Consumer Claims Tribunal decisions not honoured

Josephine Attard vs Sandro Bianchi, Flexi Marketing Ltd

This is our fifth appeal regarding this case wherein the Consumer Claims Tribunal (CCT) arbiter accepts Mrs Attard's claim and orders Mr Bianchi of Flexi Marketing Ltd to pay her Lm400, and Lm50 as moral damages plus expenses.

Mrs Attard tells me that, whenever she calls Mr Bianchi, he does not reply. However last week I made contact with him, but I failed to persuade him to honour the arbiter's decision. As long as I am in possession of a valid CCT document signed by the arbiter, I have no other option but to continue asking Mr Bianchi to honour the arbiter's decision, which was made on January 24.

In any case I am not in a position to write what Mr Bianchi told me on the telephone. So I ask him to send me a written statement explaining why he does not want to honour the arbiter's decision and what he intends to do. In the absence of such a written statement I will continue to asking him to honour the decision.

Mary A. Smith vs C. Gauci, Waterproofing

In this case, the CCT arbiter accepted the claim and ordered C. Gauci Waterproofing to pay Ms Smith the sum of Lm800 plus expenses.

This is another drawn out case. Indeed the decision was made on January 11, 2005 - a year and six months ago. Moreover, this column has already referred to this case on January 15, and February 12, to no avail. Now, in line with our new policy, we will continue asking C. Gauci Waterproofing to honour the CCT decision.

Finally, if you have referred a case to the CCT, a decision was made by the arbiter in your favour, and the trader refuses to honour the decision; write to me and send me a copy of the CCT Arbiter's decision.

In any case it is very important for consumers to know about traders who do not respect the decisions taken by the CCT arbiter, Dr Martin Fenech. Such traders do not deserve our custom.