cheated by peninsula camera shop!

[vince123123]

I think you're the one who has misinterpreted. I was never referring to the high price low price; but the misrepresentation that Nikon no longer sells batteries. I'm not sure why you are going on and on about high price low price when that is not in issue at all.

The apple orange example was to get you to see that evidence is a different issue from the substantive law. Everything needs evidence, but going by your view, so long as the customer couldn't prove he asked for an apple, the shop owner did nothing wrong in giving him an orange.

We are not in a court of law here. If there is a court case, of course evidence will come in. Right now, everyone is discussing as if the TS can prove what he says.

No problem on differing views, I'll continue to rebutt views which are sticking out to be rebutted.

Your analogy about apple and orange is irrelevant. And to clarify, I did not say the shop did nothing wrong. I think you have mis-interpreted. They did mislead TS and sold him the product that he wanted but at a higher price. However, it is also up to the consumer to be informed. I can also come up with the analogy that if A buys a condo unit today and finds that the unit downstairs is selling $10k cheaper tomorrow, can he ask for refund? Does it means the seller of the upper unit condo has been cheating? The seller can quote a price, it is up to the buyer to buy. Once he enters into a contract, he has already agreed to the price. The market place is not one where everything is fixed price. There are price variations and it is up to the consumer to sniff out the price which is acceptable to him.

And since TS does not intend to sue the shop, neither does he has any evidence to prove the wrongdoings of the shop. By publishing this shop's name wholly and fully in bold red. Doesn't that amount to defamation?

I think we are approaching this topic from different viewpoints. I can also accept and respect that people have different opinons from mine. That's fine with me. I'll leave it at that.

 

[liarliar]

That's why its good to have the clubsnap pricelist section. Cams were mostly covered but its those accesories items which we have to look out for. Prices for different make and models if applicable.

 

[mayhemics]

gotta love the lawyering... would make an interesting case though.

 

[ManWearPants]

I think you're the one who has misinterpreted. I was never referring to the high price low price; but the misrepresentation that Nikon no longer sells batteries. I'm not sure why you are going on and on about high price low price when that is not in issue at all.

The apple orange example was to get you to see that evidence is a different issue from the substantive law. Everything needs evidence, but going by your view, so long as the customer couldn't prove he asked for an apple, the shop owner did nothing wrong in giving him an orange.

We are not in a court of law here. If there is a court case, of course evidence will come in. Right now, everyone is discussing as if the TS can prove what he says.

No problem on differing views, I'll continue to rebutt views which are sticking out to be rebutted.

As mentioned, our focus to this topic is different. i am focusing on the legitimate of this transaction whereas you are coming from misrepresentation of the product.

If using your example of apples. In my case, TS asked for a big apple and got a small one instead. TS accepted the small apple and paid for the apple. The shop did sell TS an apple which he accepted. Using your case, TS wanted a big apple. Shop told him small apple sweeter than big apple. He believed him and think it is not sweet afterwards. There is no orange involved.

Also, I am not implicitly implying that the TS needs to prove his claims. Of course we all believe him since the shop does have a bad reputation. However, with only a receipt that is vague in its description of items. It is insufficient to substantiate the wrong-doings of the shop.

 

[engrmariano]

bottom line, do your homework before buying anything.

 

[Omega23]

I would advice anyone who is going to purchase anything bring a tape, voice recorder and on the recorder in front of the sales person. I dun think they dare to anyhow bullsh1t:bsmilie:

 

[vince123123]

Yes, you chose to focus on only one aspect when I asked you why you felt it was defamatory, but didn't want to see the other potentially justifying portions. You said it was libel for the TS to say the shop has cheated him, and only focused purely on the high price/low price issue to justify your stand, ignoring the fact that the shop has misrepresented on the Nikon battery issue. Of course if you only look at that one issue the TS is wrong to say the shop has cheated him; but by ignoring the critical bit about the Nikon batteries, you have allowed yourself to arrive at a misconclusion.

For your amended example of apples, if the TS asked for a big apple and the shop tried to sell him a small one instead; and the shop told him small apple is sweeter than big apple (when it is untrue and small apples are widely known in the industry to be sour and bad); then the shop has cheated the TS through this misrepresentation. It does not matter what price the small apple was sold.

