Cases featured due to no reply from suppliers

Last Sunday I featured letters naming three establishments regarding pending cases because I received no response from them to my repeated requests for their comments. I actually captioned the relevant articles with the name of the establishments.

New Millennium Computer Superstores

Complainant Anton Busuttil had written, among other things, that the New Millennium Computer Superstores "are accepting items for repair for which they know they have no parts. They are then billing a minimum charge after declaring them 'not repairable' exactly because they have no parts". However here follows New Millennium's side of the case:

First of all I would like to apologise for the delay in getting back to you. I have very little to say about Mr Busuttil.

The Lm10 charged was the inspection fee, which I had told him about when he brought in the monitor. The fact that the monitor was not repaired was that its EHT transformer was gone - a repair that would cost nearly Lm50, and this amount is very close to Lm70 that one would buy a new 17" monitor, thus the statement "not financially feasible".

It has nothing to do with us not having stocks, it is simply a matter of protecting clients against unnecessary expenses. At no time do we attract customers to repairs that we know we cannot perform. In nearly 10 years of operation we never had such complaints.

On the other hand our technician spent time on the monitor, and as you know no-one works for free. The Lm10 is the minimum inspection charge we do on monitors, whether they are repaired or not. As Mr Busuttil had done in other instances of repairs, he always expected free service... maybe he works for free himself?

If Mr Busuttil wants his money back, I can send him a cheque. I do not to deal with him or customers like him. I would like you to ask him about the discounts I gave him on the scanner, and that I didn't charge him for system reinstallation (a cost of Lm15) that he had a few weeks before, merely to get rid of him without causing any hassles.

I would like to end by stating that Mr Busuttil has reported the case to The Sunday Times merely to damage our company, and for no other reason. He has no right for what he is claiming, and what he stated are falsehood.

I thank you for your attention, and I hope you publish this letter in the Sunday Times as you did with his complaint. (Johnaton Grech, managing director)

I thank Mr Grech for his reply with a fair and clear explanation. I appeal to suppliers named in letters sent to me by consumers to reply to our requests for their comments. Indeed it is in their interest to do so as, in the absence of any response from suppliers, such cases are likely to be published.

Tabletop of South Street

This case was about a problem resulting from a change of agents/distributors. The product was a Rowenta epilation appliance and the consumer wrote that she was unable to buy "the only wax usable for this appliance with its name Elasticeria has been out of stock for the past five months".

Regarding this case Tabletop contacted me and informed me that the situation has now been rectified. Unfortunately the consumer did not inform me.

Pavillion Palace, St Andrews

Regarding Pavillion Palace Restaurant, I hope to hear from them soon. To be fair, I must point out that we pick up our mail every Friday and, if they wrote, I would refer to their response next Sunday.

Finally I appeal to consumers who refer their cases to this column to write to me if or when their cases have been resolved. More-over, if the case is not resolved please respect this column's terms and conditions particularly that "It is up to the complainant to chase the progress of the case with the supplier while, in the process, copying me in".