A MANAGER sought help from Johor Consumer Claims Tribunal after he was stuck with a highly problematic vehicle.
Ramizi Bajuri, 41, was keen on a Japanese four-door sedan at a dealership in Jalan Parit Bilal, Batu Pahat, Johor.
He contacted a salesman on May 25 last year about the vehicle.
However, the salesman informed him that the car had been sold and proposed another car of the same model with a different registration plate.
“I asked the salesman about the condition of the car and he assured me that it was good,” said Ramizi.
He paid a RM3,000 deposit and submitted documents to secure a loan from the company for the car priced at RM36,313.
Ramizi also traded in his Japanese compact sedan for RM6,000.
In total, he paid RM19,225 and secured RM17,088 in a credit loan for 36 months, with a monthly payment of RM475.
“I have yet to receive a copy of the car registration card, and the dealer promised that the company would be fully responsible if the vehicle gave any problems,” he told the Tribunal.
The claimant took possession of the car on June 5 last year.
On the way home he found malfunctions, namely the window on the passenger side and the left side mirror, and took it to the dealer for repairs.
On June 12, he found problems with the gearbox and returned the vehicle to the dealer three days later for further repairs.
“It took them almost two weeks and on June 28, I took back the car.
“On July 1, I found that the engine oil had dried up,” he said.
Ramizi refilled the oil that day and again found it totally dry on July 18, because of a leak.
A few days later on his way to work, the claimant heard sounds coming from the tyres and went to the nearest workshop.
“The foremen found that the absorber and upper control arms of the car were spoilt, so I had them replaced for RM1,160,” he said.
The engine oil issue recurred on Oct 6 after it was refilled on Sept 19.
The claimant sent the car to the dealer on Oct 19 and the issue was fixed the same day.
However, the problem resurfaced again on Nov 22 but this time, the dealer did not take any action when informed.
“I asked the dealer about replacing the car but he was only willing to buy the car back at a much lower price,” he said.
Ramizi said his car problems did not stop.
On Jan 11, he was detained by police at a roadblock when it was detected that the car had been flagged as a missing vehicle.
“I again discussed the car’s problems with the dealer on Jan 12 and 13,” he said, adding that the solutions proposed were not to his satisfaction.
Tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli ordered the respondent to refund RM18,000 to the claimant within two weeks.
The claimant is to return the vehicle to the respondent.
Those who need Tribunal assistance can call 07-227 1755/ 1766.