By the way, "implicitly implying" is a double redundant

As mentioned, our focus to this topic is different. i am focusing on the legitimate of this transaction whereas you are coming from misrepresentation of the product.

If using your example of apples. In my case, TS asked for a big apple and got a small one instead. TS accepted the small apple and paid for the apple. The shop did sell TS an apple which he accepted. Using your case, TS wanted a big apple. Shop told him small apple sweeter than big apple. He believed him and think it is not sweet afterwards. There is no orange involved.

Also, I am not implicitly implying that the TS needs to prove his claims. Of course we all believe him since the shop does have a bad reputation. However, with only a receipt that is vague in its description of items. It is insufficient to substantiate the wrong-doings of the shop.

 

[PCYL]

Do you home work first , the shop owner did not point the gun at you to buy the item
do your home work before buying in future

 

[ManWearPants]

Yes, you chose to focus on only one aspect when I asked you why you felt it was defamatory, but didn't want to see the other potentially justifying portions. You said it was libel for the TS to say the shop has cheated him, and only focused purely on the high price/low price issue to justify your stand, ignoring the fact that the shop has misrepresented on the Nikon battery issue. Of course if you only look at that one issue the TS is wrong to say the shop has cheated him; but by ignoring the critical bit about the Nikon batteries, you have allowed yourself to arrive at a misconclusion.

For your amended example of apples, if the TS asked for a big apple and the shop tried to sell him a small one instead; and the shop told him small apple is sweeter than big apple (when it is untrue and small apples are widely known in the industry to be sour and bad); then the shop has cheated the TS through this misrepresentation. It does not matter what price the small apple was sold.

By the way, "implicitly implying" is a double redundant

Before the TS conjure enough apple juice to make up a case against the Shop, he is already spreading the word that the shop is a cheat. This action can potentially have a huge negative impact on the shop.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=347284

If you refer to this earlier thread, #9 and #10 raised 2 interesting points. There seems to have been more than one cases of "newbies" in this forum who would venture up to 31st floor of Peninsular Plaza and then register with CS to launch an "attack" at this shop. With TS identity unknown, TS relationship with Shop is also unclear. Is it just a buyer and seller relationship? While this relationship remains a shroud of mystery, TS claim of misrepresentation can only be taken at face value. That the transaction is legitimate remains the only fact until proven otherwise.

Anyway, if there are really so many people being cheated at this shop. They can jolly well come together and launch a collective claim against this shop.

 

[Cartman2000]

This action can potentially have a huge negative impact on the shop.

This shop has bad enough rep to begin with

 

[vince123123]

You are free to post further comments or doubts on the TS and his motives; but these do not go towards the points I raised.

I was merely addressing the one issue of there being libel or otherwise. Since it is obvious from this last response that you do not have anything further to add or rebutt in relation to my point, you may continue with these other points of discussion at your leisure.

Before the TS conjure enough apple juice to make up a case against the Shop, he is already spreading the word that the shop is a cheat. This action can potentially have a huge negative impact on the shop.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=347284

If you refer to this earlier thread, #9 and #10 raised 2 interesting points. There seems to have been more than one cases of "newbies" in this forum who would venture up to 31st floor of Peninsular Plaza and then register with CS to launch an "attack" at this shop. With TS identity unknown, TS relationship with Shop is also unclear. Is it just a buyer and seller relationship? While this relationship remains a shroud of mystery, TS claim of misrepresentation can only be taken at face value. That the transaction is legitimate remains the only fact until proven otherwise.

Anyway, if there are really so many people being cheated at this shop. They can jolly well come together and launch a collective claim against this shop.

 

[vince123123]

To add on, I've visited your eralier thread linked and don't find anything interesting at #9 and #10, both of which are reproduced below:

We need to have a sticky for such shops actually... BLACK sticky for BLACK shops!

it beside ap rite?
afaik, they had change their shop's name before.... even if blacklisted... they will just simply change the shop name.
just curious....u getting the 40D with 17-85mm kit rite?

