Scams have become frighteningly frequent in recent years, with scammers often targeting the vulnerable.
Unfortunately, such crimes aren’t limited to just fraudulent calls or job advertisements.
Recently, a student in Malaysia went to a shop in Kuala Lumpur (KL) to purchase a screen protector for her phone.
She allegedly ended up paying a whopping RM1,575 (S$473) for the item and its insurance.
To add salt to the wound, there were no records of her transaction as she paid in cash. Furthermore, the shop allegedly failed to issue a receipt.
Posting on Facebook, the OP shared that a promoter near Jalan Petaling in KL first approached her on Sunday (26 Feb).
Source: Facebook
He offered to sell her a screen protector and phone cover for RM25 (S$7.50). After some initial reluctance, she agreed.
When they reached the store, the promoter asked for her identification card (IC), explaining that it was required to register the screen protector’s insurance.
Assuming that the insurance was a warranty, she agreed again.
During the registration process, the student saw that the charge for the insurance was RM2,099 (S$630) on the computer screen.
She questioned the staff, who said that the insurance would provide additional coverage in case the screen protector sustained damage.
They added that they would not be sending her the RM2,099 (S$630) bill, instead charging her RM25 (S$7.50) as agreed upon.
However, the situation took a turn for the worse when the registration process and installation of the screen protector was complete.
The staff proceeded to charge the OP RM2,124 (S$638), adding the insurance fee to her bill.
Source: Facebook
When she pointed out that they had just informed her that she wouldn’t need to pay the insurance fee, they purportedly explained that they wouldn’t be sending the bill to her as she would need to pay it immediately.
After a bit of back-and-forth, the OP gave RM1,575 (S$473) to the seller, as she only had RM1,700 (S$510) in her bank account.
To make matters worse, the shop had not provided her with a receipt and the transaction was in cash.
As such, there was no electronic record of the payment either.
The OP ended her post by urging the public to steer clear of the store in light of the alleged scam.
“When you encounter my situation, you need to ask others for help,” she added.
The OP also added that she will be filing a police report against the shop.
Have news you must share? Get in touch with us via email at news@mustsharenews.com.
Featured image adapted from Gordon Garcia on Flickr and Expert Reviews.
The driver who hit one of the cats purportedly denied doing so behaved angrily.
It has been marketed online as a candy that helps with male sexual enhancement.
"POP MART does not have any official licensed partners in Singapore," it said.
51% of Singapore's average monthly rainfall in November fell in northern Singapore over less than…
He made sure all the passengers were served before taking a slice for himself.
The doctor recommended a 2-week gap between manicures to allow nails to recover.