Blog @ razifshah

A backup to Razifshah.com

Legal Action against Mat Kiosk company

with one comment

Here is another related article on NST: -

Legal action against four companies (1 Feb 2009)

SIX directors of four companies dealing in Multi-Automated Touchscreen Kiosks (Mat Kiosk) and vending machines were charged in court on Jan 22 for carrying out direct selling without a licence.

Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Ministry enforcement division director-general Mohd Roslan Mahayudin said the companies were Waterdrops Ventures Sdn Bhd, Waterdrops Holding Sdn Bhd, Waterdrops Corporation Sdn Bhd and Waterdrops (M) Sdn Bhd.

He said a person found guilty of this offence could face a sentence of up to three years jail or a fine of a maximum of RM1 million, or both.

A corporate body could be fined a maximum of RM250,000.

Roslan said there were 17 cases involving 10 companies which had been caught selling Mat Kiosks and vending machines without a direct selling licence.

“Action has been taken against all these companies. We received many complaints from the public in connection with cheating and embezzlement by the companies selling these kiosks and vending machines.”

Roslan said there were 138 complaints against companies selling Mat Kiosks and vending machines between 2007 and this year.

Representatives of these companies would get people to buy the machines, with a guarantee of an income of up to RM1,000 a month.

A Mat Kiosk or vending machine costs at least RM20,000 and payment could be made with credit cards or bank loans.

“Their method of doing business is by contacting the buyer through telephone calls or by making house calls and this falls within the definition of direct selling under the Direct Sales Act 1993.

“Thus, they must have valid licences to carry out such businesses.

“However, the action taken by the enforcement division in charging these companies will not be able to help those who lost money in these scams.

“The victims also do not have a remedy at the Consumer Claims Tribunal as they do not fall within the definition of ‘consumer’ as they had entered into a business,” Roslan said.

He suggested a tripartite solution agreed to by all parties.

This arrangement could be handled by a committee chaired by the head of the consumer protection unit in his ministry.

On banks providing credit facilities to companies without valid licences, Roslan said:

“We have been talking to Bank Negara about stopping credit facilities being extended to scratch-and-win companies. Maybe we can extend this to these kind of companies as well.”

[© Copyright 2009 The New Straits Times Press (M) Berhad]

Advertisement

Written by myventings

February 1, 2009 at 5:24 am

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The Consumer Claims Tribunal could not jelp the victim to get back their money just due the the defination of ‘consumer’. Thind have to be done in future if the loop holes in the laws to be remedy and justice prefail in Malaysia.
    email me if you people have any opinon to get back the money?
    By court of law?

    Azman Rafaie

    December 13, 2009 at 1:02 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.