I'm not even sure what's the 31st floor reference in your post.

Also, you are now yourself starting to expose yourself to libel; insinuating that he has improper motives and launching an 'attack'. How does it feel to be at the other end for now

Before the TS conjure enough apple juice to make up a case against the Shop, he is already spreading the word that the shop is a cheat. This action can potentially have a huge negative impact on the shop.

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=347284

If you refer to this earlier thread, #9 and #10 raised 2 interesting points. There seems to have been more than one cases of "newbies" in this forum who would venture up to 31st floor of Peninsular Plaza and then register with CS to launch an "attack" at this shop. With TS identity unknown, TS relationship with Shop is also unclear. Is it just a buyer and seller relationship? While this relationship remains a shroud of mystery, TS claim of misrepresentation can only be taken at face value. That the transaction is legitimate remains the only fact until proven otherwise.

Anyway, if there are really so many people being cheated at this shop. They can jolly well come together and launch a collective claim against this shop.

 

[ManWearPants]

You are free to post further comments or doubts on the TS and his motives; but these do not go towards the points I raised.

I was merely addressing the one issue of there being libel or otherwise. Since it is obvious from this last response that you do not have anything further to add or rebutt in relation to my point, you may continue with these other points of discussion at your leisure.

I have already addressed it. Just that you failed to see it my way. Anyway, I rest my case too.

 

[vince123123]

Yes, I understand that your way is to only look at half the facts and ignore the other half when arriving at a conclusion of liability. Or when you start to look at the other half, you then say there's no evidence to show the other half.

I have already addressed it. Just that you failed to see it my way. Anyway, I rest my case too.

 

[ManWearPants]

To add on, I've visited your eralier thread linked and don't find anything interesting at #9 and #10, both of which are reproduced below:





I'm not even sure what's the 31st floor reference in your post.

Also, you are now yourself starting to expose yourself to libel; insinuating that he has improper motives and launching an 'attack'. How does it feel to be at the other end for now

posted incorrect thread. This should be the one
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=350933

There is a difference between questioning motives and outright defamation.

ok. enough. This is a forum. People are free to have their own opinion. I shall say no more and no need to get personal over this.

 

[SOOHOE]

posted incorrect thread. This should be the one
http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=350933

There is a difference between questioning motives and outright defamation.

ok. enough. This is a forum. People are free to have their own opinion. I shall say no more and no need to get personal over this.

well, manwearpants

the only things that come out in my mind is:

are you have any related with the shop?

or you are the tony it self?

you are the one that had motive suspected.

i already stated that i have bad experience because i didn't do much researched enough, this may only one of thousand shop that do the trick.

what i ask everyone in this forum is beware of this kind of things happen to ourself.

misleading customer, receipt not showing in detail, purposely raise up the price....

....for a person who keep defend the shop that do this kind of things should be suspected..funny!:thumbsd:

 

[ManWearPants]

well, manwearpants

the only things that come out in my mind is:

are you have any related with the shop?

or you are the tony it self?

you are the one that had motive suspected.

i already stated that i have bad experience because i didn't do much researched enough, this may only one of thousand shop that do the trick.

what i ask everyone in this forum is beware of this kind of things happen to ourself.

misleading customer, receipt not showing in detail, purposely raise up the price....

....for a person who keep defend the shop that do this kind of things should be suspected..funny!:thumbsd:

not related and didn't know of its existence, nor give a damn about how Tony looks like. I usually do my research and only visit shops that are listed in CS as reputable. No offence to you and not defending the shop. I am just being factual.

 

[Cartman2000]

I am just being factual.

Funny how you missed out one of the more important points

 

[ManWearPants]

Funny how you missed out one of the more important points

If you are refering to that fact that I missed out on misrepresentation of batteries. Scroll up.

My conclusion is if the shop is guilty of ripping customers off, I would really like to see them being punished. Just that we need these victims to come out from the shadows and take some collective actions. However, these victims usually do not want to follow up for one reason or another.

 

[Cartman2000]

Ah, I'm dropping by City Hall later anyway. Will go enquire on these batteries, see what Mr Tony has to say