Consumer Claims Tribunal decisions not honoured

Due to the extreme lack of respect shown to the Consumer Claims Tribunal (CCT) by certain traders, who blatantly refuse to honour the Arbiter's decisions, we must continue naming these traders until decisions are honoured. According to our records, the featured cases haven't been honoured yet.

What made things worse was that we had cases where traders informed us that they had honoured the Arbiter's decisions and, subsequently, we were informed by consumers that it was not so.

Just to confirm that our list of rogue traders is up to date, I appeal to these consumers to inform us in writing if their case has been resolved, so that we can remove them from our list. In any case, it is very disturbing to note that we have so many CCT decisions not honoured. However, it is very important for consumers to know about traders who do not honour decisions made by the CCT.

If you referred your case to the CCT, a decision was taken in your favour; and the trader refuses to honour it, send me a copy of the Arbiter's decision with a view to adding your case to this list. Such traders do not deserve our custom, and this is why we must continue featuring these lists.

Mary A. Smith vs C. Gauci Waterproofing

Ms Smith commissioned C. Gauci Waterproofing to do a job on her roof and paid the company Lm800. After about a year, when it rained, it transpired that the waterproofing did not sustain the rain. Ms Smith submitted a claim to the CCT.

The CCT Arbiter on January 11, 2005, accepted Ms Smith's claim and ordered C. Gauci Waterproofing to pay her the sum of Lm800, plus expenses.

Josephine Attard vs Flexi Marketing Ltd

The CCT Arbiter on June 9, 2005, accepted Ms Attard's claim and ordered Sandro Bianchi of Flexi Marketing Ltd to pay her Lm400, and Lm50 as moral damages, plus expenses.

Horace Farrugia vs Chris Borg of Ctronics

On January 10, 2003, Mr Farrugia paid Mr Borg Lm230 for a Sony15" TFT Monitor. On realising that the monitor was damaged, Mr Farrugia submitted a claim of Lm230. However Mr Borg did not submit a reply to the claim.

The CCT Arbiter on December 15, 2005, partially accepted Mr Farrugia's claim and ordered Mr Borg to pay him Lm120, plus expenses.

Subsequently, on February 16, 2006, the CCT Arbiter issued another order on having taken cognisance of a note submitted by Mr Farrugia, that the monitor be returned to Mr Farrugia.

Simone Calaio vs Cecile Boutique

Ms Calaio paid a Lm30 deposit on a dress costing Lm65 at Cecile Boutique. When she went to pick up the dress she noticed a defect in workmanship around the neckline. She asked Cecile Boutique to give her the chance to choose another dress, to no avail.

The CCT Arbiter on April 25, 2006, ordered Cecile Boutique to pay Ms Calaio Lm30. I appeal to Mr Jones (owner of Cecile Boutique) to comply.

Joseph and Rita Xerri vs Viaggi Montebello

The Xerris booked and paid for a flight to London which, due to some bombing, was subsequently cancelled. Viaggi Montebello sustained that what happened was not his fault. The CCT Arbiter on May 30, 2006, partially accepted the Xerris' claim and ordered Viaggi Montebello to pay them Lm100, plus expenses.

Mary Ann Grima vs A to Z TV Teleshopping

On January 17, 2006, Ms Grima bought five items, including a radio for Lm13. Subsequently it transpired that nothing worked. She asked A to Z TV Teleshopping to refund her Lm13. However, rather than a refund, the staff at A to Z TV Teleshopping were only prepared to give her a credit note.

Despite having been advised about the hearing, nobody from A to Z TV Teleshopping attended the hearing of the case. The CCT Arbiter on August 31, 2006, upheld Ms Grima's claim and ordered A to Z TV to refund her Lm13, plus expenses.

Josephine Formosa and Margaret Casha vs European Holidays

In two separate cases, Ms Formosa and Ms Casha took a week's holiday in Tunisia. They were held up for about five hours at Malta International Airport and, when they were coming back, they were asked to leave the hotel at 11 a.m. instead of at 4 p.m., as they were previously told. Ms Formosa and Ms Casha submitted a claim for Lm30.

The CCT Arbiter on August 10, 2006, decided in favour of Ms Formosa and Ms Casha, ordering European Holidays to pay them Lm20, plus expenses of Lm4. They claim to have received Lm20 each but not the Lm4 each for expenses. I appeal to European Holidays to honour the decision in full by paying them the expenses.

Emanuela and Saviour Brincat vs Radamatic Ltd

The Brincats bought 97 m2 of Gres floor tiles from Radamatic Ltd. After the tile layer finished his work, Mr Brincat washed the tiles and it transpired that there were three different colour shades. Radamatic Ltd only wanted to change some tiles rather than all of them.

On having taken cognisance of the claimants' version as well as the defendant's version, the CCT Arbiter on August 31, 2006, noted that the claimants' version was more credible. The Arbiter ordered Radamatic Ltd to pay the Brincats Lm500, plus expenses.

Paul and Antoinette Mangion vs Seguna Woodworks

The Mangions bought a leather sofa from Seguna Woodworks for Lm722. After some time, the stitching of the sofa started coming off, so the Mangions claimed Lm284 from Seguna Woodworks. This constituted the cost of repairing the sofa. Seguna Woodworks stressed that it was due to having moved the cushions.

However, on having seen the photos of the sofa, and on having listened to both sides of the case, the CCT Arbiter on February 15, 2007, accepted the Mangions' argument and ordered Seguna Woodworks to pay them Lm200, plus expenses.

Carmen Zammit vs Mobile Phone Centre

Ms Zammit bought a mobile phone from Mobile Phone Centre, Independence Avenue, Mosta. In January 2006, the phone had problems with its speaker. In April 2006, it had further defects in its charging system. Ms Zammit referred the case to the CCT Arbiter.

Despite having been advised about the hearing, Mobile Phone Centre did not attend the hearing. The CCT Arbiter on February 15, 2007, noted that Ms Zammit's version is credible and ordered Mobile Phone Centre to pay her Lm35, plus expenses.