then AXA will claim back the payout money back from Machi's family or estate. The bias of the general system is becoming nauseating. Money makes the world go round.

Standard Chartered http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.h...od=inlineTickerPLC agreed to pay $340 million to a New York regulator to settle allegations that the bank broke U.S. money-laundering laws in handling transactions for Iranian customers, after a weeklong, trans-Atlantic regulatory drama. Standard Chartered Chief Executive Peter A. Sands flew into New York to help negotiate the settlement, said people familiar with the bank. The sum is the largest fine ever collected by a single U.S. regulator in a money-laundering case. The agreement came just eight days after the regulator, Superintendent Benjamin M. Lawsky of the state Department of Financial Services, stunned the banking world, and fellow U.S. regulators, by accusing the fifth-biggest U.K. bank by assets of illegally scheming over a decade to hide more than 60,000 financial transactions totaling $250 billion for Iranian clients. The allegations and the settlement, which were first reported by The Wall Street Journal, sparked criticism of Mr. Lawsky from senior U.K. officials, including central banker Mervyn King. The settlement led the New York regulator to call off a hearing scheduled for Wednesday morning at its offices in Lower Manhattan. The bank's chief executive had flown to New York this weekend to oversee settlement talks, according to people familiar with the bank. The bank, which earlier had contested much of the allegations, acknowledged the fine covers all the transactions that the New York regulator alleged were illegal. The bank hasn't admitted wrongdoing. The settlement took the form of a term sheet signed by Mr. Sands that spelled out the key points in the agreement, including the monetary penalty, said people familiar with the matter. Because the deal was struck so quickly, the final settlement agreement is yet to be drafted in its full legal format, they said. The penalty is the latest in a series of enforcement actions by U.S. authorities against foreign banks over allegations they failed to uphold U.S. money-laundering laws. ING Bank NV of the Netherlands this year agreed to pay $619 million to settle charges in a case brought by U.S. Justice Department and the Manhattan district attorney's office, with the resulting funds split by those two entities. Other banks that have settled similar allegations that they broke U.S. sanctions laws in recent years include ABN Amro Bank, now part of Royal Bank of Scotland Group http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.h...od=inlineTicker PLC, Credit Suisse Group AG http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.h...od=inlineTicker and Barclays PLC.http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.h...od=inlineTicker ING, Royal Bank of Scotland, Credit Suisse and Barclays acknowledged violating laws including the Trading With the Enemy Act. http://online.wsj.com/public/quotes/main.h...od=inlineTickerHSBC Holdings PLC is being probed by U.S. authorities and has told investors that it has reserved $700 million to pay fines. Standard Chartered's actions regarding Iran are still under criminal investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department, according to federal officials. The bank, following its internal review, had already uncovered $14 million of improper money transfers for Iranian clients, a bank spokesperson said. A Standard Chartered spokesman said a formal agreement "is expected to be concluded shortly." He added that the bank "continues to engage constructively with the other relevant U.S. authorities." Standard Chartered's actions regarding Iran are still under criminal investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department, according to federal officials.The bank, following its internal review, had already uncovered $14 million of improper money transfers for Iranian clients, a bank spokesperson said.A Standard Chartered spokesman said a formal agreement "is expected to be concluded shortly." He added that the bank "continues to engage constructively with the other relevant U.S. authorities." The settlement discussions between Standard Chartered and Mr. Lawsky's office began last Tuesday. Mr. Lawsky had leveled his allegations after the London stock market closed that Monday afternoon, U.K. time. The stock has dropped 7% on the London Stock Exchange since the allegations came to light Aug. 6, wiping out $2.4 billion in market value. While the bank's attorneys and executives worked to address the allegations, they also sounded out other U.S. regulators, in the hopes that all would come together to negotiate with the bank as a group. Both Mr. Lawsky's office and the bank's attorneys worked on two tracks. They prepared documents and presentations to hash out the facts of Mr. Lawsky's case at a hearing he set for Wednesday, while bracing to wrangle over the price tag and terms of a settlement agreement. The talks stretched late into Monday and were finalized Tuesday, said people familiar with the matter, with Mr. Sands signing the document just hours before Mr. Lawsky's office put out a statement at about 2 p.m. Four other U.S. regulators that have been probing the bank's actions weren't part of the settlement. The U.S. Treasury Department, the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Manhattan district attorney's office have been negotiating with Standard Chartered since 2011 to reach a settlement over its Iran-related transactions. Standard Chartered wanted to settle with U.S. authorities as a group to assuage investors' concerns about exposure to future penalties, but the other regulators didn't move quickly enough, said a person close to the bank. A Treasury Department representative said: "Our investigation continues. Treasury will continue working with our regulatory and law enforcement partners to hold Standard Chartered accountable for any sanctionable activity that occurred." A Justice Department spokesman said the agency "continues to work closely with our regulatory and other partners to determine what actions might be appropriate in this matter.'' "The Federal Reserve continues to work with the other agencies on a comprehensive resolution," said a Fed spokeswoman. "Banks that violate international sanctions aren't just breaking the law, they are enabling the financing of terrorist regimes and undermining our collective safety and security," said Erin Duggan, a spokeswoman for Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. As part of the settlement, Standard Chartered agreed to install a monitor chosen by Mr. Lawsky's office to oversee its international transactions. The bank also agreed to appoint its own auditors in its New York office to oversee compliance with U.S. money-laundering laws. Analysts say the settlement is a good outcome for Standard Chartered. They say the penalty is manageable for a bank that generated nearly $4 billion of profit in the first half of 2012. And the resolution of Mr. Lawsky's probe, as well as his threat to revoke the bank's New York license, is likely to relieve investors, said Alastair Ryan, a London-based banking analyst with UBS. "Putting this issue behind them will be welcomed by shareholders," Mr. Ryan said. "Regulators, however aggressive, hold the whip hand now and removing tail risk for this [$340 million] figure

Saw the fiery exchnages between Slyvia Lim & Shammugam in Parliament debate (Woffles Wu or Woof Woof). It seems Shammugam views that Woof Woof got similar treatment from past incidents which Slyvia & majority of locals don't quite agree with.

4 years for human trafficking, what would the sentence be like if he was caught in Singapore?