Tribunal rules dirty tablecloths, late photographer don’t justify full refund

A COOK who wanted to claim all expenses incurred for a wedding ceremony had his claims dismissed by the consumer tribunal, on lack of merit.

The claimant, who works in Singapore, told the Johor Baru Consumer Claims Tribunal during the hearing that he was dissatisfied with the wedding planner for failing to provide services as promised.

The 22-year-old known as Tasnem said the respondent had changed the venue for the ceremony from a multipurpose hall in Jalan Kempas 9/2, Kempas Lama to a hall in Persiaran Kempas Baru.

“I found that the Persiaran Kempas Baru hall was unsafe as the air-conditioning unit at the main entrance was not properly fixed and there were holes in the ceiling,’’ said the claimant.

Tasnem also said the hall lacked parking spaces for guests and the People’s Volunteer Corps (Rela) personnel were not performing their duty well in controlling traffic flow, leading to accidents in the area.

He complained too that the tablecloths were soiled and the curtains were dirty, adding that the respondent did not do anything to clean or replace them before the wedding ceremony.

“The tribunal could not award you RM15,999 for your claims, as you have fully utilised the services and products rendered by the respondent,” Tribunal president Hafez Zalkapli said in his judgment.

Jaws Event & Wedding Planner operations manager Muhammad Suwarno, when met outside the tribunal, said the claimant had engaged the company to handle his wedding on Dec 23, 2023.

“The wedding package was RM15,999 and the claimant had no issue with the price,” he said.

Muhammad said the sum included the cost of a variety of items such as hiring of a kompang group, a master of ceremony, make-up artiste and audio equipment, alongside a double-tier wedding cake, pelamin (dais), wedding trousseau and hall rental.

“There was also video and photography services for RM1,000,” he said.

The respondent said he had met the claimant and his fiancee on Feb 27, 2023, in Jalan Kempas 9/2. He said the couple was told to pay a RM1,000 deposit if they agreed to the wedding package.

Muhammad said the claimant paid the deposit on May 17 to book the hall in Jalan Kempas 9/2, and made the second payment of RM7,499 on Nov 27 and the third − RM7,500 − on Dec 19.

The respondent rebutted claims by Tasnem that he was not informed about the venue change, as the location of the new wedding hall was printed on the soft copy of the wedding invitation.

Muhammad said the venue was changed as the landowner decided not to extend the lease of the hall which his company had used to hold wedding ceremonies for many years.

“The claimant also breached the terms and conditions of payment but we decided not to proceed with claims against him.”

Muhammad said the claimant was scheduled to make the second payment of RM7,499 on Nov 23, 2023, but only settled it on Nov 27.

The respondent said the claimant turned up at the Persiaran Kempas Baru hall on the eve of the ceremony, Dec 22, 2023, to inspect the wedding preparations and was satisfied.

“The photographer and videographer hired by us turned up late on the wedding day but they managed to take photos and videos of the wedding including some outdoor moments,” said Muhammad.

The respondent said the company refunded RM1,000 to the claimant as compensation for the photographer and videographer turning up late.

“The claimant did not write in his affidavit that he had received the money from us.”

Muhammad said the couple’s families, friends and relatives overstayed at the hall until 5pm after the wedding when they were supposed to vacate by 4pm.

“At the end of the day, the claimant was happy with our services,” said the respondent.

Those who need assistance in Tribunal matters can call 07-227 1755/ 1766.