Consumer Claims Tribunal cases not honoured

We must continue sharing information about cases referred to the Consumer Claims Tribunal on which a decision was made in favour of the consumer and the decision was not honoured by the trader. It is very important for consumers to know about these traders.

Raymond Cassar vs DJR Trading Co. Ltd

The Tribunal Arbiter ordered DJR Trading to repair the television set, and added that, if the television was not returned to Raymond Cassar 'repaired' within three weeks, DJR Trading would have to pay Mr Cassar Lm450.

Mr Drago of DJR Trading did not honour the Consumer Claims Tribunal Arbiter's decision.

Audrey Bonello vs Philip Delceppo Woodworks

The Tribunal Arbiter ordered Philip Delceppo of Philip Delceppo Woodworks, 23, Triq Guilermu, Cospicua, to give Mrs Bonello a full refund. This amounts to Lm477.35 (Lm400 deposit and Lm77.35 being the cost of handles given to Philip Delceppo which were paid for by Mrs Bonello).

Carmel Tabone vs Star Travel

In this case, the Consumer Claims Tribunal's decision is that Star Travel is to refund Lm40 to Mr Tabone, who paid for English, but was given Continental Breakfast.

Mr M. Baron of Star Travel has not honoured the Consumer Claims Tribunal's decision.

Alfred Grixti & Pauline Grixti vs Noel Falzon (Anthena Energy Complex)

The Arbiter's decision orders Noel Falzon (Anthena Energy Complex) to pay Lm11.95 plus expenses to Alfred Grixti and Pauline Grixti.

Joseph Spiteri vs Victor Galea (V.G. Tiler Co. Ltd)

The Arbiter decided in favour of Joseph Spiteri. Victor Galea was ordered to pay Spiteri Lm50 plus expenses. I am informed by Mr Spiteri that his repeated appeals to Mr Galea on the telephone have proved to be futile.

Victor Degiorgio vs tiler Lawrence Azzopardi

Another tiler, Lawrence Azzopardi, is refusing to honour the Arbiter's decision ordering him to pay Victor Degiorgio Lm130 plus expenses.

Dorianne Avellino vs Woodwork & Aluminium

The Arbiter decided Woodwork & Aluminium should refund Dorianne Avellino Lm165 but, so far, Woodwork & Aluminium have only paid Lm65.

Mary Anne Darmenia vs Joseph Busuttil, Pembroke

The Arbiter ordered Joseph Busuttil to pay Lm140 plus expenses for a faulty mobile phone.

If any of the above referred to cases/decisions have been honoured, I urge either party to inform me so that I can remove the case from the list.

Meanwhile, I invite consumers who have referred a case to the Consumer Claims Tribunal to write to me if a decision was made in their favour and has not been honoured by the trader. Please send me a copy of the Consumer Claims Tribunal's decision.

These are "long-drawn-out" pending cases. I make a special appeal to the respective traders involved. It is in their interest to be removed from the list.

On January 4 I made a special reference to the case involving Ms Mary Anne Darmenia and Joseph Busuttil. In this case the trader, Mr Busuttil, was ordered to pay Ms. Darmenia Lm140 plus expenses for a faulty mobile phone. In the absence of any willingness on Mr Busuttil's part to honour the Arbiter's decision, I have no other option but to keep on asking him to do so. Ms Darmenia wrote me a letter (featured on January 4) in which she describes herself as one of the innocent victims.

Last Thursday I called Ms Darmenia and asked her whether there were any developments. She informed me that there was no reaction from Mr Busuttil. At this point I must feature the conclusion to Ms Darmenia's letter, which Mr Busuttil is welcome to reply to:

It seems that I have exhausted all my legal rights, including seeking a warrant of seizure to be paid. However, my vendor (Joseph Busuttil) has changed his place of business from Busuttil Video Shop at 251, High Street, Hamrun, which is where I bought my mobile phone from, to a different business address, namely "Busuttil Insurance Sub-Agency" at 521, Triq Fra Giuseppe Zammit, Pembroke. He is flouting the law by refusing all correspondence, including official correspondence which is related to his previous business line.

Justice is being denied in my case as my rights seem to be out of reach. (Mary Anne Darmenia)

Soap & Sponge drawn out case

Unfortunately we have another long-drawn-out and still pending case. This one involves Soap & Sponge Ltd and dates back to September 1995, when the complainants, Isabel Cassar (now Isabel Attard Cassar) and David Attard, bought a set of tiles from Soap & Sponge Ltd managed and directed by Edgar Camilleri.

The first letter we received about this case was dated April 29, 1996, and on July 28, 1996, I carried the first article about it. The complainants had written to me explaining that the tiles, which Soap & Sponge Ltd delivered, were of an inferior quality to the original sample supplied to them on the basis of which they made the order. The person they dealt with was Mr Camilleri who, at the time, was managing director and a shareholder of Soap & Sponge Ltd.

Mr Camilleri stressed that the tiles conformed to European Standards and so he rejected the complainants' claim/complaint. Subsequently, after futile attempts to obtain an amicable solution, in August 1996, the complainants had no other option but to resort to legal action, which resulted in a court decision (October 2002) made in their favour.

However they are still denied the money owed to them as confirmed in court. Mr Camilleri's rationale here is that the complainants' dispute is with Soap & Sponge Ltd and not with him, who is currently managing Ideal Bathrooms Ltd, which is owned by A.S. Consultancy Holdings Ltd of which Edgar Camilleri is a shareholder.

At this point however one could ask why Edgar Camilleri, in his capacity as managing director Soap & Sponge Ltd, wanted the cheque in payment regarding this transaction to be made out to Mr Camilleri, not to Soap & Sponge Ltd.

In any case, on October 2002, the Court reached a final decision in favour of the complainants Isabel Cassar and David Attard. Basically, the Court accepted and agreed with the complainants' assertion that the tiles supplied were of an inferior quality to the actual sample provided initially. Thus, the court ordered Soap & Sponge Ltd to remove the inferior tiles supplied and to pay the complainants Lm7,537.63 plus any interest which may accrue from the date of the court decision to the date of payment.

In the absence of any co-operation from Mr Camilleri, he has now earned a special section in our Website www.muscatinglott.net dedicated to this case.

We look forward to being in a position to declare all these cases 'closed'. In the absence of any co-operation we will have to dedicate more sections in our Website in line with the consumers' right to be informed.