Livid over a news report of a local television channel early this month accusing a used car dealer of cheating its clients, a company director blames the news report for a vigilante attack against the firm that occurred a week later.

"I am not a cheat. There is no such charge in the order from the Consumer Claims Tribunal. What the TV station published is not accurate," said the company director who did not want to be named.

NONE She argued that the claim in the TV report that the dealer had cheated its customers was unjustified as the company was in the process of complying with the tribunal's order to repay the booking deposits of clients who did not make their purchases, though admittedly with some delay.

"It's only a question of time. We have not paid yet. But we did not cheat," she repeatedly said, adamant that the company had not done anything wrong.

She claimed that even after explaining the matter to the news crew that came to her office with some of the company's customers, the TV station still used the word "cheat" in its broadcast news.

"They could have reported it as ‘accused of cheating' or ‘alleged to have cheated', but instead they used the word ‘cheat' as if it was already proven in court."

She said the TV station's news crew came to her outlet in Klang a week before she and her staff were attacked and robbed by a group of vigilante at the dealership on April 7.

Many of those who had followed the news crew during the interview returned to participate in the attack and robbery at the premises.

Malaysiakini reported on the attack yesterday as well as posted the CCTV footage of the incident.

The attack saw 20 to 30 persons, some identified as disgruntled customers by the company director and others she said were ‘gangsters', some of them armed with improvised weapons, ransack the office, threaten the mostly female employees, physically assaulted the director and carted away money, cars and other belongings.

‘Delays justifiable'

A number of the used car dealership's customers have collectively filed police reports and lodged complaints with the Customer Claims Tribunal, accusing the company of cheating after it withheld booking deposits from those who cancelled their purchase.

The deposits of RM2,000 a customer on average, the director claimed, were clearly stated as "non-refundable" in the booking agreements and receipts that have been signed by both parties.

However, customers who cancelled their bookings are disputing the company's retention of their deposits.

Most of the cancellations arose from shortfalls in the loans offered to the customers and the prices of the used cars they booked. These clients were not able to make up the difference and had to cancel their bookings.

The Consumer Claims Tribunal had ordered the company to reimburse the booking deposits in most of the cases, but the company had been slow in doing so.

The director reasoned that in the main, the delays were justifiable as the company had the right of appeal.

She relented though that the company would pay these customers back in due course as it would cost more to engage a lawyer to appeal the decisions in the High Court - and there was also the possibility of more attacks if it did not pay them off.

Asked about speculation that the company intentionally muddled up the loan applications so that it could pocket the booking deposits when the loans sought by its customers fell short, forcing those who could not afford to cancel their bookings, the director rubbished the allegation.

"RM2,000? Believe me, for every car that is booked by a customer, we spend more money in administrative costs handling the loan applications and other matters. We won't make money if they fail to get enough loan and cancel. We also want the deals to succeed."

She added that sometimes the used cars, which in most cases are sold ‘as is', would incur more costs as the company would have to carry out repairs before delivery.

"We have to pay extra to fix it up before we can give it to the clients. What about our work? Are my workers to work without pay?"

The director stressed that they would not cheat clients of such paltry amounts and maintained that the company too loses money when customers cancel their orders.

"Why would a datuk and a datin cheat someone for 100 or 200 ringgit? If I want to cheat, I would cheat by the millions. Then at least it may be worth being called a cheat," she said in a parting shot.

VIDEO l 5 mins