Comments on: Thieves went on shopping spree, victim has to pay

By: KopitiamApek

KopitiamApek — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 03:38:17 +0000

10) leesjuanpat

well said.
why jump into the credit card hole and complaint when you cannot climb out.
there are a lot of spenders out there who are great at spending but are clueless of how to earn that money to sustain their spending habit. so when they are unable to command that earning power to sustain the high life they think is their birth right, they complaint gahmen no good.
same old sad story o

By: leesjuanpat

leesjuanpat — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 02:19:04 +0000

With the advent of debit cards. Many of us can do away with credit cards.
I am always amused why people want to hold so many credit cards and be more
liable if they lose it.

Many a times, a person with a row of cards will ostentatiously flip them and sometimes even said “which card should I use har?” A feeling of I have ‘arrived’
living on credit. Sad.

Well, for her stolen card case, she should not be penalised to pay 75% of the charges. This will be a precedent court case to watch if she want to fight it out.

All banks are the same. They will shade you with the umbrella when sunny. When rain arrives, they will snatch your brella away.

We can live without credit cards, for those who do not know.

By: preston loon

preston loon — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 01:51:46 +0000

This liability is one of those dark sides of capitalism.The banking institutions hit you
on both fronts.Firstly,they gave you the privilege to charge your purchases to the cards with interests.And then when your card is stolen and used,they hit you a hefty ‘fine’ of 75% of what was purchased illegally.My advice to the victim is, do not waste your time taking them to court , just cough up what you owe them and cut up those
credit cards.By the way,have you heard of debit cards?

By: Benefit of Doubt

Benefit of Doubt — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 23:34:58 +0000

There could be a good reason for the banks not to take full responsibility.

I am not suggesting anything about this particular case because I do not have any evidence to say so, but under normal circumstances it is possible for the holder of a card to go on a shopping spree and then report that his/her cards were lost; or to report the cards were lost and then go on a shopping spree in another country, knowing that it would take some time for the banks to stop all payments.

By: agongkia

agongkia — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:49:06 +0000

This shows that the bank trust you only 25%.
Talking about bank.
This case still not so bad.My friend was somehow misled into paying his vehicle instalment into a ghost account by cash machine when he got no time to pay at the counter.After years ,he then realise that the money he put in by machine was not accounted for.His vehicle was even tow in front of him even he insist that he did not default the payment and believe that he had paid up more than he is suppose to.
He only manage to find some of the receipts that he kept and claim back that portion.The staff said that he is the only one who bank in that General account number and when my friend ask those extra money not accounted for to be return to him since he is the only one putting money in that account ,the staff did not take up the challenge.
So ,bank got the final say.

By: Karma went on Exile for decades and still counting

Karma went on Exile for decades and still counting — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:35:15 +0000

This is not a pro-Rich system right?

If a person is poor, he can still get the best legal service and win a case that he is truely victimized by a rich man since Lou Tee Wu Mak wan right?
since in this world , the good will always win right?
since in this world, justice will surely be given to the victim wan right?

rich or poor, so long as you are right, you will win.

who believes me?
or should i say, who disbelieve me?

By: Your Value System

Your Value System — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 14:30:24 +0000

I am sure this is not an example of pro-business right?

By: KopitiamApek

KopitiamApek — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 11:38:51 +0000

3) Dare to fight the bank?

Suing the bank is lkike drinking poison and hoping your enemy will die.

By: Dare to fight the bank?

Dare to fight the bank? — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:47:03 +0000

Steve Wu,

You expect an ordinary individual to take a counter suit on a bank? You sure or not?

By: KopitiamApek

KopitiamApek — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 06:52:37 +0000

Hope she did reported the loss to the banks asap when it ocuured.

By: Steve Wu

Steve Wu — Fri, 27 Nov 2009 02:50:57 +0000

Consumers have always paid (perhaps excessively) for the use of credit cards (it ends up in the final product price), hence it is expected of the card issuers to provide adequate security in the system. How is it that any thief can make purchases without any legal form of non-repudiation (e.g. a valid signature)? That this security is sorely lacking is both pervasive and persistent (been around a long time) and must be the sole responsibility of the issuer.

Ms Tan should consider taking a counter suit on the issuer bank(s) using the recently amended Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act. Any terms and conditions which are unfair to the consumer may be challenged, regardless of whether the consumer had agreed to them previously. See the details at http://app.mti.gov.sg/default.asp?id=84 .

If I may also suggest that she approaches the Law Society to assist her with this case as it is a matter of public interest. The Law Society has set up a task group specifically for public interest litigation.